junctions

Infrastructure and Cyclist Safety (TRL Report PPR 580)

Publisher: 
TRL, DfT
Publication date: 
October 2011
Document file: 
Abstract: 

The Department for Transport commissioned TRL to conduct a literature review to consider the role of infrastructure in relation to the safety of cyclists and their interaction with other road users. It was undertaken as part of the wider research programme, Road User Safety and Cycling, being led by TRL. Overall, it proved problematic to draw firm conclusions from the literature. Taken as a whole, the most significant infrastructure-related risk factors for cyclists in single vehicle incidents on highways appear to be slippery roads (due to weather) and poor or defective road surfaces. For multi-vehicle collisions, the main infrastructure risk factors appear to be posted speed limits and encounters with other road users at junctions.

Document types:

Document geography:

Geographical spread:

Document weight:

B02 Road Crossings Side Roads

Publisher: 
Cycling England
Publication date: 
August 2008
Abstract: 

Maintaining the continuity of cycle tracks is important if they are to provide an attractive alternative to being on road. Consideration should be given to the use of cycle priority crossings where they cross minor roads where daily traffic flows are below 2000 vehicles per day.

European experience suggests that where the cycle track is used solely by cyclists travelling in the same direction as vehicles on the adjacent traffic lane, returning cyclists to the carriageway before side road junctions can also be an effective solution.

See also: 

Document geography:

Geographical spread:

Document weight:

C11 Cyclists And Junctions

Publisher: 
Cycling England
Publication date: 
August 2008
Abstract: 

All junction designs should seek to give priority to cyclists where practicable, and minimise delay and maximise cyclists’ safety and comfort in all cases (see also A08 Signal Controlled Junctions and A13 Roundabouts).

Document geography:

Geographical spread:

Document types:

Document weight:

B09 Obstruction Of Cycle Track Accesses

Publisher: 
Cycling England
Publication date: 
August 2008
Abstract: 

Where cycle tracks emerge onto the carriageway, suitable arrangements should be put in place to prevent parked vehicles obstructing access and to ensure adequate visibility (e.g. “Keep Clear” road markings, double yellow lines etc.) (see also A14 Corner Radii, B04 Junction and Forward Visibility and B05 Footway Crossings).

See also: 

Document geography:

Geographical spread:

Document types:

Document weight:

B04 Junction And Forward Visibility

Publisher: 
Cycling England
Publication date: 
August 2008
Abstract: 

Adequate visibility (20m where the design speed is 12mph) should be provided or measures to manage speed considered (see also B08 Access and Speed Controls).

See also: 

Document geography:

Geographical spread:

Document weight:

A11 Cycle Lanes

Publisher: 
Cycling England
Publication date: 
August 2008
Document file: 
Abstract: 

The decision to provide cycle lanes should be reached by reference to the hierarchy of provision (Local Transport Note 2/08 Table 1.2) and such tools as the CROW derived ‘speed/flow’ diagram (see below); they should not be seen as a universal solution. Where provided, they should be a minimum of 1.5m wide, continuous, made conspicuous across side roads at junctions and not abandon cyclists where roads become narrow, for example at right turning lanes. When cycle lanes are being introduced, the cost of remedial measures to the carriageway surface should be included within the scheme budget.

See also: 

Document geography:

Geographical spread:

Document types:

Document weight:

C03 Signs

Publisher: 
Cycling England
Publication date: 
August 2008
Document file: 
Abstract: 

The use of “CYCLISTS DISMOUNT” and “END OF ROUTE” signs should always be avoided unless there is a proven need.

The use of advance directions signs, particularly map-type where this will direct cyclists through complex junctions, can help cyclists conserve energy lost when stopping to read signs erected at junctions.

Existing posts should be used whenever practicable to minimise clutter. Posts and sign faces should not reduce the effective width of a cycle track by being placed in the path of pedestrians or cyclists. Where possible, sign posts and lamp columns should be set back 500mm beyond the edge of a cycle track. Where walls or fences prevent this they should be placed tight up against them.

Where vandalism is a problem signs should be mounted high enough to discourage graffiti and anti-rotational fixings used to prevent rotation.

Sign x-heights should reflect the positioning and likely speed of approaching cyclists.

See also: 

Document geography:

Geographical spread:

Document types:

Document weight:

B07 Cycle Track Junctions

Publisher: 
Cycling England
Publication date: 
August 2008
Abstract: 

Adequate corner radii should be provided at junctions between cycle tracks (minimum 2m) and chamfered corners (min 1m) at the rear of footways crossed by cycle tracks, not 900 tie-ins. (see also A14 Corner Radii, B04 Junction and Forward Visibility, B05 Footway Crossings and B08 Access and Speed Controls).

See also: 

Document geography:

Geographical spread:

Document types:

Document weight:

Subscribe to RSS - junctions