Cycle network and route planning guide - NZ Transport Agency

5.4 Dual networks
Description
Dual networks provide two different types of cycle route network — for instance, one
based on urban arterial roads, the other comprising cycle paths or backstreets.
Dual networks are sometimes provided within one road reserve. For example, a cycle
path may be appropriate where it provides a short link for primary school aged children
near shops or a school, even though it is beside an arterial road with cycle lanes.
A rural road may have a sealed shoulder suitable for experienced and sporting cyclists,
but a path may also be provided for less experienced cyclists.
Dual path and lane facility, North Parade, Christchurch, New Zealand. (Photo: Tim Hughes)
Advantages
Some cyclists value off-road and
backstreet options more than others.
By providing choice, each can choose
what suits them.
Even experienced cyclists will value
more pleasant alternatives as long
as they are still direct. As a rule of
thumb, a 10 percent extra journey time
has been suggested as sometimes
acceptable (Hudson, 1982).
Disadvantages
Where a dual network is provided within
one road reserve, motorists may not expect
cyclists to be riding on the road as well
as on a path. This can compromise safety,
especially when crossing driveways and
side roads.
Dual network provision also costs more
and may be seen politically as oversupply,
especially if an element involves a
significant difficulty or cost (financial, or to
other road users).
Recommendation
Dual networks should be considered
where the extra cost is outweighed by
the benefits to cyclists.
If only one network can be funded,
the LOS provided by each option to
the different cyclist groups should be
assessed. Consultation with cyclists over
the choice will be important.
Having a path next to a roadway should
not automatically exclude cyclists from
using the road instead. On-road bans
should only be instigated after assessing
whether the paths and roadway meet
the needs of all users in terms of
technical standards. Other factors
to consider include:
• the potential for delay and confusion
at intersections and driveways
• the adequacy of sight distances and
shoulder or lane widths
• the adequacy of the path condition
and width
• the potential for conflict with other
path users
• the relative LOS for cyclists of
different skills.
5.5 Hierarchy approach
Description
Cycle routes are sometimes assigned to hierarchies based on trip length and user type.
For example, cycle routes in regional or district networks may be classified as regional,
inter-urban or tourist, while cycle routes in a large urban area may be classified as
principal, collector or local.
Principal routes are for longer-distance movement, are direct with minimal delays and
may even be separated from motor traffic to provide a ‘motorway’ LOS for cyclists.
Collector routes distribute cycle traffic between the principal routes and local origins
and destinations (Cumming, 1996).
Some urban cycle route hierarchies aim to provide a designated cycle route within
100 m of each home (such as in Delft, The Netherlands).
Advantages
Hierarchies can be used to assign
implementation priorities (so that routes
higher in the hierarchy are implemented
first) and can be linked to design standards
(so that more important routes provide a
better LOS).
Disadvantage
A cycle route hierarchy will not work if
using it involves significant detours.
Recommendation
Consider using cycle route hierarchies
for setting target design standards,
LOS and implementation priorities.
32