Cycle network and route planning guide - NZ Transport Agency

9.5.1 Bicycle compatibility index (BCI)
Advantages
The BCI measure is flexible and simple
to use and can be used to distinguish
between conditions on roads during
different periods.
As Table 9.2 (see opposite)
demonstrates, a minimum of data is
required to determine a BCI/LOS result
for an entire route. The data is readily
sourced in most instances.
Disadvantages
BCI does not account for:
• low traffic volume environments
where cyclists readily integrate with
other traffic
• significant intersections
• strategic considerations such as route
directness, coherence and purpose
• paths. A similar US-developed process
is available for paths, but it is not known
whether the two methods may not be
compatible for comparing path and
road options.
Recommendations
The BCI method is most useful
when comparing mid-block route
options at an early stage, and
when a quick and simple method
is desirable.
9.5.2 Cycle review LOS
Advantages
This is more comprehensive than the BCI
method. Among other factors, it gives
basic consideration to intersections and
route directness, and includes paths.
Disadvantages
A significant volume of data is required.
It can be time consuming to compare
several quite different route options.
Recommendations
This comprehensive method (IHT et al, 1998) can be used to examine existing infrastructure
and to compare different route options provided concept proposals for routes are
reasonably well defined.
It should be used at a level appropriate for each route.
Straightforward situations with obvious choices will not gain much benefit from the full
depth of the process, but will nevertheless benefit from analysis based on its concepts.
It can be used to assign an overall LOS score for a route proposal.
9.5.3 Florida bicycle LOS
This method is the most widely used approach in the USA. It assesses bicycle LOS on
links and straight through intersections as part of a multi-modal assessment of LOS.
It is based on the research by Landis. The method includes a computer program to
simplify the calculations. Refer to Florida DOT (2002).
9.6 Which method?
Further research
Further investigation into the
appropriateness of the above methods
for application in New Zealand is
required and will be undertaken.
Local authorities are invited to contact
the LTSA with a view to participating
and/or leading trial projects.
Practitioners are encouraged to assess
other methods where appropriate
and available.
Recommendations
Use a mix of the methods outlined above.
A needs assessment is always important. In general, many of the issues associated with
developing a cycle route are qualitative, and only this type of assessment will consider
all the overarching issues.
For a quantitative assessment, the cycle review LOS method appears to be the
most useful.
Individual RCAs are encouraged to consider implementing a cycle audit and cycle
review style of process, and to work with the LTSA to develop a New Zealand
recommended process.
A review of crash records (see section 7.3.2) is also worthwhile when assessing existing
conditions.
Two aspects stand out as being important in any cycling assessment:
• Does the facility meet the users’ needs?
• ‘The choice of routes in urban areas is largely determined by the extent to which
junction features can be resolved where the cycle route meets or crosses more
heavily trafficked roads’ (Ove Arup and Partners, 1997).
62