Cycling & Edinburgh Tram

7/31/2019 Cycling & Edinburgh Tram

1/22

Cycling and the Edinburgh tramway

For: TIE Ltd & Spokes

November 2007


2/22

2

Contents

1. Introduction2. General remarks

3. Remarks on cycling

4. Design principles

5. Leith Walk

6. Princes Street

7. St. Andrew Square

8. Conclusions

34

5

6

8

17

20

21


3/22

3

1. Introduction

The city of Edinburgh has been planning anew tramline. TIE Limited is responsible forpreparing all designs for the roadsconcerned.

Spokes is an organisation representingEdinburgh cyclists and advocating the

position of cyclists in traffic.

To further explore the possibilities for goodcycle facilities while designing the tramwayin several major Edinburgh streets, TIE andSpokes agreed to seek expertise on thismatter in The Netherlands.

.

Goudappel Coffeng has been asked tolook at provisions for cyclists along theon-road sections of Tram route 1a. A sitevisit and discussion with all parties washeld in Edinburgh on 8th and 9thNovember 2007.

Based on the experience of such facilitiesin the Netherlands and elsewhere inEurope, Goudappel Coffeng have preparedthis report to bring about and illustratevarious options.

This report concentrates on Leith Walk,

Princes Street and St. Andrew Square, butsome principles could as well apply toother streets.

In this stage it has not been the intentionto make detailed designs.

Goudappel Coffeng


4/22

4

2. General Remarks

Edinburgh has been planning a new tramlineto make public transport more efficient.

The lay-out of the Edinburgh traffic system isbased on heavy usage by private cars andpublic transport (buses). Most streets providethe maximum available space to driving and

parking of cars.

Improvement of the public realm can be oneof the positive consequences of the project.

Cycling in Edinburgh has over the yearsbecome a serious means of transport. Good

off-road facilities for cycling have been builton deserted railways. On-road facilities havebeen mainly limited to advanced stop lanesat junctions and some lanes at the side ofstreets. Many of these lanes suffer fromvehicle parking.

The introduction of a tram system is achance to emphasise other means of urbantransport than private cars. This could workout not only as a good form of publictransport, but also provide good facilities for

cyclists on the main tramway corridors.

Dedicating of the main roads such as Leith

Walk only for public transport (trams andbuses), cyclists and pedestrians, as happensin many French cities (Straatsburg, Orleans),has not been considered a serious option.

City of Edinburgh Local Transport Strategy, statesthat...

In tram and bus schemes, "conditions for pedestriansand cyclistsshould be maintained or improved"[policy PT10]

and

"Safe provision for cyclists will be made on streets used

by the tram [policy Cycle 10]

The City Council meeting on 25 October 2007decided...

"To reaffirm the commitment in the Local TransportStrategy to maintain or improve conditions for

pedestrians and cyclists().


5/22

5

3. Remarks on cycling

In the Netherlands the position of cyclists intraffic goes without saying. In every newdesign for a street facilities for cyclists will belaid out. In the Netherlands standards forcycling facilities have therefore beendeveloped.

This is not (yet) the general practice in the UK,although efforts are being made to improvethis situation. Specifications have beendeveloped for designing a tramway inEdinburgh, which include specifications forcycle facilities. (See scheme)

For reasons of safety it is essential to meet thestandards, or not have these facilities at all.Its unsafe to suggest for example there is acycle lane, if the space for vehicles and cyclesis too narrow for accommodation of both.

In the Dutch design practice cyclists are

accommodated mainly in the slow realm ofpedestrians, as opposite to the fast realm of

cars, buses (and parking).

With streets the size of those in Edinburgh asafe and comfortable position for cyclists mustbe possible, within the local constraints

From Design Maual Working Draft 2

(TIE, 14th november 2003):The objective is to increase and improvethe quality of the public realm byreadressing the distribution of space

between the different user groups,including vehicles, public transport,

pedestrians and cyclists

The key issues associated withpedestrians and cyclists in reletion to theproposed tram system are:

Safety

Freedom of movement

It is important that cycleways are ofadequate size and physical barriers limitedto areas of high speed track, in order togenerate safe and efficient cycleways.

Cyclists should be given priority byproviding adequate space adjacent to the

tram route. Cycleways alongside tramroutes should be 1.75m desirable(minimum) and 1.5m normal (minimum).

Cycleways should be fluent trhrougoutthe tram route, avoiding interaction withboth tram and vehicles such as parked cars

or unloading areas and be designed so asnot to cross rails.


6/22

6

One aspect of the current design is theposition of the poles for the overheadwire. They are now situated in themiddle of the street. Doing so leads toan extra consumption of space. In the

current design it takes 1.5 m to placethem.

The main advantage is probably thelower costs of the poles, and thepossibility to place traffic lights on thethus created isle.

Bringing the poles to the side of thestreet will reduce the width of thetramlane by 1.5 m. This means itprovides the potential space needed forone cyclelane!

Poles can be positioned in the strip usedfor parking or on the pavement. Thusthey can also serve as poles for streetlightning. Maintenance is easier if polesare at the side, rather than having to digup or interfere with the space betweenthe two tramlines, thereby possibly

blocking both lines.

4. Design principles

4.1 Poles for overhead wire Traffic lights can be located on theislands that are needed at junctions forpedestrians to be able to cross the streetin several phases. These islands are tobe located to both sides of the tram laneanyway. In this way extra space is onlyneeded at junction, not all the way along

the street.

If it is not permitted to cross thetramway coming from small sidestreets,then a 1.5 m wide barrier could beapplied.

4.2 Compulsory cycle facilities

Cycle lanes, and speciallydedicated lanes for cyclistsare safe and easy, whenused. In The Netherlandsthe use of these facillities is

in most cases compulsory.

This much used sign meansone has to use the cyclewayand is not allowed on themain road


7/22

7

At this moment the general practice forcycle lanes in Edinburgh is that at busstops they are interrupted. (1)

This brings about an uncomfortable andunsafe position for cyclists, and some

disturbance for bus traffic.

shelter

BusS

TOP

shelter

BusS

TOP

shelter

BusS

TOP

By positioning the cycle lane next to the

loading/unloading-area of buses, mutualinterference is less, but still cyclists andbuses have to cross.

In streets with many buses and busstops(i.e. Princes Street) separating buses andcycles is the most safe solution and gets

the best traffic flow. Area for sheltersshould be provided near the curb.

1 32

4.3 Cycle lanes vs bus stops


8/22

8

5. Leith Walk

TIE has made a new design for all streets inwhich the new tramline is going to be laidout.

In the cross section for Leith Walk a 1.0 mwide cycle lane has been drawn, next to avehicle lane of 2.45m.

Knowing that many trucks and buses are atleast 2.5m wide, this doesnt look like a safesolution. We would suggest a minimum of3.0 m for vehicles next to a cycle lane of atleast 1.5m.

Function of Leith Walk:

Leith Walk is a busy street with manyhairdressers, betting offices, bars, grocerystores and a lot more. It appears to have amerely local function, although there aresome more specialised shops. Due to factthat Leith Walk connects Leith with the city

centre, the many motorised passers by formpart of the clientele.

Most of the parking space is available insidestreets.

To be able to comment on the designsmade, and make propositions for possibleimprovement, we would suggest to

1.Develop possible cross sections

2.Investigate the width of the profile

3.Discuss solutions at junctions and stops


9/22

9

To investigate on other possible cross-sectionsover Leith Walk we have first drawn somestandards.

In discussions a minimum size of the pavementof 2.0 m was discussed. According to thefunction of this street we think 3.0 m is the

minimum.Parking space can be reduced to 2.0 m wide,when parking area is clearly marked, andpossibly a small curb is used between parkingspace and cycle lane; a 0.5 m buffer betweencycle lane and parking is desirable.

Where unloading takes places, parking can be2.5 m wide, reducing the size of the pavementby 0.5 m (but only temporarily)

Cycle lane: minimum of 1.5m, not to be

interrupted by bus stops

Traffic-lane: 3.0 m wide; near junctions twolanes can be 5.5 m together.

Tram and bus use a separated lane. Whenpoles for overhead wire are in the middle, 8.0m is the minimum, to be reduced to 6.5 m withpoles to the side of the street

Using these standards, the TIE-profile adds upto 26 metrs.

The narrowest part of Leith Walk is 23-24

metres wide. Most of it, from SteadsPlace to the South, is 26.5 metres ormore. (see p 11)

On the next pages several possibillituieshave been schematically drawn

5.1 Develop possible cross sections

5.2 Investigate the width of the profile

5.3 Discuss solutions at junctionsand stops

A profile is useful for drawing stretched

parts of the street. At junctions andstops local solutions have to be designed.In spite of not having made a design onLeith Walk, p 13 offers a sketch of apossible layout


10/22

10

Possible profiles for Leith Walk


11/22

11

>28.0 m

>26.5 m


12/22

12

Leith Walk with cycle paths


13/22

13

Leith Walk, possible design with stop and cycle paths


14/22

14

Example: The Hague, Laan van Meerdervoort


15/22

15

Leith Walk with cycle lanes


16/22

16

Example: The Hague, Jan van der Heijdenstraat


17/22

17

5. Princes Street

Princes Street is a very busy street,although on large part of it private cars arenot allowed.

Large numbers of buses and taxis use it.The pavement is used largely by shoppingpeople on the north side. On the south side

there are no buildings, but there is a majorview on the castle which attracts tourists.There are also many bus stops on the southside.

The busstops in Princes Street are not neatlyorganised. The number of buses having

stops is large and each bus has several stopsalong Princes street.

The number of buses will be reducedafter introduction of the tram but willremain high. In the cross section forPrinces Street no cycle lane has beendrawn.These factors put together suggest a firmsolution:a dedicated cycle path whichcould be bidirectional. This is the onlyway to provide a save passage for

cyclists and an undisturbed passage forbuses and taxis at the same time (see3.2)


18/22

18

Possible profiles for Princes Street


19/22

19

Princes Street with dedicated cycle path


20/22

20

6. St Andrew Square

In the curve the tram uses to enter St.Andrew Square the tramway uses a lot ofspace, due to the necessary widening of theprofile. It closes off the entrance of StAndrew Square like a cork in a bottle.

This means one of the most outstanding

cycle facilities has to go.

However, in the current design the eastern-most part of St Andrew Square will bededicated to tram and local traffic, leaving agood possibility to include a new dedicatedcycle lane.

1 32To be able to do so, the tramrailscould be moved slightly to thesouth in Princes Street.This creates the space to uncorkSt Andrew Square, and add cyclefacilities. The car lane that is nowblocked by the tram has to wait forthe tram anyway, so this wont bean extra obstruction. A second carlane probably is not necessary, butcould be added as the tramlane hasto bend back towards the middle ofthe street.


21/22

21

7. Conclusions & recommendations

Edinburgh is working on a better positionfor cyclists in the city;

The construction of a tramline is a goodopportunity to change the public realm;Its an opportunity to create good cyclingfacilities along the tramline;

Cyclists are vulnerable, so cyclingfacilities have to be safe; Its importantto meet the standards that are set forcycling facilities;

If they cannot be made safely, its better

not to create them;

With streets the size of those inEdinburgh (most Edinburgh streets arebroader then Dutch inner city streets) asafe and comfortable position for cyclistsmust be posiible, within the localconstraints;

Tram platforms could be separated and

along the track instead of island-shapedplatforms; thus the tracks dont have tocurve toward the outside (maintenance)

Using a broad barrier in the middle of thestreet is not an efficient way to use thespace available;

On Leith Walk there are goodpossibilities to incorporate goodcycling facilities in the new lay-out;Even in the narrowest part, in whichlike nowadays, hardly any parking ispossible; The facilities could consistof dedicated cycle lanes adjacent tothe pavement as well as cycle lanesalong the car lanes;

In Princes Street the number ofbuses and bus stops is so large, itwould be desirable to apply a

dedicated (bidirectional) cycle lane

By reconsidering the way the tramenters St. Andrew Square, cyclefacilities could be incorporated in thedesign.


22/22

22

Opdrachtgever(s) TIE limited & Spokes Edinburgh

Titel rapport Cycling and the Edinburgh tramway

Kenmerk SPE001/soh

Datum publicatie 23 november 2007

Projectteam opdrachtgever(s) Mike Connelly, Ian Maxwell

Projectteam Goudappel Coffeng Hans van der Stok, Henk van Zeijl

Projectomschrijving Advies over de inpasbaarheid van fietsvoorzienngen bij trambaan in Edinburgh

Trefwoorden Edinburgh, tram, Light Rail, fietsen, cycling

Cycling & Edinburgh Tram

Documents

Transcript of Cycling & Edinburgh Tram