Cycling for Everyone

Caption: Women dominate cycling in central Copenhagen, where almost half of all trips are by bike. The bike lane shown here serves over 55,000 bike trips per day.Illustration by Susan L. Handy

In spite of their affluence and high rates of car ownership, countries in northern Europe have achieved a high overall rate of bike shares in their urban travel; ranging from almost ten per cent of trips in Belgium and Germany to about 20 per cent in Denmark, and 30 per cent in the Netherlands. What is equally impressive is Northern European women cycle as often as men, and all age groups make a considerable percentage of their daily trips by bike. That is quite a contrast to Canada and the United States, where only about one per cent of trips are by bike, and most cyclists are young men. Two important aims of cycling policies in North America should be to raise the overall bike share of trips while simultaneously making cycling safe, convenient, and feasible for women as well as men, and for all age groups.

How to make Cycling Safe and Convenient for Everyone

The most important approach to making cycling safe, convenient, and attractive for everyone in northern European cities is the provision of separate cycling facilities along heavily travelled roads and at intersections, combined with extensive traffic calming of residential neighbourhoods. Safe and relatively stress-free cycling routes are especially important for children, the elderly, women, and for anyone with any sort of disability. Providing such separate facilities to connect practical, utilitarian points of origin and destinations also promotes cycling for work, school, and shopping trips. This contrasts with the mainly recreational cycling in Canada and the USA, where most separate cycling facilities are along urban parks, rivers and lakes, or in rural areas.

As noted in this series of three articles, separate facilities are only part of the solution. Northern European cities reinforce the safety, convenience, and attractiveness of excellent cycling rights of way with their extensive bike parking, integration with public transport, comprehensive traffic education and training of both cyclists and motorists, and the wide range of promotional events intended to generate enthusiasm and wide public support for cycling.

At the same time, car use in northern Europe is made expensive, less convenient, and less necessary through a host of taxes and restrictions on car ownership, car use, and parking. Their land use policies also foster relatively compact, mixed-use developments that generate more bikeable, shorter trips.

In this first article, the focus is placed on the various types of cycling rights of way. I chose to start here because having a place to ride is the most obvious and basic prerequisite for cycling. There are many different kinds of cycling facilities, and cyclists vary in their preferences of one type of facility over another. These should not be viewed as mutually exclusive alternatives, however, but rather as complements to each other, permitting as many choices as possible to satisfy a wide range of cyclist preferences.

Bike Paths and Lanes

From the mid-1970s to the mid-1990s, separate facilities expanded greatly throughout northern Europe. In Germany, for example, the bikeway network almost tripled in length, from 12,911 km in 1976 to 31,236 km in 1996. In the Netherlands, the bikeway network doubled in length, from 9,282 km in 1978 to 18,948 km in 1996. Nationwide, aggregate statistics for the mid 1990s to today are not available, but data for individual cities suggest continued expansion, albeit at a much slower rate than previously. The main focus now appears to be on improving the specific design of cycle paths and lanes to improve safety.

In 2004, for example, Berlin (3.4 million inhabitants) had 1,140 kilometres of separate bike paths and lanes. By comparison, Amsterdam (735,000 inhabitants) and Copenhagen (504,000 inhabitants) each have roughly 400 kilometres of completely separate bike paths and lanes. Even much smaller cities, however, have extensive cycling facilities. There are 320 kilometres of bike paths and lanes in Münster, Germany (278,000 inhabitants), over 500 kilometres in Odense, Denmark (185,000 inhabitants), and over 420 kilometres in Groningen, Netherlands (181,000).
The bicycling networks in all these cities include numerous off-street shortcut connections that run between streets and traversing blocks, and enable cyclists to take the most direct possible route. The result of all these facilities is a truly complete, integrated system of bicycling routes that allow cyclists to cover almost any trip either on completely separate paths and lanes or on lightly travelled, traffic-calmed residential streets.

Not only has the network of separate cycling facilities greatly expanded since the 1970s, but their design, quality, and maintenance have continually improved to ensure safer, more convenient, and more attractive cycling with each passing year. In addition, most cities have established a fully integrated system of directional signs for cyclists, colour-coded to correspond to different types of bike routes. All large cities and most medium-sized cities provide detailed maps of their cycling facilities. Some cities have recently introduced Internet bike route planning to assist cyclists in choosing the route that best serves their needs. In Berlin and Odense, for example, cyclists can enter their point of origin and destination, as well as a range of personal preferences, such as speed, on-street or off-street facility, avoiding major intersections and heavy traffic, etc. The Internet program shows the optimal route on a map and provides all relevant information about time, average speed, bike parking, and public transport connections.

The provision of separate cycling facilities is the cornerstone of Dutch, Danish, and German policies to make cycling safe and attractive to everyone. They are designed to feel safe, comfortable, and convenient for both young and old, for women as well as men, and for all levels of cycling ability. Virtually all studies of the impacts of separate facilities confirm that most cyclists prefer them. Separate paths, in particular, are perceived as being much safer and more pleasant than cycling on the roadway, thus leading to significant growth in cycling volumes when such facilities are expanded.

Traffic Calming

It is neither possible nor necessary to provide separate bike paths and lanes on lightly travelled residential streets, but they constitute an important part of the overall cycling route network. Thus, Dutch, Danish, and German cities have engineered traffic calming on most streets in residential neighbourhoods, reducing the legal speed limit to 30 kph (19 mph) and often prohibiting any through traffic. In addition, many cities – especially in the Netherlands – have introduced considerable alterations to the streets themselves, such as road narrowing, raised intersections and crosswalks, traffic circles, extra curves and zigzag routes, speed humps, and artificial dead ends created by mid-block street closures. Cycling is almost always allowed in both directions on all such traffic-calmed streets, even when they are restricted to one-way travel for cars; this further enhances the flexibility of bike travel. In the Netherlands, Denmark, and Germany, traffic calming is area-wide and not reserved for isolated streets.

Related to traffic calming, almost all cities have created extensive car-free zones in their centres, mainly intended for pedestrian use but generally permitting cycling during off-peak hours. In some Dutch cities, these car-free zones specifically include cycling facilities such as bike lanes and parking. In some cities, the combination of traffic calming of residential streets and prohibition of cars in city centres makes it almost impossible for cars to traverse the city center to get to the other side.

Another kind of traffic calming is the “bicycle street,” which has been increasingly adopted in Dutch and German cities. These are narrow streets where cyclists are given absolute traffic priority over the entire width of the street. Cars are usually permitted to use the streets as well, but they are limited to 30 kph (or less) and cannot rush bicyclists or otherwise interfere with them.

Traffic calmed residential neighbourhoods, car-free city centres, and special bicycle streets greatly enhance the overall bicycling network in all Dutch, Danish, and German cities. Most importantly, they offer much safer, less stressful cycling than streets filled with fast-moving motor vehicles. Since most bike trips start at home, traffic calming of neighbourhood streets is crucial to enabling bike trips to start in a safe, pleasant environment as cyclists make their way to the separate bike paths and lanes that serve the rest of the trip.

All available evidence shows that traffic calming improves overall traffic safety. The benefits tend to be greatest for pedestrians, but serious cyclist injuries also fall sharply. Moreover, all studies report large increases in overall levels of walking and cycling. There are, of course, many different kinds of traffic calming and it is conceivable that one or another specific kind of traffic calming measure (perhaps traffic circles or speed humps) might detract from cycling safety in some circumstances. Overall, however, there is overwhelming evidence that traffic calming enhances both pedestrian and cyclist safety by reducing speeds on secondary roads.

Intersection Modifications

While bike paths and lanes help protect cyclists from exposure to traffic dangers between intersections, they can pose safety problems while crossing them. Thus, Dutch, Danish, and German planners have worked continuously on perfecting the designs of intersections to facilitate safe cyclist crossings. The extent and specific design of intersection modifications vary from city to city, of course, but they generally include most of the following:

• Special bike lanes leading up to the intersection, with advance stop lines for cyclists, far ahead of waiting cars.
• Advance green traffic signals for cyclists, and extra green signal phases for cyclists at intersections with heavy cycling volumes.
• Turn restrictions for cars, while all turns allowed for cyclists.
• Highly visible, distinctively coloured bike lane crossings at intersections.
• Special cyclist-activated traffic lights.
• Timing traffic lights to provide a “green wave” for cyclists instead of for car drivers, generally assuming 14-22 kph bike speed.
• Moving bike pathways a bit further away from their parallel streets when they approach intersections to help avoid collisions with right-turning cars.

Given the very nature of roadway intersections, it is virtually impossible to avoid all conflicts between motor vehicles and cyclists, but Dutch, Danish, and German planners have done a superb job of minimizing these dangers.

The Ninth Avenue Complete Street in Manhattan includes one of the first European style bike paths in the US. Its design protects cyclists from moving traffic and eliminates conflicts with turning vehicles at intersections.Photograph by NYC Department of Transportation

Making all Roads more Bikeable

No major North American city even comes close to providing a complete and fully integrated system of separate cycling facilities. Thus, it is crucial that roads, in general, be made safer and more convenient for cycling. That includes proper design of drain grates, wide outside lanes and shoulders, repair of potholes, and cleaning up debris on the roadway and shoulders.  Roads should also offer clear signage of convenient bike routes and reminders to motorists to share the road with cyclists.

In short, roads should be designed for use by cyclists and not just by motorists. Bicycling is obviously not appropriate on certain high-speed, high volume highways. Nevertheless, cycling is both possible and legally permitted on the vast majority of roads in both Canada and the USA.  The legal rights of cyclists to ride on roads must be clearly and convincingly conveyed to motorists and enforced by the police and courts.

Conclusion

Cycling remains a marginal mode of transport in most North American cities because it is widely viewed as requiring special equipment and training, physical fitness, and the courage and willingness to battle with motor vehicles on streets without separate bike lanes or paths. Cycling is a mainstream mode of urban travel in Northern Europe precisely because it does not require any of those things.

Providing safe and convenient rights of way is the most important element in making cycling possible for everyone, but it alone is not sufficient. The remaining two articles in this series examine other, complementary and necessary policies.
For more details and background reading, readers may consult the following two articles: “Making Cycling Irresistible,” Transport Reviews, July 2008, Vol. 28, No. 4, pp. 495-528, accessible at: http://policy.rutgers.edu/faculty/pucher/Irresistible.pdf

For more details and background reading, readers may consult the following two articles:

“Making Cycling Irresistible,” Transport Reviews, July 2008, Vol. 28, No. 4, pp. 495-528, accessible at: http://policy.rutgers.edu/faculty/pucher/Irresistible.pdf
And “At the Frontiers of Cycling,” World Transport Policy and Practice, December 2007, Vol. 13, No. 3, pp. 8-57, accessible at: www.eco-logica.co.uk/pdf/wtpp13.3.pdf

About the Author

John Pucher is a professor in the Bloustein School of Planning and Public Policy at Rutgers University (New Brunswick, New Jersey). [more...]

Published in Momentum No. 35

The style issue shows the world just how sexy riding a bike in the city can be as we take a close up look at some of visionaries behind the upcoming urban friendly cycling fashion trends. Other topics in the issue include a cycling profile of Canada's capital city, Ottawa, as well as a look at cycling culture in Austin, Texas.

Prev: Fashion Pedallers

Next: The Object of Desire

More from No. 35