Ontario Traffic Manual Book 18

8/20/2019 Ontario Traffic Manual Book 18

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/ontario-traffic-manual-book-18 1/219

ROUTE

Paved Shoulder

Travel Lane3.0 - 3.75 m

Paved

Shoulder 1.2 m -2.0+ m

CyclingFacilitiesD16-011-24



ISBN 978-1-4606-3570-4Copyright © 2014

Queen’s Printer for OntarioAll rights reserved.

Cette publication hautement spécialisée {Ontario Trafc Manual - Book 18 – Cycling Facili-ties} n’est disponible qu’en anglais conformément au Règlement 671/92, selon lequel il n’estpas obligatoire de la traduire en vertu de la Loi sur les services en français. Pour obtenir des

renseignements en français, veuillez communiquer avec le ministère des Transports del’Ontario par courriel à [email protected].





ii

Custodial Office

Inquiries, suggestions or comments regarding theOntario Traffic Manual May be directed to:

Ministry of Transportation of Ontario (MTO)Traffic Office301 St. Paul Street, 2nd Floor SouthSt. Catherines, OntarioL2R 7R4Phone: 905-704-2960Fax: 905-704-2888e-mail: [email protected]

Book 18 Acknowledgements

The Ontario Traffic Manual Book 18 (CyclingFacilities) was made possible as a result of thegenerous funding support from the Ministryof Transportation of Ontario and a number ofOntario Municipalities. The Ontario Traffic Councilwould like to thank the following individuals andtheir organizations for their contribution in thedevelopment of OTM Book 18:

Consultant Team:

Marco D’Angelo – Ontario Traffic CouncilDave Richardson, P.Eng., PTOE – MMM GroupDave McLaughlin, MCIP, RPP – MMM Group

Technical Advisors: Jim Dowell, P.Eng. – MMM GroupBob Koziol, P.Eng. – MMM GroupMarc Jolicoeur, P.E. – Vélo QuébecJeff Olson, R.A. – Alta Planning + Design

Technical Su pport:

Claire Basinski, MCIP, RPP – MMM GroupDorothy Kowpak, MCIP, RPP – MMM GroupJonathan Mang, CET – MMM GroupMichael Parker – MMM GroupKevin Yeung – MMM GroupSarah Krapez – MMM GroupPhil Goff – Alta Planning + Design

Independent Reviewer: Gerry Forbes, P.Eng., PTOE – INTUS Road SafetyEngineering Inc.

Technical Committee and Funding Supporters:Nelson Cadete – City of BramptonKara Van Myall – Bruce CountyJack Van Dorp – Bruce CountyPat David – Bruce CountyDan Ozimkovic – City of BurlingtonVito Tolone – City of BurlingtonDaryl Bender – City of HamiltonHart Solomon – City of HamiltonHeide Schlegl – Town of MiltonJacquelyn Hayward Gulati – City of MississaugaJacqueline Hunter – City of MississaugaPhil Bergen – Region of NiagaraPetar Vujic – Region of NiagaraChris Clapham – Town of OakvilleRobert Grimwood – City of OttawaZlatko Krstulic – City of OttawaDave Shelsted – City of Greater SudburyLukasz Pawlowski – City of TorontoSelma Hubjer – City of VaughanGeoffrey Haines – City of VaughanGarrett Donaher – Region of WaterlooJohn Hill – Region of WaterlooYvonne Kaczor – York RegionJason Mainprize – York RegionVi Bui – York RegionRoger De Gannes – Ministry of TransportationTerry Short – Ministry of Transportation

The Ontario Traffic Council would also like to thankthe Transportation Association of Canada (TAC), anational not-for-profit association that promotesthe provision of safe, secure, efficient, effective

and environmentally and financially sustainabletransportation services in support of Canada’ssocial and economic goals. All figures that havebeen excerpted from the TAC publication: BikewayTraffic Control Guidelines for Canada – SecondEdition (2012) are reproduced with the expresswritten authority of the Transportation Association ofCanada (TAC).

Book 18 · Cycling Facilities

Ontario Traffic Manual · December 2013



vOntario Traffic Manual · December 2013

Table of Contents

1. GENERAL INFORMATION 1 1.1 Introduction 1

1.2 Sections of this Book 2

1.3 Bicycle Features & Rules of the Road 3

1.4 The Design Domain Concept 7 1.5 Cycling Myths 7

2. BIKEWAY NETWORK PLANNING 11 2.1 User Characteristics 11

2.1.1 Age 11 2.1.2 Skill and Comfort Level 12

2.1.3 Trip Purpose 14 2.1.4 Other Potential Users 14

2.2 Bicycle Operating Requirements 14

2.3 Types of Bicycle Facilities 15 2.3.1 On-Road Facilities 16

2.3.1.1 Shared Roadway and Signed Bicycle Route 16 2.3.1.2 Signed Bicycle Route with Paved Shoulder 16

2.3.1.3 Conventional Bicycle Lane 17 2.3.1.4 Separated Bicycle Lane 18

2.3.1.5 Contraflow Bicycle Lane 18 2.3.1.6 Raise d Cycle Track 18

2.3.1.7 Bicycle Priority Street 19 2.3.2 In-Boulevard Bicycle Facilities 19

2.3.2.1 Active Transporta tion Path 19

2.4 Route Selection Criteria 20

2.4.1 Access and Potential Use 20

2.4.2 Connectivity and Directness 20 2.4.3 Physical Barriers 21

2.4.4 Attractiveness 21 2.4.5 Safety and Comfort 21

2.4.6 Cost 22




vi

2.4.7 Accommodation of Existing and Future Demand 22

2.4.8 Consistent with Local Tourism Strategies and Goals 22 2.5 Bicycle Design Supporting Complete Streets 22

2.6 Support Features 22 2.6.1 Bicycle Parking Facilities 22

2.6.2 Other End-of-Trip Facilities 23 2.6.3 Rest Areas 23

2.6.4 Emergency and Service Vehicle Access 23 2.7 Information Regarding Maintenance 23

3. BICYCLE FACILITY SELECTION TOOL 25 3.1 General 25

3.2 Overview of the Bicycle Facility Type Selection Process 26

3.2.1 Suitable Application Environments 26 3.2.2 The Process 26

3.2.2.1 Step 1: Facility Pre-Selection 28 3.2.2.2 Step 2: A More Detailed Look 31 3.2.2.3 Step 3: Justify Your Rationale 39

4. BICYCLE FACILITY DESIGN 41 4.1 Shared Roadways 42 4.1.1 Shared Roadways and Signed Bicycle Routes 42

4.1.1.1 Geometry 42

4.1.1.2 Sign s 44 4.1.1.3 Pavement Mark ings 47

4.1.1.4 Design Applicatio ns 48 4.1.2 Signed Bicycle Route with Paved Shoulders 51

4.1.2.1 Geometry 51 4.1.2.2 Signs 54

4.1.2.3 Pavement Markings 54 4.1.2.4 Design Applicatio ns 55

4.2 Bicycle Lanes 60 4.2.1 Conventional Bicycle Lanes 60

4.2.1.1 Geometry 60 4.2.1.2 Signs 63

4.2.1.3 Pavement Markings 64

4.2.1.4 Design Applicatio ns 66









ixOntario Traffic Manual · December 2013

Appendices

A. GLOSSARY 193

7.1.1 Type and Location of Bicycle Parking Area 173

7.1.2 Visibility and Security 174 7.1.3 Type of Bicycle Parking Facility 175

7.1.4 Clearance Considerations 177 7.2 Other End-of-Trip Facilities 180

7.2.1 Bike Rooms 180 7.2.2 Showers and Change Rooms 181

7.3 Rest Area s 181 7.4 Emergency and Service Vehicle Access 182

8 MAINTENANCE STRATEGIES FOR BICYCLE FACILITIES 183 8.1 Sweeping 184

8.2 Surface Repairs 184 C.2.1 Bumps and Depressions 185

C.2.2 Cracking 185 C.2.3 Potholes 186

C.2.4 Pavement Drop-off At Shoulders 187 8.3 Vegetation Management 188

8.4 Maintenance of Signage and Pavement Markings 188 8.5 Drainage Improvements 189

8.6 Winter Maintenance 189 8.7 Parking Facilities 191




x

List of FiguresFigure 2.1 Four Types of Cyclist 13Figure 2.2 Cyclist Operating Space 15Figure 2.3 Shared Roadway with Sharrows 16Figure 2.4 Paved Shoulder 17Figure 2.5 Conventional Bicycle Lane 17Figure 2.6 Separated Bicycle Lane 18Figure 2.7 Raised Cycle Track 19Figure 2.8 Bicycle Priority Street 19Figure 2.9 An Example of a Shared Use AT Path 20Figure 3.1 Bicycle Facility Type Selection 3-Step Process Flow Chart 26Figure 3.2 Model Worksheet for the Facility Type Selection Tool 27Figure 3.3 Desirable Bicycle Facility Pre-Selection Nomograph 30Figure 4.1 Examples of Shared Roadways and Signed Bicycle Routes 44Figure 4.2 Cross-Sections of Shared Roadways and Signed Bicycle Routes 45Figure 4.3 Bicycle Route Marker Sign 45Figure 4.4 Share the Road and Shared Use Lane Single File Signs 46Figure 4.5 Motor Vehicle Passing Prohibited Signs 46Figure 4.6 ‘Sharrow’ Pavement Marking 47Figure 4.7 Wide Signed Bicycle Route without On-Street Parking 48Figure 4.8 Wide Signed Bicycle Route with On-Street Parking 49Figure 4.9 Narrow Signed Bicycle Route without On-Street Parking 49Figure 4.10 Narrow Signed Bicycle Route with On-Street Parking 50

Figure 4.11 Examples of Signed Bicycle Routes with Paved Shoulders 52Figure 4.12 Cross-Sections of Signed Bicycle Routes with Paved Shoulder 53Figure 4.13 Bicycle Route Marker Sign 54Figure 4.14 Solid White Edge Line 54Figure 4.15 Signed Bicycle Route with Paved Shoulders and Marked Buffer 55Figure 4.16 Signed Bicycle Route with Paved Shoulders and Rumble Strips 55Figure 4.17a Shoulder Rumble Strips for 0.5m Bicycle Buffer Zone 57Figure 4.17b Shoulder Rumble Strips for 1.0m Bicycle Buffer Zone 58Figure 4.17c Shoulder Rumble Strips for 1.5m Bicycle Buffer Zone 59Figure 4.18 Examples of Conventional Bicycle Lanes 62Figure 4.19 Cross-Sections of Conventional Bicycle Lanes 62Figure 4.20a Overhead and Ground-mounted Reserved Bicycle Lane Signs (OTM) 63

Figure 4.20b Reserved Lane Begins and Ends Tab Signs (OTM) 63Figure 4.21 Reserved Bicycle Lane Signs (TAC) 63Figure 4.22 Reserved Bicycle Lane Ahead Sign 64Figure 4.23 Turning Vehicles Yield to Bicycles Sign 64Figure 4.24 Solid White Bicycle Lane Line 65Figure 4.25 Dashed White Bicycle Lane Line 65Figure 4.26 Bicycle Lane Pavement Markings 65Figure 4.27 Bicycle Lane on Two-Lane Two-Way Road with On-Street Parking 66









xiiiOntario Traffic Manual · December 2013

Figure 5.1 Bicycle Priority Street Design Elements 130Figure 5.2 Design Elements on a Typical Bicycle Priority Street 131Figure 5.3 One-Lane Chicane Roadway with Two-Way Traffic 132Figure 5.4 Shared Use Markings on Two-Lane Chicaned Roadway 133Figure 5.5 Bicycle Lane on Chicaned Roadway 133Figure 5.6 Bicycle Lane Markings across a Speed Hump 134Figure 5.7 An Example of Narrowing Vehicular Lane Widths for the Implementation

of Bicycle Facilities 135Figure 5.8 An Example of Removing and Narrowing Parking Lanes of the

Implementation of Bicycle Facilities 136Figure 5.9 Bicycle Lane at a Single Lane Roundabout, No Bicycle Bypass 137Figure 5.10 Tapered Ramp Example 138Figure 5.11 Bicycle Lane at a Multi-Lane Roundabout with Bicycle Bypass 139Figure 5.12 Sharrow Markings in a Conflict Zone 140Figure 5.13 White Dashed Markings in Conflict Zone 141Figure 5.14 White Dashed Bicycle Markings and Bicycle Stencils in a Conflict Zone 141Figure 5.15 Contraflow cyclist / side-street driver 143Figure 5.16 Contraflow cyclist / main-street driver 143Figure 5.17 With-flow cyclist / main-street driver 143Figure 5.18 Stopped motor vehicles may block the path 143Figure 5.19 Bicycle Lane Passing a Transit Stop 145Figure 5.20 Cycle Facility at Transit Stop (Roncesvalles Avenue, Toronto) 145Figure 5.21 Cycle Facility at Transit Stop (Sherbourne Street, Toronto) 145Figure 5.22 Bicycle Lane across Lower Speed ( ≤ 70 km/h) Diverging Ramp Facility 146Figure 5.23 Context Specific Example of Cyclist Crossing at Low-Speed On-Ramp

with Green Surface Treatment and Pavement Markings 147Figure 5.24 Bicycle Lane across Lower Speed ( ≤ 70 km/h) Diverging Ramp Facilitywith Parallel Lane 147

Figure 5.25 Bicycle Lane across Lower Speed ( ≤ 70 km/h) Merging Ramp Facility 148Figure 5.26 Bicycle Lane across Lower Speed ( ≤ 70 km/h) Merging Ramp Facility

with Acceleration Lane 149Figure 5.27 Bicycle Crossing at a High-Speed Diverging Ramp 150Figure 5.28 Bicycle Lane Jug Handle at Diverging Ramp Facility 151Figure 5.29 Bicycle Crossing at a High-Speed Merging Ramp 152Figure 5.30 Side Clearance at Bridges 155Figure 5.31 Bicycle Lane at Skewed Railway Crossing – Gate Controlled 157Figure 5.32 Bicycle Lane at Skewed Railway Crossing – Ungated Control 157

Figure 5.33 Bicycle Lane Jug Handle at Skewed Railway Crossing – Gate Controlled 158Figure 5.34 Bicycle Lane Jug Handle at Skewed Railway Crossing – Ungated Control 158Figure 5.35 Separate Crossride 159Figure 5.36 Combined Crossride 160Figure 5.37 Mixed Crosside 160Figure 5.38 Midblock Crossride 161Figure 5.39 Example of a Bicycle Signal Head 162Figure 5.40 Standard Bicycle Signal Head 162




xiv

Figure 5.41 Bicycle Signal Loop Detector Stencil Sign 163Figure 5.42 Bicycle Signal Loop Detector Stencil Pavement Marking 163Figure 5.43 Signalized Intersection Crossing Sign 163Figure 5.44 Example Pavement Marking for Bicycle Actuation Location 163Figure 5.45 Example of Cyclist Pushbutton 163Figure 5.46 Catch Basin Inlet within the Curb Face 165Figure 5.47 Example of a Drainage Grate with Herring Bone Openings 165Figure 5.48 Bicycle Lane Closed Sign 167Figure 5.49 Bicycle Lane Detour Markers 168Figure 5.50 Grooved Pavement Sign 168Figure 5.51 Distance Advisory Tab Signs 168Figure 6.1 Five-Stage Implementation Schedule 170Figure 7.1 An Example of Short-Term Parking 173

Figure 7.2 An Example of Long-Term Parking 174Figure 7.3 Sheltered Bicycle Parking 174Figure 7.4 Post and Ring Stand 175Figure 7.5 Ring Rack 175Figure 7.6 Cora Bike Rack 175Figure 7.7 Improper Use of Ribbon Bike Rack 175Figure 7.8 The Bridge Rack is a Poor Example of a Bike Rack 176Figure 7.9 12 Sided Polygon Bike Lockers 177Figure 7.10 Bike Locker Secured with Personal Lock 177Figure 7.11 Bike Lockers Located in a Parking Garage 177Figure 7.12 Mesh Panels Allow for Surveillance of Lockers Contents 177Figure 7.13 Basic Dimensions for the One Bicycle per Stand Perpendicular Configuration 179Figure B.14 Two Partially Overlapping Rows of Perpendicular Parked Bicycles 179Figure 7.15 Basic Dimensions for the Two Bicycles per Stand Perpendicular Configuration 180Figure 7.16 Bike Room 180Figure 7.17 Bike Repair Station 181Figure 7.18 An Example of a Change Room 181Figure 7.19 Bollards on Finch Corridor, Toronto 182Figure 8.1 An Example of Seasonal Sweeping Requirements 184Figure 8.2 Poorly Maintained Bicycle Lane 185Figure 8.3 Well Maintained Bicycle Facility 185Figure 8.4 Pothole Identified by Hazard Marker 187Figure 8.5 Poor Drainage Causes Puddling in Bike Lane 189Figure 8.6 Bicycle Lane is Not Cleared of Snow 190Figure 8.7 Bicycle Facility is Cleared of Snow 190





xvOntario Traffic Manual · December 2013

List of TablesTable 1.1 Bicycle Specific Rules of the Road 4Table 3.1 85th Percentile Motor Vehicle Operating Speeds 31Table 3.2 Motor Vehicle Volumes 32Table 3.3 Function of Street or Road or Highway 32Table 3.4 Vehicle Mix 33Table 3.5 Collision History 33Table 3.6 Available Space 34Table 3.7 Costs 35Table 3.8 Anticipated Users in terms of Skill and Trip Purpose 35Table 3.9 Level of Bicycle Use 36

Table 3.10 Function of Route within the Bicycle Facility Network 36Table 3.11 Type of Roadway Improvement Project 37Table 3.12 On-Street Parking (for urban situations) 38Table 3.13 Frequency of Intersections (for urban situations) 39Table 4.1 Desired and Suggested Minimum Lane Widths for Urban Shared

Roadways / Signed Bicycle Routes 43Table 4.2 Desired and Suggested Minimum Paved Shoulders Widths for Rural

Cross-Sections on Signed Bicycle Routes 52Table 4.3 Desired and Suggested Minimum Widths for Bicycle Lanes (to the face of curb) 61Table 4.4 Desired and Suggested Minimum Widths for Separated Bicycle Lanes 87Table 4.5 Desired and Suggested Minimum Widths for a Contraflow Bicycle Lane

(to the face of curb) 98Table 4.6 Desired and Suggested Minimum Widths for Cycle Tracks (excluding

curb to travel lane) 106Table 4.7 Desired and Suggested Minimum Widths for In-Boulevard Bicycle Facilities 115Table 5.1 Minimum Side Clearances at Bridges 154Table 5.2 Cyclist Considerations for Drainage Grates and Utility Covers 164Table 5.3 Illumination Levels for Bicycle Facilities 166






1Ontario Traffic Manual · December 2013

1. General Information

1.1 Introduction

The Ontario Traffic Manual (OTM) is a series oftraffic engineering and traffic control referencemanuals produced by the Ministry of Transportationof Ontario (MTO) for use by municipalities inOntario. As of 2013, nine of the 22 Books havebeen completed, and the Ministry has establisheda process of updating the Books as required.

The OTM series provides guidelines on varioustraffic control devices. OTM Book 18 – CyclingFacilities has been developed by MTO in associationwith the Ontario Traffic Council (OTC). At the timeof publication, the design guidelines presentedin OTM Book 18 are considered to be consistentwith the intent of the Highway Traffic Act (HTA) withrespect to municipal roads and infrastructure.MTO acknowledges that as the application ofBook 18 evolves over ti me, the HTA may requirefurther clarification to accommodate new andevolving cycling facilities. Funding and technicalsupport has come from the Ministry as well as aSteering Committee comprised of sponsoringmunicipalities.

A complete listing of the planned and previouslycompleted OTM volumes is found in Book 1. Anew edition of Book 1 will be released to coincidewith the production of each new Book in the OTMseries. This is necessary in order to have a mastertable of contents and indices which are up-to-date at any given time. Book 1 should be readprior to the application of any of the other Booksin the OTM series. The use of any of the devicesand applications discussed in those Books shouldbe considered in conjunction with the contents ofother related OTM Books as appropriate.

The purpose of Book 18 is to provide practicalguidance on the planning, design and operation ofcycling facilities in Ontario. It applies to on- and off-road facilities within the road right-of-way, howeveroff-road trails through parks, ravines, Hydro corridorsor open space are outside of its scope. It is for use bytraffic engineers, planners and other transportationpractitioners, and promotes a uniform approachacross the province. The other objectives of theOTM are to provide a set of guidelines consistentwith the intent of the Highway Traffic Act (HTA) andto establish a basis for municipalities to generateor update their own guidelines and standards.

Book 18 includes consolidated references to relevantmaterial that is provided in other OTM Books asapplicable to bicycle facility planning, design andtraffic control. Book 18 incorporates current bestpractices in Ontario, Canada and internationally. Theguidelines cover a broad range of traffic situations,and they are based on many factors which determinethe specific design and operational effectiveness ofbicycle facilities.

No manual can cover all situations encounteredin the field. Therefore, knowledge of applicationand field experience are essential in deciding theappropriate course of action in the absence ofspecific direction from the Manual itself. This isespecially true if the user is deviating significantlyfrom any recommendations in the Manual. Similarly,municipalities may need to adopt policies that reflectlocal conditions and context. The traffic practitioner’sfundamental responsibility is to exercise goodengineering judgement that is in the best interestsof the public. Guidelines are provided in the OTMto supplement professional experience and assist inmaking those judgments.

This manual also refers to various publications andprimary references produced by MTO and otheragencies such as the Institute of Transportation




2

Engineers (ITE), the Transportation Association ofCanada (TAC) and the Ontario Traffic Council (OTC).The guidelines developed in Book 18 also wereinformed by primary cycling design referencesfrom the United States published by the NationalAssociation of City Transportation Officials (NACTO)and the American Association of State Highway andTransportation Officials (AASHTO).

1.2 Sections of this Book

This Manual is organized in the following order:

• Section 1 - General Information: This sectionincludes introductory information on thepurpose of the Manual as well as keyhighlights. The section presents relevantbackground and policy information plus adescription of each of the Sections foundwithin Book 18.

• Section 2 - Bikeway Network Planning: Thissection provides transportation professionalswith a framework for the planning of an

urban or rural bicycle network. Section 2contains overarching active transportationplanning concepts that should beincorporated into a municipal transportationor cycling master plan. Establishing aplanning framework for cycling is importantto guide bicycle facility selection, theapplication of bicycle facility designs andtraffic control devices that are appropriate fora given location or context.

• Section 3 - Bicycle Facility Type

Selection: This section presents a BicycleFacility Type Selection tool that bridgesthe gap between route selection andinfrastructure design. It includes a facilityselection process, and also discussescontext sensitive design considerations.

• Section 4 - Bicycle Facility Design: Thissection provides practitioners with theinformation necessary to design on-road and in-boulevard bicycle facilities. Itincludes general geometric considerations,appropriate signage and pavement markingsas well as intersection treatments.

• Section 5 - Additional Bicycle Facility DesignApplications: This section discusses additionalbicycle facility design considerations suchas bicycle priority streets and traffic calmingmeasures, plus the integration of bicyclefacilities at roundabouts, interchanges, rampcrossings, conflict zones, bridge structuresand railway crossings.

• Section 6 - Implementation Process: Thefundamental principles outlined in Section2 (Bikeway Network Planning), Section3 (Bicycle Facility Type Selection) andSection 4 (Bicycle Facility Design) arebrought together in this section. It outlinesa suggested strategy for implementinga bicycle network, and is based on best

practices from across North America. Thissection presents a recommended process,including a management structure and a setof steps considered important to support thereview, approval, design and implementationof bicycle facilities on or in the boulevard ofpublic roadways.

• Section 7 - Support Features: This sectionprovides a description and examples ofsupplemental features which should beconsidered for the enhancement and

promotion of cycling. These include bicycleparking, end-of-trip facilities and rest areas,as well as emergency and service vehicleaccess.






• Section 8 – Maintenance Strategies for BicycleFacilities: This section provides relevantinformation and strategies for ensuring thesafe and efficient operation of on-road and in-boulevard bicycle facilities that are within theroad right-of-way.

• Appendix A - Glossary

1.3 Bicycle Features & Rules of the Road

The Ontario Highway Traffic Act (HTA) defines the

rules of the road, and identifies the rights andresponsibilities of motor vehicles, cyclists andpedestrians. Currently the HTA defines a bicycle(including electric-assisted e-bikes) as a vehicle.Tricycles and unicycles are also considered to be‘bicycles’, but those that are motor-assisted, suchas mopeds, are excluded from this category. Assuch, cyclists must comply with the rules of theroad in the same manner as a motorist.

Bicycles can be operated on most roadways inOntario, with the exception of the 400 serieshighways and other roadways to which access hasbeen restricted through Municipal By-laws. Cyclistsin Ontario are not required to have a driver’slicense, and there are no age restrictions to operatea bicycle. The legislation also states that a cyclistmust wear a bicycle helmet if under 18 years of ageand operating their bicycle on the road.

The HTA generally treats bicycles like any othervehicle. Table 1.1 outlines the bicycle specificrules of the road contained in the HTA.




4

Table 1.1 – Bicycle Specific Rules of the RoadSituation Rights and Duties

HTASection

Lights andreflectors onbicycles, etc.

“When on a highway at any time from one-half hour before sunset to one-half hour after sunrise and at any other time when, due to insufficient light orunfavourable atmospheric conditions, persons and vehicles on the highwayare not clearly discernible at a distance of 150 metres or less, every motor-assisted bicycle and bicycle (other than a unicycle) shall carry a lighted lampdisplaying a white or amber light on its front and a lighted lamp displayinga red light or a reflector approved by the Ministry on its rear, and in additionwhite reflective material shall be placed on its front forks, and red reflective

material covering a surface of not less than 250 millimetres in length and 25millimetres in width shall be place on its rear.”

62 (17)

Brakes onbicycle

“No person shall ride a bicycle on a highway unless it is equipped with atleast one brake system acting on the rear wheel that will enable the rider tomake the braked wheel skid on dry, level and clean pavement.”

64 (3)

Alarm bell to besounded

“Every motor vehicle, motor assisted bicycle and bicycle shall be equippedwith an alarm bell, gong or horn, which shall be kept in good working orderand sounded whenever it is reasonably necessary to notify pedestrians orothers of its approach.”

75 (5)

Bicyclists towear helmet

“No person shall carry a passenger who is under sixteen years of age ona motorcycle on a highway unless the passenger is wearing a helmet that

complies with the regulations and the chin strap of the helmet is securelyfastened under the chin.”

“Subject to subsection 103.1 (2), no person shall ride on or operate a bicycleon a highway unless the person is wearing a bicycle helmet that complieswith the regulations and the chin strap of the helmet is securely fastenedunder the chin.”

104 (2)

104(2.1)

Riding inpedestriancrossover

“No person shall ride a bicycle across a roadway within a pedestriancrossover.”

140 (6)

Signal for left orright turn

“The driver or operator of a vehicle upon a highway before turning to the

left or right at any intersection or into a private road or driveway or from onelane for traffic to another lane for traffic or to leave the roadway shall firstsee that the movement can be made in safety, and if the operation of anyother vehicle may be affected by the movement shall give a signal plainlyvisible to the driver or operator of the other vehicle of the intention to makethe movement.”

142 (1)






Situation Rights and DutiesHTASection

Mode ofsignalling turn

“The signal required in subsections (1) and (2) shall be given either by meansof the hand and arm in the manner herein specified or by a mechanical orelectrical signal device as described in subsection (6).”

142 (3)

How to signalmanually

“When the signal is given by means of the hand and arm, the driver oroperator shall indicate his or her intention to turn,

(a) to the left, by extending the hand and arm horizontally andbeyond the left side of the vehicle; or

(b) to the right, by extending the hand and arm upward and beyondthe left side of the vehicle.

Despite clause (4) (b), a person on a bicycle may indicate the intentionto turn to the right by extending the right hand and arm horizontally andbeyond the right side of the bicycle.”

142 (4)

142 (5)

Signal for stop

“The driver or operator of a vehicle upon a highway before stopping orsuddenly decreasing the speed of the vehicle, if the operation of any othervehicle may be affected by such stopping or decreasing of speed, shall givea signal plainly visible to the driver or operator of the other vehicle of theintention to stop or decrease speed, manually

(c) by means of the hand and arm extended downward beyondthe left side of the vehicle; or

signalling device(d) by means of a stop lamp or lamps on the rear of the vehicle

which shall emit a red or amber light and which shall be actuatedupon application of the service or foot brake and which may ormay not be incorporated with one or more rear lamps. R.S.O.1990, c. H.8, s. 142 (8).”

142 (8)

Yielding topedestrians

“When under this section a driver is permitted to proceed, the driver shallyield the right of way to pedestrians lawfully within a crosswalk.”

144 (7)

Riding incrosswalksprohibited

“No person shall ride a bicycle across a roadway within or along a crosswalkat an intersection or at a location other than an intersection which locationis controlled by a traffic control signal system.”

144 (29)

Vehiclesmeeting

bicycles

“Every person in charge of a vehicle on a highway meeting a persontravelling on a bicycle shall allow the cyclist sufficient room on the roadway

to pass.”

148 (4)

Bicyclesovertaken

“Every person on a bicycle or motor assisted bicycle who is overtaken by avehicle or equestrian travelling at a greater speed shall turn out to the rightand allow the vehicle or equestrian to pass and the vehicle or equestrianovertaking shall turn out to the left so far as may be necessary to avoid acollision.”

148 (6)




6

Situation Rights and DutiesHTASection

Towing of personson bicycles,toboggans, etc.,prohibited

“No driver of a vehicle or street car shall permit any person riding upona bicycle, coaster, roller skates, skis, toboggan, sled or toy vehicle toattach the same, himself or herself to the vehicle or street car.”

160

Clinging to vehicles,bicycle passengers,etc.Bicycle riders, etc.,clinging to vehicles

“A person riding upon a motor assisted bicycle, a bicycle, a coaster,roller skates, skis, a toboggan, a sled or a toy vehicle shall not attach it,them, himself or herself to a vehicle or street car on a roadway.”

178 (1)

Bicycle passengers “No person riding on a bicycle designed for carrying one person onlyshall carry any other person thereon.”

178 (2)

Persons clinging tovehicles

“No person shall attach himself or herself to the outside of a vehicleor street car on a roadway for the purpose of being drawn along theroadway.”

178 (4)

Duties of pedestrianwhen walking alonghighway

Note: A dismounted cyclist is considered a pedestrian.

“Where sidewalks are not provided on a highway, a pedestrian walkingalong the highway shall walk on the left side thereof facing oncomingtraffic and, when walking along the roadway, shall walk as close to theleft edge thereof as possible.”

“Subsection (1) does not apply to a pedestrian walking a bicycle incircumstances where crossing to the left side of the highway wouldbe unsafe.”

179 (1)

179 (2)

Regulating orprohibiting useof highway bypedestrians, etc.

“Bicycles are prohibited on designated freeways such as the 400series, the QEW, Ottawa Queensway and on roads where “NoBicycle” signs are posted by regulation (i.e. Reg 630) or municipal by-law.”

185 (1)

Prohibiting motorassisted bicycles,etc., on municipal

highways

“The council of a municipality may by by-law prohibit pedestrians orthe use of motor assisted bicycles, bicycles, wheelchairs or animalson any highway or portion of a highway under its jurisdiction.”

185 (2)

Cyclist to identify self

“A police officer who finds any person contravening this Act or anymunicipal by-law regulating traffic while in charge of a bicycle mayrequire that person to stop and to provide identification of himself orherself.”“Every person who is required to stop, by a police officer acting undersubsection (1), shall stop and identify himself or herself to the policeofficer.”

218 (1)

218 (2)






1.4 The Design Domain Concept

Throughout OTM Book 18, practitioners areencouraged to design bicycle facilities within adesign domain. This concept was first introducedin the TAC Geometric Design Guide for CanadianRoads. The design domain can be viewed as arange of values that a practitioner may choosefor a particular design parameter. It provides thepractitioner with some flexibility to design a bicyclefacility for the appropriate conditions, rather than tomeet a rigid standard.

It is very important that a practitioner designing abikeway facility understands the design processincluding the rationale and justification for providinga particular treatment. Practitioners should referto Sections 2 and 3 to better understand theprocesses involved in Bikeway Network Planningand Bicycle Facility Type Selection.

For each design parameter, the most appropriatevalue should be chosen based on severalconsiderations, including:

• Facility function;

• Available right-of-way;

• Traffic volume;

• Posted and observed speed;

• Perceived user comfort and safety level;

• Actual collision risk; and

• Cost.

The practitioner is responsible for designingfacilities through the use of good engineeringjudgement. This requires experience, insight and anunderstanding of local conditions.

The design domain is applied primarily to the lanewidths of a bikeway facility. It is presented as a

‘desired width’ and a ‘suggested minimum’ value.It is recommended that the practitioner designto the desired width. However, through the useof good engineering judgement, the designer mayconsider implementing a width that is less thanthe desired value, but no lower than the suggestedminimum for context specific situations andsegments or corridors with constrained rights-of-way. Also, practitioners may choose to design to astandard that is wider than the desired dimensionsbased on an assessment of the conditions and otherconsiderations.

Designers are strongly recommended to documenttheir rationale at all stages of the facility selectionand design process. This is particularly importantwhere proposals deviate from the desired widths,which are considered optimal from a safetyperspective. This will assist the designer should theybe required to defend any compromises they mayhave chosen for operational, cost or other reasonsbased on their engineering judgement.

Practitioners should refer to the TAC Geometric

Design Guide for Canadian Roads sections 1.1.5and 1.1.6 for further information on the concept of adesign domain.

1.5 Cycling Myths

There are a number of misconceptions regardingsafety associated with bicycle transportation. Withthe evolution of bicycle planning and facility design,experts have identified and summarized several ofthese myths in the sections below.

Myth #1: Cycling on Sidewalks is Desirable

Cycling should almost never be mixed withpedestrian traffic on sidewalks. The only exception isfor children (typically under the age of 11) who maylack the necessary skills and cognitive abilities




8

to operate a bike on a roadway with motor vehicletraffic.

Cycling on a sidewalk is strongly discouragedbecause of the mobility constraints and varyingabilities of pedestrians and cyclists. Cyclists travelat much higher speeds than pedestrians, yet theycannot change their direction or speed as quicklyas a pedestrian can. There are also numerousfixed objects on or adjacent to a sidewalk aroundwhich cyclists must navigate. These include parkingmeters, utility poles, sign posts, transit shelters,benches, trees, fire hydrants and mail boxes. In

general, cyclists should have access to dedicatedor bicycle-friendly facilities.

Other conflicts that cyclists encounter while riding ona sidewalk include pedestrians alighting from buses,exiting stores and emerging from parked cars. Suchsituations do not allow enough time for cyclists toavoid a collision. Pedestrians, on the other hand, canfind it difficult to predict the intended direction of anoncoming or overtaking cyclist.

When cyclists use sidewalks to travel in theopposite direction to the adjacent motor vehicleflow, conflicts occur more frequently at drivewaysor intersecting streets. This is because drivers whoexit these areas are not looking for cyclists, whotravel at higher speeds than pedestrians. The risksto cyclists are similar to those for raised cycletracks, in-boulevard facilities and separated bikelanes described in section 5.4.1.2. However,they are amplified since the lack of a formal cyclingfacility and associated signing makes drivers lesslikely to expect cyclists to be crossing.

Finally, sidewalks are typically 1.5 metres widewhich is the minimum width of an on-street bicyclelane. Thus, any manoeuvring by the cyclist to avoidpedestrians, fixed objects or oncoming cyclistswould require them to either stop or leave thesidewalk.

In residential areas, it is common for children to ridetheir bicycles on sidewalks. This type of cycling isappropriate, however these sidewalks should not besigned as bicycle paths or routes.

Myth #2: On-Street Cycling is not Safe

Statistically, off-road facilities have a higherincidence of bicycle collisions with motor vehiclesor pedestrians at cross streets and driveways,particularly in commercial areas, compared to on-road cycling.

Many off-road facilities have been built with poorsight lines, severely limited recovery areas andsharp deflections in the alignment at bridges,sometimes with slippery threshold plates at theabutment. Often there are accumulations of sand,debris and eroded materials on separated bicyclefacilities since they do not get swept as regularlyas on-street bicycle lanes. These frequently lead toincidents which do not involve another vehicle orcyclist.

It could be argued that the higher risk of collisionson bike paths is offset by the lower average severityof injuries suffered compared to those associatedwith on-street collisions with motor vehicles. Thisis a complex issue that is beyond the scope of thismanual. However, the blanket statement that “on-street cycling is not safe” should not be acceptedby practitioners. The full range of available facilities(as outlined in Section 4) should be considered bythe designer, and the most appropriate one shouldbe selected for each particular site.

Myth #3: Riding Against Traffic is Safer

Riding in the roadway against the flow of trafficis one of the leading causes of cyclist fatalities,especially among children. Pedestrians areencouraged to walk against the flow of traffic so






that drivers and pedestrians can see each other,but this is not as effective for cyclists. Motoristsare not expecting cyclists to be travelling againstthe flow of traffic, particularly at intersections. It isalso more difficult for motorists to react in time andtake evasive action because the speed of cyclistsis much higher than that of pedestrians. It is muchsafer for a cyclist to travel with the flow of trafficand be equipped with bright clothing, reflectorsand lights. A rear-view mirror is recommended; inthe absence of one, cyclists should check over theirshoulder to see that it i s safe before commencinga manoeuvre.

Myth #4: Cyclists Can Dismount and Walk asNecessary

It is sometimes necessary for cyclists to dismounttheir bicycle and walk when the terrain or cyclingconditions are difficult and no alternatives exist.However, the option of asking cyclists to dismountand walk their bikes should not be relied upon inlieu of adequately accommodating cyclists throughappropriate road design. Being propelled bymuscular power, cyclists more than other vehicleoperators will prefer to sustain their momentumand avoid stopping. Cyclists usually find it difficultto rationalize why “dismount and walk” restrictionsare in place, and conclude that they were a poor,illogical or arbitrary decision. Thus, if facility designscause cyclists to make what they consider to beunnecessary stops, this will increase the likelihoodthat they will ignore or disobey traffic controls,which breeds disrespect for these devices.

Myth #5: All Cyclists are the Same

Cyclists come in all shapes and sizes, and have awide range of ages and skill levels. Furthermore,utilitarian and recreational cyclists have distinctpriorities that result in wide variations in travel

speed, route choice, facility preference andperception of risk.

If bicycle facilities are designed for only one typeof cyclist, such facilities may be underutilizedby other cyclist types. For example, utilitariancommuter cyclists travelling at speed on an activetransportation path with high pedestrian volumesmay create a hazard. A bicycle facility on anarterial or major collector road may be consideredhazardous for use by young or inexperiencedcyclists. Each age group has its own characteristics,its own collision patterns, and its own needs. See

Section 2.1.2 for further information on cyclisttypes.

Myth #6: Multi-use Paths are Acceptable for AllRecreational Users

Active transportation paths, often referred to asin-boulevard multi-use paths or trails, are similarto sidewalks but are wider and designed toaccommodate cyclists, pedestrians and other usersin a common off-road shared facility. As a generalprinciple, there needs to be adequate space forpedestrians and cyclists to safely co-exist whereshared facilities are being proposed. Where spacepermits, separate pedestrian and cycling facilitiesshould be considered.

Other active transportation users such as in-lineskaters and skateboarders may utilize multi-use trailsdepending on the surface type. As a rule, motorizedvehicles are prohibited from off-road multi-use trails;however, snowmobiles and all-terrain vehicles may

be permitted on some trail systems.

Providing the same path for horses and bicyclescreates an unsatisfactory and possibly verydangerous mix. Horses startle easily and maychange direction suddenly if they perceive cyclistsas a danger. Bicycle facilities and horse trails are




10

also incompatible in their surface requirements.Bicycles function best on hard surfaces; forhorses, soft surfaces are preferable. As a result,separate equestrian and bicycle facilities should beprovided.

Myth #7: Cyclists do not ride in the WinterSeason

Cycling is a viable mode of transportation andrecreation year round, including in the winterseason. While cycling volumes decrease fromDecember to March, in many parts of Ontario largenumbers continue to cycle through the winter. Thisis particularly true of commuters, who may rely oncycling to travel to and from work since they haveno alternative form of transportation. Participatingin cycling activities over the winter also allowscyclists to continue reaping the health benefits ofincreased physical activity that they enjoy the restof the year.

The main challenge for cyclists in the winter seasonis unfavourable weather conditions such as snowand ice, which must be managed to ensure a saferiding experience. Municipalities without a wintermaintenance strategy for cycling infrastructure areencouraged to develop one. In many jurisdictions,winter maintenance is often integrated into theoperating costs of bike facilities.

In Sweden, where winters are comparable to herein Ontario, winter cyclist volumes can be morethan a third of those recorded during the summer.However, volumes on bikeways with leftover snow

and ice are significantly lower than on those thathave been fully cleared. Maximizing the utilizationof cycling infrastructure year-round can minimizethe additional winter demand transferred to other

transportation systems, whose capacity may alsobe affected by the conditions.

Practitioners should note that bicycle facilities canactually have cost-saving effects. For example,bike lanes keep heavier motor vehicles away fromdrainage grates and other curbside infrastructure.The pavement in that area is particularly vulnerableto damage that may be exacerbated by the freeze-thaw conditions, and the need for remedial worksis therefore reduced. Information on maintenancestrategies and considerations can be found inSection 8.






2. Bikeway Network Planning

Cycling is an extremely efficient means oftransportation but, like any other mode of travel,there are risks associated with operating a bicycle.Cyclists, like pedestrians, are considered vulnerableroad users since they are at a greater risk of injuryin collisions with motor vehicles. It is importantthat planners and designers consider the needs ofcyclists and motorists, while following acceptedroad safety and geometric design guidelines.

While all roadways should be accessible forcycling, except where prohibited by law, not allroadways are appropriate for all cyclists. Bicyclefacility planning consists of selecting candidateroutes which are part of an overall bikewaynetwork that meets the needs of potential cyclists.Individual routes may be more appropriate for aparticular group of cyclists based on the roadwaycharacteristics and facility type. However, theoverall bikeway network should be selected,planned and designed with all potential cyclists in

mind.

Bikeway network planning should occur inadvance of bicycle facility type selection (Section3) and bicycle facility design (Section 4) . Bikewaynetwork planning can also help to achieve effectiveimplementation of cycling network projects(Section 6).

The information in this chapter outlines the keyconcepts when planning, selecting and designingappropriate bicycle facilities. These conceptsinclude:

• Bicycle User Characteristics;

• Bicycle Operating Requirements;

• Bicycle Facility Types; and

• Route Selection Criteria.

2.1 User Characteristics

A cycling network should provide a clear, well-defined and comfortable environment for allanticipated users. Therefore, it is important toidentify the primary target groups for whom thefacility is being designed. Cyclists can generally begrouped according to age, skill level, comfort zoneand trip purpose.

2.1.1 Age

A well-planned cycling network should consider theneeds of users of all ages.

Adults:

• Tend to cycle for longer periods of time butdistances vary depending on the purpose ofthe trip;

• Cycle for both utilitarian and recreationalpurposes, although this is typicallydependent on the time of year. Utilitarian(particularly commuter) cycling rates typicallydominate in winter months; and

• Skill and comfort level typically determine thefacility and street type on which they chooseto ride.

Children / Young Adults / Seniors:

• Unlikely to go on longer trips, and tend toengage in short distance cycling activities;

• Distance travelled varies from less than1 kilometre for young children to over 5kilometres for older children and youngadults;




12

• Cycle for utilitarian purposes, such as ridingto visit friends, to school or to run errands;

• Cycle for recreational purposes, perhapsusing a trail, park or other such facility withintheir neighbourhood;

• More likely to ride on residential or lowvolume streets and trails;

• Less visible to motorists because they aresmaller in stature and ride smaller bicycles;and

• Riding skill and judgement are not as

developed compared to older cyclists.

2.1.2 Skill and Comfort Level

Practitioners should consider the skill and comfortlevel of cyclists when deciding to implementa bicycle network and when choosing theappropriate bicycle facility type. The PortlandBicycle Plan suggests that cyclists can becategorized into one of the following four groups:‘Strong and Fearless’, ‘Enthused and Confident’,

‘Interested but Concerned’ and ‘No Way, No How’,a characterization which is widely accepted bydesigners and cycling groups throughout NorthAmerica.

‘Strong and Fearless’ cyclists:

• Tend to ride more frequently;

• Will typically cycle for both utilitarian andrecreational purposes;

• Have advanced cycling skills and arecomfortable riding alongside motorizedtraffic; and

• Will cycle regardless of roadway conditions,although users in this group may prefer touse on-street bike lanes.

‘Enthused and Confident’ cyclists are those whoare comfortable sharing the roadway with vehiculartraffic but prefer to do so within their own designatedarea with pavement markings and signage for thepreferential or exclusive use of cyclists.

Many studies have shown that the number onereason people do not ride bicycles is because theyare not comfortable riding on the roadway withmotorized vehicles. ‘Interested but Concerned’ describes people who:

• Avoid cycling in areas with medium to high

volumes of motor vehicle traffic;• Become discouraged by high-speed traffic,

extreme topographic conditions andinconsistent bicycle facilities;

• Ride infrequently, typically around theirimmediate neighbourhood but are curiousabout cycling and would like to ride more;

• May not have their own car, for examplechildren or teenagers who would like to cycleto school or other activities but they (or their

parents) are concerned for their safety; and

• May be attracted to cycling by theimplementation of designated facilities,particularly separated and in-boulevardbicycle facilities which provide more spacebetween cyclists and motorists.

The ‘No Way, No How’ group represents peoplewho are not, and may never be, interestedin cycling. This may be related to their local

topography, a lack of skills or capability, or justthat they have not and would not consider cyclingfor transportation.






It should be noted that this categorizationaddresses only their willingness to use a bicycleas a main means of transportation. However,people in all these groups, especially the‘Interested but Concerned’ group, may also cyclefor recreation.

Figure 2.1 is an example of the typicaldistribution of the four types of cyclist that canbe found in an urban municipality. Development ofthe cycling network should improve the experienceof the ‘Strong and Fearless’ and the ‘Enthused andConfident’ groups, however these only represent

‘No Way, No How’‘Interested but Concerned’

‘Enthused and Confident’ ‘Strong and Fearless’

32%

60%

7%

about 8% of the population. The target market forpractitioners promoting the expansion of cyclingshould be the ‘Interested but Concerned’ group.These people comprise 60% of the population andwould cycle more if the facilities were in place tohelp them to feel safe on their bikes.

Source: ALTA Planning & Design, 2010 - Based on information from the City of Portland, Oregon, 2010

Figure 2.1 – Four Types of Cyclist




14

2.1.3 Trip Purpose

Generally, cycling trips can be divided into threecategories: Utilitarian, Recreational and Touring.

• Utilitarian or destination-oriented tripsare for the purpose of reaching a particulardestination and are often repetitive. Theseinclude trips to places of employment(commuting), to school or to shops, plus tripsthat are necessary as part of an individual’sdaily activities. Commuters are concernedwith travel time and distance. They generally

prefer to take the most direct route, whichmay include major roadways, although theyalso favour routes with as few traffic signalsand stop signs as possible. Commutercyclists may use bike paths, but only if theroutes lead directly to their destination withfew interruptions.

• Recreational trips are identified by the levelof enjoyment, scenery and company of othercyclists. Recreational riders generally avoidhigher volume arterials and collector roads,

and ride on off-road bicycle facilities, quietneighbourhood streets or rural roadways.Fitness and sport cyclists ride for exerciseand skill training. Trips can be taken alone orin groups, simulating race conditions in orderto improve their skill and fitness level. Thesecyclists prefer to ride on low volume ruralroadways with minimal traffic interruptions.

• Touring trips are often longer than utilitarianor recreational trips. Touring cyclists preferto ride on rural roads or major trails withample scenery. Trips are generally betweenurban areas or to specific points of interest.Touring trips require more planning since theroute, destinations and accommodation areimportant factors for the cyclist.

2.1.4 Other Potential Users

OTM Book 18 focuses on designing facilities forcyclists. As a result, it does not include the detailsof facility types for other road users. However,consideration should be given to other possibleusers when choosing facility types and designingcycling connections or networks. These users mayinclude pedestrians (both able-bodied and thoseusing powered mobility aids), in-line skaters andskateboarders, as well as riders of electric bikes,electric scooters and Segways.

2.2 Bicycle Operating Requirements

The operating space for cyclists is an important factorin bikeway facility design. Cyclists need a certainamount of space to maintain stability. The operatingspace is determined by examining typical bicycledimensions, space requirements for manoeuvring,horizontal clearance and vertical height. Operatingcharacteristics vary considerably from cyclist tocyclist due to differing types of bicycles, varyingabilities or the surrounding environment. This lattercategory includes traffic volumes, vehicle mix,speed, geometric alignments and topographicalconditions.

An operating width of 1.2 to 1.5 metres is sufficientto accommodate the forward movement of themajority of cyclists. This dimension is greater thanthe actual width occupied since it takes into accountthe natural side-to-side movement that can varyaccording to speed, wind and the ability of thecyclist.

Manoeuvring space requirements can vary from0.1 to 0.45 metres on each side of the physicalenvelope. In addition, to ride comfortably and avoidfixed objects such as curbs, bridge abutments andrailings, a cyclist needs a minimum of 0.25 metres






of horizontal clearance from the closest edge ofthe bicycle facility to the rigid or conflicting object orhazard. A 0.5 metre clear zone should be providedbehind the vertical face of curb plus a width of 0.5metres alongside the outer edge of the bicyclefacility. This should be graded and free of stationaryobjects. The operating height of 2.5 metres cangenerally accommodate an average adult cycliststanding upright on the pedals of a bicycle. Figure2.2 illustrates the typical operating space requiredfor a cyclist on the roadway.

1 . 5

m

1 . 1

m

Minimum1.2 m

Physical

Handlebar

Eye Level

2 . 5

m

Operating

0.75 m

Desired

Widths

H e

i g h t s

1.5 m

In addition to having well-planned and designedbicycle facilities, it is important to have supportingpolicies with regard to education, encouragement,enforcement and bicycle training programs. Pleaserefer to the Bicycle Facility Selection Tool inSection 3 for more information regarding user riskand bicycle facility type selection.

2.3 Types of Bicycle Facilities

A complete cycling network typically consistsof various types of bicycle facilities whichaccommodate different user characteristics and trippurposes. Each bicycle facility type within the right-of-way can be organized into two categories: on-road and in-boulevard.

Please note that there may be other variations ofthese bicycle facility types beyond those discussedin these guidelines. This document focuses on avariety of facility types which are summarized as

follows:

On-Road Bicycle Facilities:

• Shared Roadway and Signed Only BicycleRoute

• Signed Bicycle Route with Paved Shoulder

• Conventional Bicycle Lane

• Separated Bicycle Lane

• Raised Cycle Track

• Bicycle Priority Streets

In-Boulevard Bicycle Facilities:

• Active Transportation / Multi Use Path

• Raised Cycle Track

Note that the Raised Cycle Track appears in bothcategories. A raised cycle track can be within theroadway if it is between the curbs but slightlyelevated. It can also take the form of a one-way ortwo-way in-boulevard facility beyond the curbs.

Based on information from the AASHTO Guide for the Planning, Designand Operation of Bicycle Facilities, 2012

Figure 2.2 – Cyclist Operating Space




16

Note: Sharrows are intended to indicate to bothmotorists and cyclists the appropriate line of travelfor cyclists.Credit: New River Valley Bicycle Association, 2011

through specific locations such as intersections,bicycle route marker signs may be omitted. Referto Section 4.1.1 for more detailed informationregarding the design of Shared Roadways andSigned Bike Routes.

2.3.1.2 Signed Bicycl e Route with PavedShoulder

This is a road with a rural cross section which issigned as a bike route that also includes a pavedshoulder. A paved shoulder is a portion of a roadwaywhich is contiguous with the travelled way, and isused to accommodate stopped vehicles, emergencyuse, pedestrians and cyclists as well as for lateralsupport of the pavement structure. A paved shoulderon a designated bike route may include a buffer zoneto provide greater separation between motoristsand cyclists travelling in the same direction.

A signed bike route with a buffered paved shoulderis typically recommended on rural secondary

2.3.1 On-Road Bicycle Facilities

2.3.1.1 Shared Roadways and Signed BicycleRoutes

Unless cycling is specifically restricted, all roadwaysare considered to be Shared Roadways where bothmotorists and cyclists share the same vehiculartravel lane.

On a shared roadway that has been designatedas a bicycle route, green marker signs should beinstalled. This is required for all formal, continuous

bicycle facilities for awareness, consistency andwayfinding purposes. Where the marker sign is theonly bicycle-related provision, this is known as a‘Signed Only’ route.

While a bicycle may operate on any sharedroadway, a ‘Signed Only’ bike route is typicallyonly considered for local urban and suburbanroads where traffic volumes and vehicle operatingspeeds are low. As motor vehicle traffic volumesincrease, the width of the shared travel lane may

be increased. However, this may result in highermotor vehicle speeds and associated safety risks,hence upgrading to a formal bicycle facility such asa conventional bicycle lane is preferred wheneverfeasible.

Shared use lane markings (sharrows) may beapplied as an option. Sharrows are intendedto indicate to both motorists and cyclists theappropriate line of travel for cyclists. Where sharedlanes are sufficiently wide for cyclists to ridealongside motorists, sharrows are applied near thecurb. Where shared lanes are too narrow for this,the sharrows are placed in the centre of the lane.

In the two aforementioned cases, practitionersmay install ‘Share the Road’ and ‘Shared Use LaneSingle File’ signs respectively. Where a sharrowor similar treatment is provided to guide cyclists

Figure 2.3 – Shared Roadway with Sharrows






Note: Sufficient space should be provided to mitigateconflict between cyclists and opening car doors on streets

where on-street parking is permitted

Credit: MMM

Note: The paved shoulder is adjacent to the vehiculartravel lane and provides cyclists with a riding space

further away from motor vehicle traffic.

Credit: MMM, 2009

roadways. Bicycle lanes should typically beprovided on both sides of two-way streets. Onone-way streets, conventional bike lanes operatein the direction of travel. As described in Section

2.3.1.5 , in a contraflow scenario the bike laneoperates in the opposite direction to the flow ofmotor vehicles. If on-street parking is permitted,the bicycle lane is typically placed betweenthe parking area and the travel lane. However,some municipalities are experimenting with thelocation of the bicycle lane by placing it betweenthe curb and permanent on-street parking,thereby creating a form of separated bicycle lane.Either way, sufficient space should be provided tomitigate conflicts between cyclists and opening

car doors.

The space reserved for the preferential or exclusiveuse of cyclists is defined by one or, in some cases,two longitudinal pavement markings plus a diamondfollowed by a bicycle symbol indicating that thelane is reserved. Refer to Section 4.2.1 for further

highways, arterials or collectors. The buffer canbe made up of two edge lines with or withoutdiagonal hatching. A rumble strip may be providedbetween the edge lines if it is deemed necessary

for the safety of motorists; however, the spacingand shape of the grooves should be as bicycle-friendly as possible. The buffer provides addedseparation between cyclists and motorists, offeringboth user groups more comfort as they travel alongthe roadway. Refer to Section 4.1.2 for moreinformation.

2.3.1.3 Conventiona l Bicycle Lane

This is a portion of a roadway which has beendesignated by pavement markings and signage forthe preferential or exclusive use of cyclists.

A bicycle lane is typically located on urbanarterial or collector roadways that have highertraffic volumes, operating speeds and proportionof commercial vehicles compared to local urban

Figure 2.4 – Paved Shoulder – Dufferin County Figure 2.5 – Conventional Bicycle Lane,Milton Trails




18

Note: Separation restricts the encroachment ofmotorized traffic, and is perceived to create a moresecure and comfortable environment for cyclists.

Credit: SF.streetblog.org, 2009 (left photo)Credit: Cit y of Vancouver (right photo)

A separated bicycle lane, also sometimes referredto as a ‘segregated bicycle lane’ may be separatedby a buffer with hatched pavement markingsor by a physical barrier such as a line of bollards,a median or parked vehicles. Physical separationrestricts the encroachment of motor vehicle trafficinto the separated bicycle lane, and is perceived tocreate a more secure and comfortable environmentfor cyclists. It may, however, restrict a cyclist’sability to manoeuvre into or out of the lane midblock.Where a roadway allows on-street parking, the

guidance on the design of Conventional BicycleLanes, including signage requirements.

2.3.1.4 Separa ted Bicycle Lane

This is a portion of a roadway which has beendesignated for the exclusive use of cyclists bysignage along with a physical or marked buffer. Thisfacility type provides additional spatial or physicalseparation between motorists and cyclists.

separated bicycle lane may be positioned betweenthe parking lane and the curb. A separated bicyclelane is typically used for utilitarian purposes. Referto Section 4.2.2 for further guidance on the designof Separated Bicycle Lanes.

2.3.1.5 Contraflow Bicycle Lane

Cyclists riding within a Contraflow Bicycle Lanetravel in the opposite direction to motor vehicletraffic. A Contraflow Bicycle Lane enables two-way bicycle travel on a roadway that has one-way operation for motor vehicles. It is a type of

Conventional Bicycle Lane or Separated BicycleLane that simply operates in the opposite directionto the normal flow of traffic.

A Contraflow Bicycle Lane is typically implementedto provide greater connectivity within a bikewaynetwork where the route using regular bicyclefacilities would be much longer. Refer to Section4.2.3 for further guidance on the design ofContraflow Bicycle Lanes.

2.3.1.6 Raised Cycle Track

This is a bicycle facility adjacent to but verticallyseparated from motor vehicle travel lanes. A raisedcycle track is designated for exclusive use bycyclists, and is distinct from the sidewalk.

A raised cycle track is typically implemented on highvolume urban arterial or collector roadways withhigh bicycle traffic volumes. Raised cycle tracks aretypically curb separated to the level of the adjacentsidewalk or an intermediate level between that and

the roadway.

The raised cycle track may be designed for one-wayor two-way travel. Raised cycle tracks are typicallyused by both experienced and casual cyclists forutilitarian purposes. Refer to Section 4.3.1 fordesign guidelines on Raised Cycle Tracks.

Figure 2.6 – Separated Bicycle Lane






Note: A bicycle priority street is typically implemented onlow volume residential roadways with measures to reducemotor vehicle volume.

Credit: Rich Dhrul

Note: A raised cycle track is typically implemented onhigh volume urban arterial or collector roadways with highbicycle traffic volumes

Credit: MMM, 2013

a single path shared by cyclists and pedestrians. Inurban areas, an Active Transportation Path is oftenreferred to as an ‘in-boulevard multi-use path’.

Active Transportation Paths provide recreationalopportunities but may also provide a direct

commuter route in corridors not served by on-roadbicycle facilities. Designers should consider accessand connectivity restrictions that may result if afacility is only on one side of, and removed from,the roadway. Practitioners should look to mitigatethis through the provision of midblock crossingfacilities.

An Active Transportation Path is appropriate forboth experienced and inexperienced cyclists and,if permitted, other active transportation users suchas pedestrians, in-line skaters, skateboarders andwheelchair users. Motor vehicles are not permittedon an Active Transportation Path, except whenemergency or maintenance vehicles require access.

Figure 2.9 illustrates a typical cross-section for anActive Transportation Path for use by both cyclistsand pedestrians. Refer to Section 4.4.1 for further

2.3.1.7 Bicycle Pri ority Street

Sometimes referred to as a ‘Bicycle Boulevard’ or‘Local Bicycle Street’, this is a low-volume, low-speed street that has been optimized for bicycletravel through treatments such as traffic calming

and traffic reduction by means of signage andpavement markings, as well as intersectioncrossing treatments. The facility is designedto allow through movements for cyclists whilediscouraging motorized traffic from taking thesame route. This facility is typically implemented onresidential streets. Refer to Section 5.1 for furtherguidance on the design of Bicycle Priority Streets.

2.3.2 In-Boulevard Bicycle Facilities

2.3.2.1 Active Transportat ion Path

This is a path that is physically separated from motorvehicle traffic by a strip of grass (often referred toas a “boulevard” or “verge”) or paved ‘splash strip’within the roadway or highway right-of-way. AnActive Transportation Path may be comprised of abicycle facility that is distinct from the sidewalk, or

Figure 2.8 – Bicycle Priority StreetFigure 2.7 – Raised Cycle Track in Toronto




20

Note: Motorized vehicles are not permitted on activetransportation paths, except when emergency ormaintenance vehicles require access. Credit: MMM

guidance on the design of In-Boulevard ActiveTransportation Paths.

2.4 Route Selection Criteria

Except where prohibited by law, cyclists arepermitted to ride on all roadways. However, someroadway corridors may be more suitable than othersfor the implementation of bicycle facilities. Theprocess of developing a comprehensive bikeway

network involves selecting routes that meet theneeds of potential users. Often a set of routeselection criteria is used to help practitioners in thisprocess. Several common route selection criteriaare described below which should, at a minimum,be considered when selecting candidate routes.The Bicycle Facility Selection Tool in Section 3outlines the process which should be undertaken toselect the bicycle facility type that best suits a givendesign situation.

Figure 2.9 – An Example of a Shared Use ATPath

2.4.1 Access and Potential Use

A comprehensive bikeway network is oftendeveloped by selecting routes that are locatedclose to the highest proportion of users in order tomaximize access and use. Cyclists are more inclinedto use a bikeway network if it is located close tokey points of origin and destination in a community.Areas with high concentrations of residential,employment, commercial and retail land uses, aswell as educational institutions, community centresand recreational areas should be considered as keyorigin and destination points that may generate

cycling trips.

As public transit infrastructure develops, mobilityhubs are becoming increasingly significant nodesin the bicycle network. They include train terminals,subway stations, LRT stops and bus interchanges.Mobility hubs are effectively becoming moreprominent origin and destination points on thecycling network. Utilitarian cyclists transfer to orfrom different modes of transportation at theselocations. Formalizing bicycle routes that connect

residential centres to these nodes will increasethe catchment area of the transit network. Suchcycling infrastructure will give a larger proportion ofOntario’s urban population more rapid and reliableaccess to their nearest mobility hub than if theymade the first or last leg of their journey by foot.

2.4.2 Connectivity and Directness

Candidate routes that are selected to form a bicyclenetwork should improve connections to othermodes of transportation and places of interestfor cyclists. Candidate routes should add to thecompleteness of an individual corridor or to thecomprehensiveness of the overall bike network. Theroutes should be distributed in a way that providesthe shortest, quickest and most convenientconnections between origin and destination points.






In some cases, the selection of facilities forconstruction is based on opportunities that mayarise for synergies with other projects, as outlinedin Table 3.11 . Combining works in this wayallows bike facilities to be installed while achievingcost efficiencies, however practitioners shouldconsider the completeness of the resulting bikewaynetwork. The implementation of small sections ofdisconnected bicycle facilities is unlikely to providemeaningful connections for cyclists since thosefacilities may suffer from low cycling volumes.Practitioners should consider investing some ofthe resources saved through the aforementioned

synergies to provide additional links that properlyintegrate the new facilities into the network.

2.4.3 Physical Barriers

In some areas, there may be major physicalbarriers or constraints to bicycle travel causedby topography, rivers, narrow bridges, freeways,railroad tracks or other obstacles. When selectingcandidate routes, preference should be given toroutes with few or no barriers or constraints that

may affect the connectivity and directness of thebike route. If these constraints are unavoidable for aparticular candidate route, consideration should begiven as to how such barriers will be overcome, andthe associated costs, when comparing alternativeroutes.

2.4.4 Attractiveness

Scenery is an important consideration for anybikeway network, especially for touring andrecreational routes. Candidate routes that areattractive and comfortable to use will improveoverall user enjoyment and increase the perceptionof safety. A high quality cycling experience canbe provided in a wide range of settings. Bikewaysthat serve a primarily recreational purpose may belocated beside rivers and ravines, or through hydrorights-of-way; existing or former rail corridors may

also provide an interesting and attractive route.Recreational cyclists tend to favour routes withadjacent land uses that are attractive; utilitariancyclists will also prefer these routes, provided theyare direct.

2.4.5 Safety and Comfort

The safety and risk exposure of cyclists mustbe considered when selecting candidate routes.The factors that influence the level of safety andrisk exposure for a particular bikeway include:user conflicts, traffic volume and speed, truck and

bus volumes, on-street parking, surface quality,sightlines, maintenance considerations and humanfactors. These variables are discussed in detailwithin the Bicycle Facility Selection Tool in Section3. The roadway and safety characteristics of thecandidate route should also be considered.

Pavement surface quality and traffic volumes arefactors that may affect a cyclist’s comfort levelwithin the bicycle facility. Candidate routes shouldhave a pavement surface that is free of bumps,

potholes and other surface irregularities in order toprovide users with a comfortable cycling experience.Candidate routes located on heavily travelled orhigh-speed roadways may be frequently used byexperienced utilitarian cyclists, but recreationalcyclists may not be comfortable with this type offacility. A parallel route should be selected wherepossible in order to accommodate those usergroups.

2.4.6 Cost

The evaluation of candidate routes will normallyinvolve a cost comparison. This analysis shouldidentify the capital and maintenance costs for thebicycle facility. Consideration should also be given tothe feasibility of constructing and implementing thecandidate route.




22

Funding availability can limit choices; however, alack of funds can never justify a poorly designed,constructed or maintained facility. It is usually moredesirable not to build anything than to construct apoorly planned or designed facility. The decisionto implement a bikeway should be made with aconscious, long-term commitment to a proper levelof maintenance.

2.4.7 Accommodation of Existing and FutureDemand

Routes that are established, successful and popular

with cyclists should be selected as candidateroutes. Local cyclists and stakeholders may alsoidentify routes as an important future connection,and request that additional facilities be constructedto improve the connection. Routes with sceniccorridors along abandoned railroads, and roadswhere shoulders can be paved have a high potentialfor cycle tourism, and should be considered ascandidate routes.

2.4.8 Consistent with Local Tourism Strategies

and Goals

When selecting candidate routes, practitionersshould review the strategies and goals identified byRegional Tourism Offices and related organizationsto ensure that the route supports, and is consistentwith, these strategies and goals. These routesshould consider primary regional destinationssuch as Conservation Areas, and may also includeimportant local destinations such as CommunityCentres, Universities and Historic Sites.

2.5 Bicycle Design Supporting CompleteStreets

Complete Streets are roadways which have beendesigned to be a safe, attractive, accessible andintegrated environment for all road users acrossall modes. Pedestrians, cyclists, motorists and

transit users of all ages and abilities are consideredduring the design and implementation of CompleteStreets.

The benefits include:

• Improved safety for all users;

• More liveable communities;

• Positive impacts on public health; and

• Economic benefits, since people want to bethere.

Cycling infrastructure is a key element of theComplete Streets mix. It improves the accessibilityof a community and, if effectively planned anddesigned, allows for seamless transitions betweencycling, pedestrian and transit modes.

Corridor projects are a good opportunity forproviding continuous bicycle facilities as part of,or in addition to, the planned bikeway network.Combining the provision of bicycle facilities withthose for Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) or Light Rail Transit(LRT) planning can lead to implementation synergiesand associated cost savings.

2.6 Support Features

There are several key support features whichshould be considered in the planning and design ofbikeway networks. Sometimes these provisions areoverlooked, but they often play a key role in providingusers a complete bikeway system and encouragingbicycle use.

2.6.1 Bicycle Parking Facilities

Providing bicycle parking facilities is an essentialcomponent of a multi-modal transportation system,and is necessary for encouraging more bicycle use.A lack of appropriate bicycle parking supply candeter individuals from considering cycling astheir basic mode of transportation.






Adequately designed bicycle parking facilitieslocated in strategic areas allow cyclists to securelylock their bicycles, and can contribute to moreorderly sidewalks and parking areas in terms ofappearance and flow. Some factors that should beconsidered when planning and designing bicycleparking include:

• Location of Bicycle Parking Area;

• Visibility and Security;

• Type of Bicycle Parking Facility;

• Weather Protection; and

• Clearance Considerations.

Refer to Section 8.7 in Section 8 for informationon the maintenance of bicycle parking facilities.

2.6.2 Other End-of-Trip Facilities

In addition to secure bicycle parking, non-residentialdevelopments can offer a variety of other end-of-trip facilities such as bike rooms with repair stationsas well as shower and change facilities.

2.6.3 Rest Areas

Rest areas should be provided at strategic locationsalong routes where users are expected to stop,such as lookouts and restaurants, as well as alongtrails and waterfront promenades. Rest areas canbe provided for both rural and urban recreationalroutes.

2.6.4 Emergency and Service Vehicle Access

Additional consideration should be given toemergency access to physically separated bicyclelanes and in-boulevard facilities. The challenge liesin implementing access configurations that allowthe free flow of permitted path users, as well asaccess for authorized emergency and servicevehicles, while blocking unauthorized motor

vehicles. Some options that may be considered forthese circumstances include:

• Removable or Retractable Bollards;

• Flex Bollards; and

• Split Path Entrances.

For more information on Support Features, pleaserefer to Section 7.

2.7 Information Regarding Maintenance

Maintenance is vital to the effectiveness of bikefacilities. In order to support the growth in tripsby bicycle, municipalities must be able to assurecyclists of infrastructure that is:

• Safe – without surface defects that mayunnecessarily slow cyclists or cause them tolose control;

• Comfortable – with a smooth riding surface,preferably providing good skid resistance.The riding quality of off-road facilities should

be at least as good as that of an adjacentroad; and

• Aesthetically acceptable.

From the municipality’s perspective, bike facilitiesshould fulfil all legal requirements and mitigateliability risks, as well as being durable and easy tomaintain.

When scheduling their maintenance operations,municipalities should prioritize ‘spines’: long, primary

routes that have high connectivity with other facilities.These should benefit from year-round cleaning andsnow removal, as should Active Transportation pathsthat form key connections or links.

Further information regarding maintenancestrategies may be found in Section 8 .




24






3. Bicycle Facility Type Selection

3.1 General

This chapter provides a detailed explanation of thethree step bicycle facility selection process that isrecommended for use by bicycle facility designersand practitioners.

This facility selection process provides a consistentframework that is straightforward to apply anduses readily available data. It was developed based

on current research and knowledge of facility typeselection and best practices regarding ‘degrees ofseparation’ as outlined in Section 3.2.1.

The tool is not prescriptive. This is to allow flexibilityduring the decision making process to accountfor differences in the physical and operationalcharacteristics of the roadway of interest. Thisis especially true when there are constraints inretrofitting existing corridors and intersections.

However, before a practitioner selects a bicyclefacility type, it is important that the followingrealities are clearly understood:

1. The choice to separate is not simple: Thechoice to provide a separated versus non-separated bicycle facility is not a simple“yes” or “no” decision;

2. Design criteria need to recognize context:The design criteria and associated thresholdsused to select one bicycle facility type over

another need to be flexible to accommodatesite specific characteristics; and

3. The final decision requires professional judgemen t: The experience and judgementof a qualified engineering designer orpractitioner should ultimately influence thebicycle facility type, plus the added designfeatures or enhancements that are selected.

Research shows that one of the most effectivemeasures for improving overall cyclist safety withina road network is increasing the number of cyclistsusing the system. However, in order to encouragecyclists of different ages and abilities, a variety ofbicycle facilities with different degrees of separation

between motorists and cyclists must be available.Separation of cyclists and motor vehicles becomesincreasingly more important as traffic volumes andoperating speeds increase.

Bicycle facilities exhibit various levels of separationbetween cyclists and motorists. These range fromshared travel lanes with no separation but with theoption to provide sharrow markings, to bicycle lanesdelineated by pavement markings, to separatedbicycle lanes with a painted buffer or physical barrier.

Other alternatives are in-boulevard bicycle facilitieswithin the highway right-of-way, or off-road bicyclefacilities outside the highway right-of-way. However,a direct comparison of the relative safety of differenttypes of bicycle facilities and degrees of separationis difficult. A bicycle facility with greater separationmay appear to be ‘safer’ but may result in moreconflicts at intersections and driveways, especiallyif the separation makes the cyclist less visible to themotorist. As previously stated, the choice to providea separated or non-separated bicycle facility is not asimple decision. Designers must critically evaluatethe situation by using their engineering experienceand professional judgement to make the final facilitytype selection.




26

3.2 Overview of the Bicycle Facility TypeSelection Process

3.2.1 Suitable Application Environments

The bicycle facility type selection process hasbeen developed for application in both urban andrural environments. However, when going throughthe process outlined in Section 3.2.2, designersmust be aware of the fact that urban and ruralroadways have different characteristics which needto be considered when selecting a bicycle facilitytype. For example, on-street parking or frequency

of driveways and intersections may be more of aconcern in urban situations, while the availabilityof paved shoulders and level of bicycle use may bemore of a concern in rural situations. The followingsection provides a detailed explanation of thebicycle facility type selection process.

3.2.2 The Process

The bicycle facility type selection process has threesteps, as shown in Figure 3.1 . It is important thatpractitioners complete each step to ensure that they

have selected the best possible solution given sitespecific characteristics and available information.

Figure 3.2 provides a model “worksheet” thatpractitioners can use to guide them through thebicycle facility selection process.

Step 1 allows practitioners to pre-select thedesirable bicycle facility type based on the motorvehicle operating speed and the average daily trafficvolume. This step is accomplished through theuse of the ‘Desirable Bicycle Facility Pre-SelectionNomograph’ illustrated in Figure 3.3.

Step 2 guides practitioners to take a more detailedlook at site specific characteristics in order todetermine the appropriateness of the pre-selectedfacility type. Practitioners use this step to criticallyevaluate the situation in order to select the mostappropriate facility type.

Step 3 guides practitioners in documenting theirrationale for their final decision. Sections 3.2.2.1to 3.2.2.3 provide more detailed information abouteach step.

STEP 1:

Facility Pre-SelectionUse Nomograph – Figure 3.3

STEP 2a: STEP 2b: STEP 2c:

Inventory Site-Specific ConditionsReview Key Design

Considerations and ApplicationHeuristics – Section 3.2.2.2

Select Appropriate andFeasible Bicycle Facility Type

STEP 3:

Justify Decision and IdentifyDesign Enhancements

Figure 3.1 – Bicycle Facility Type Selection 3-Step Process Flow Chart







28

A public consultative process should be considereddepending on the context, particularly wherethere is a significant cost or impact on road usersassociated with the proposals.

3.2.2.1 Step 1: Facility Pre-Selection

Facility pre-selection is undertaken through theuse of a nomograph which helps practitionersidentify the desirable bicycle facility type for a givensituation based on the 85 th percentile motor vehicleoperating speed and average daily traffic volume.

Several international organizations known for theirwork in bicycle network planning and facility designsuch as Transport for London, Sustrans (UnitedKingdom), CROW (Netherlands), Denmark RoadDirectorate, Australia Roads Traffic Authority, andthe New Zealand Land Transport Safety Authorityhave developed facility selection nomographs toaid practitioners in pre-selecting bicycle facilitytypes. The principles and suggested thresholdsin these nomographs are understood to be basedon two-lane, two-way roadways. Within the North

American context, there are numerous multi-laneroads which serve as important connectors inurban networks. In areas with few or no practicaltwo-lane alternatives, especially in built-up urbanareas, these multi-lane roads should be consideredas candidates for the implementation of bicyclefacilities.

The ‘Desirable Bicycle Facility Pre-SelectionNomograph’, illustrated in Figure 3.3 , was derivedfrom international examples and, therefore, ismost applicable to two-lane, two-way roadways.The principles, however, are still applicable tomulti-lane roadway situations. In these instances,practitioners should consider the operating speed,total combined traffic volume and mix of vehiclestravelling on the lanes directly adjacent to thecycling facility since these are believed to have thegreatest effect on cyclists.

The ‘Desirable Bicycle Facility Pre-SelectionNomograph’ is only the first step in the bicyclefacility selection process, and should not be used byitself as the justification for facility selection.

As previously stated, this nomograph may be usedto assess urban and rural situations. However,designers must be cognizant of the fact that urbanand rural roadways have different characteristicswhich need to be considered when selecting abicycle facility type.

In urban areas there are typically more frequent

conflict points such as driveways, midblockcrossings, intersections and on-street parking.These need to be considered when assessing riskexposure in urban environments since they willinfluence the selection of suitable facility types.In rural and suburban locations, the availability ofpaved shoulders and level of bicycle use must beconsidered.

In addition, roadway characteristics may vary alongany given route. Therefore, the route should be

divided into homogenous sections for analysis andfacility selection. If possible, a consistent facilitytype should be considered along a given route tomaintain cyclist and motorist expectations.

The nomograph is divided into three types ofoperating environment categories:

1. Shared Roadway (Blue)

2. Designated Cycling Operating Space (White)

3. Separated Facility or Alternate Routes (Red)

The ‘Shared Roadway’ environment involvesrelatively low traffic volumes and low to moderatespeeds. If motor vehicle operating speed andaverage daily traffic lands a designer in the blue






area, the types of bicycle facilities that may besuitable include shared roadways and signed bikeroutes with standard or wide travelled lanes, withor without shared lane markings.

The ‘Designated Cycling Operating Space’ environment involves routes with moderate tohigh speeds combined with low traffic volumes,as well as scenarios where speeds are low andtraffic volumes are moderate. If the motor vehicleoperating speed and the average daily traffic volumeof a route fall in the white area, the types of bicyclefacilities that are suitable include paved shoulders

or buffered paved shoulders for rural cross-sections.Exclusive bicycle lanes, separated bicycle lanes orraised cycle tracks may be suitable for urban cross-sections.

The ‘Separated Facility or Alternate Routes’environment involves high-speed scenarios,sites with high traffic volumes, and routes wheremoderate to high speeds coincide with moderate tohigh traffic volumes. If the motor vehicle operatingspeed and the average daily traffic volume of a

route fall in the red area, alternate parallel corridorsmore conducive to cycling should be examinedwhere possible. However, practitioners shouldconsider the implications in terms of cyclist accessto popular destinations, network connectivity andthe spacing of parallel routes. The types of bicyclefacilities that might be suitable include a bufferedpaved shoulder on a rural road, a separated bicyclelane or raised cycle track on an urban road, or a pathin a roadway boulevard.

The nomograph does not contain precisely definedlines between the three operating environmentcategories since there are no absolute thresholdswhere one particular facility type is preferred overanother. However, the gradual transition in colouron the nomograph from blue to white to red

represents the relative increase in risk to cyclistsas speeds and volumes on a roadway increase. Asone progresses into higher levels of risk, there isa preference to provide the types of bicycle facilitiesthat result in increasing degrees of separation.Once an operating environment and candidatefacility type is identified, the practitioner shouldproceed to Step 2 to complete a more detailedassessment of site-specific conditions.




30

1 0

2 0

3 0

5 0

6 0

7 0

8 0

9 0

1 0 0

4 0

M o t o r V e h i c l e

8 5 t h P e r c e n t i l e

R u r a l

S u b u r b a n

U r b a n

O p e r a t i n g S p e e d

( k m / h )

1 0

2 0

3 0

5 0

6 0

7 0

8 0

9 0

1 0 0

4 0

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

1 0

1 1

1 2

1 3

1 4

1 5

0

1

AverageDailyTrafficVolume

( T h o u s a n d s )

( f o r 2 l a n e r o a d w a y s , o n e i n e a c h d i r e c t i o n )

D e s i r a b l e C y c l i n g F a c i l i t y

S T E P 1 o f 3

P r e - s e l e c t i o n N o m o g r a p h

C y c l i n g

O p e r a t i n g S p a c e

C o n s i d e r D e s i g n a t e d

- P a v e d S h o u l d e r s

- E x c l u s i v e B i c y c l e L a n e s

S e p a r a t e d B i c y c l e L a n e s /

C y c l e

T r a c k s

F o o t n o t e s : - T h i s n o m o g r a p h i s t h e f i r s t o f a

t h r e e

s t e p

b i c

y c l e

f a c i l i t y s e l e c t i o n

p r o c e s s

, , a n d

s h o u l d n o t b e u

s e d

b y

i t s e l f a s t h e j u s t i f i c a t i o n f o r f a c i l i t y s e l e c t i o n ( s e e S t e p s 2 a n d 3 ) .

T h e n o m o g r a p h s i m

p l y h e l p s p r a c t i t i o n e r s p r e - s e l e c t a d e s i r a b l e c y c l i n g f a c i l i t y t y p e ,

h o w e v e r t h e c o n t e x t

o f t h e s i t u a t i o n g o v e r n s t h e f i n a l d e c i s i o n

.

- T h e n o m o g r a p h h a s b e e n a d a p t e d f o r t h e N o r t h A m e r i c a n c o n t e x t a n d i s b a s e d o n

i n t e r n a t i o n a l e x a m p l e s a n d r e s e a r c h f o r t w o l a n e r o a d w

a y s .

I t i s , h o w

e v e r , s t i l l

a p p l i c a b l e f o r m u l t

i - l a n e r o a d w

a y s .

F o r t h e s e s i t u a t i o n s , d e s i g n e r s s h o u l d c o n s i d e r

t h e o p e r a t i n g s p e e d

, t o t a l c o m b i n e d t r a f f i c v o l u

m e a n d t r a f f i c m i x o f t h e v e h i c l e s

t r a v e

l i n g i n t h e l a n e s i m m e d i a t e l y a d j a c e n t t o t h e c y c l i n g f a c i l i t i e s .

- F o r r u r a l a n d s u b u

r b a n l o c a t i o n s t h

i s n o m o g r a p h a s s u m e s g o o d s i g h t l i n e s a r e p r o v i d e d

f o r a l l r o a d u

s e r s . I n u

r b a n a r e a s , t h e r e a r e t y p i c a l l y m o r e f r e q u

e n t c o n f l i c t p o i n t s a t

d r i v e w a y s , m i d b l o c k c r o s s i n g s a n d i n t e r s e c t i o n s ( e s p e c i a l l y o n m u

l t i - l a n e r o a d s ) , a s w

e l l

a s o n r o a d s e g m e n t s w

i t h o n - s t r e e

t p a r k i n g . T h i s n e e d s t o b e c o n s i d e r e d w

h e n a s s e s s i n g

r i s k e x p o s u r e i n u

r b a n e n v i r o n

m e n t s s i n c e i t w

i l l i n f l u e n c e t h e s e l e c t i o n o f a s u i t a b l e

f a c i l i t y t y p e .

- C o n s i d e r a S e p a r a t e d F a c i l i t y o r a n

A l t e r n a t e R o a d f o r r o a d w

a y s w

i t h a n A A D T g r e a t e r

t h a n 1 5

, 0 0 0 v e h

i c l e s a n d a n o p e r a

t i n g s p e e d o f g r e a t e r t h e n 5 0 k m / h

.

S h a r e d R o a d w a y

-

S h a r e d L a n e M a r k i n g s

-

W i d e C u r b L a n e s

-

S t a n d a r d L a n e s

C o n s i d e r a n A l t e r n a t e

R o a d

o r S e p a r a t e d

F a c i l i t y s u c h a s

C o n s i d e r

-

B u f f e r e d P a v e d S h o u l d e r s

-

S e p a r a t e d B i c y c l e L a n e s / C y c l e T r a c k s

- A c t i v e

T r a n s p o r t a t i o n P a t h w a y

i n B o u l e v a r d

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

1 0

1 1

1 2

1 3

1 4

1 5

0

1

> >

I n c r e a s i n g r i s k ( a d d i t i o n a l o p e r a t i n g

s p a c e a n d s e p a r a t i o n r e q u i r e d )

Source: MMM, 2013

Figure 3.3 – Desirable Bicycle Facility Pre-Selection Nomograph






As the speed differential between motorists and cyclists increases, so does the collision risk for cyclistsusing that roadway. Therefore, when selecting a bicycle facility type, the 85 th percentile operating speedshould be considered. Higher motor vehicle speeds may negatively influence a cyclist’s ability to controltheir bicycle.

Site Characteristics Design Considerations and Application Heuristics

Low (30 to 49 km/h)Speed differential between bicycles and motor vehicles is within30 km/h, suggesting integration of the two modes as mixed traffic,in standard or wide curb lanes, may be appropriate.

Moderate (50 to 69 km/h)Exclusive operating space for both bicycles and motor vehicles, inthe form of paved shoulders, bicycle lanes or separated facilities isrecommended.

High (70 to 89 km/h)Speed differential between bicycles and motor vehicles exceeds40 km/h, suggesting physical separation of the two modes is most

appropriate such as buffered paved shoulders.

Very high (90 km/h and greater)

Physical separation is preferable, particularly in an urbanenvironment. In rural areas of the province, it may not be practicalto provide physically separated facilities on very high speedroadways where bicycles are currently allowed. A painted bufferbetween the roadway and the paved shoulder is an alternativetreatment for such cases. If this is not feasible, provision of aparallel bicycle route should be explored.

3.2.2.2 Step 2: A More Detailed Look

A tool such as the nomograph in Section 3.2.2.1

may aid a practitioner in pre-selecting the desirablebicycle facility type. However, this facility type maynot always be the most appropriate solution for agiven situation due to other design factors. A set ofapplication heuristics or knowledge-based rules,have been developed to aid practitioners in Step 2of the bicycle facility type selection process. Theseheuristics link specific site conditions to appropriatefacility types and supplementary design features.

Primary determining criteria, not in any specific

order, include:

1. 85 th percentile motor vehicle operatingspeeds;

Tables 3.1 through to 3.13 provide key design considerations for the 13 application heuristics.

Table 3.1 – 85 th Percentile Motor Vehicle Operating Speeds

2. Motor vehicle volumes;

3. Function of street, road or highway;

4. Vehicle mix;

5. Collision history; and

6. Available space.

Secondary criteria include:

7. Costs;

8. Anticipated users in terms of skill and trippurpose;

9. Level of bicycle use;

10. Function of route within bicycle facilitynetwork;

11. Type of roadway improvement project;

12. On-street parking; and

13. Frequency of intersections.




32

As motor vehicle volume increases, so does the collision risk for cyclists using that roadway. For planning purposes,

the future year traffic volumes should be used when selecting an appropriate bicycle facility type for a givenroadway section. Where AADT volumes are unavailable, rush hour volumes may be used. Some municipalitiessuggest that as a rule of thumb, rush hour volumes typically represent 10% of the daily volume.

Site Characterist ics Design Considerations and Application Heuristics

Very Low Volume: where two-waydaily average volume is less than500 vpd on a two-lane road

No facility type is typically required.

Low Volume: where two-way dailyaverage volume is 500 to 2,000 vpdon a two-lane road

Mixed traffic may be appropriate if vehicle speeds are low. Lanes shouldbe wide enough to comfortably accommodate shared use by cyclists andmotorists. If speeds are moderate, paved shoulders or bicycle lanes should

be considered.Moderate Volume: where two-waydaily average volume is 2,000 to10,000 vpd on a two-lane road

Some level of formal bicycle facility such as a conventional bicycle lane isrecommended. If this is not feasible, a signed bicycle route with a pavedshoulder may be considered.

High Volume: where two-way dailyaverage volume is greater than10,000 vpd on a two-lane road

Physical separation of motor vehicle and bicycle traffic may be mostappropriate.

Hourly one-way volume in the curblane exceeds 250 vph

Some level of formal bicycle facility such as a ‘signed only’ bike route witha paved shoulder or bicycle lanes are recommended.

While generally reflected in motor vehicle volumes, the function of a roadway should also be considered in bicyclefacility decisions. The significance of this factor will be higher in cases where volume or speed data are unavailable.


Access roads such as local roadsand residential streets

Mixed traffic may be appropriate if speeds and volumes are low. Wherefeasible, design features associated with Bicycle Priority Streets shouldbe applied, as described in section 5.1. Otherwise, curb lanes shouldbe wide enough to comfortably accommodate shared use by cyclists andmotorists, with dimensions as indicated in Table 4.1 for a Wide SignedBicycle Route.

Both mobility and access roadssuch as minor collectors plus similarroads and streets

Some level of formal bicycle facility such as a signed bike route with pavedshoulder or bicycle lane is appropriate. A Narrow Signed Bicycle Route maybe implemented, with dimensions as indicated in Table 4.1 .

Mobility roads such as arterials andmajor collectors

Some level of formal bicycle facility such as a bicycle lane or separatedfacility is appropriate.

Motor vehicle commuter routeSeparated bicycle facilities should be considered to minimize conflictswith aggressive drivers on the roadway.

Table 3.2 – Motor Vehicle Volumes

Table 3.3 – Function of Street or Road or Highway







34

The space available to serve all functions and users of a roadway is finite. Consequently, practitioners shouldconsider the constraints imposed by curbs, pinch points and physical barriers when choosing the most appropriate

facility for a particular section of roadway. Once the facility type has been selected, the adequacy of sightlines,both at intersections and continuously along a roadway should be considered. Please refer to Section 5.4 formore details.


Sufficient curb-to-curb width existsto adequately accommodatemotorists and cyclists.

Redistribute roadway space to accommodate bicycle lanes by narrowingor eliminating parking lanes, narrowing travel lanes, or eliminatingunnecessary travel or turn lanes. Where bicycle lanes are not feasible, widecurb lanes may be provided. Please refer to Section 5.2 for guidance onintegrating bicycle facilities through road retrofits.

Sufficient curb-to-curb widthexists, but pinch points are createdwhere turn lanes are developed atintersections.

There is a higher risk of collisions at intersection compared to othersections of road and less confident cyclists may be deterred by a lack of

designated bicycle facilities on the immediate approach to an intersection.Where feasible, localized widening should be undertaken to providecontinuous bicycle facilities of constant width entering, through and exitingthe intersection. Where this is not possible, bike lanes may be discontinuedwith appropriate positive guidance or warning measures upstream of themerge point or intersection. Practitioners should carefully and practicallyconsider the way in which cyclists and general traffic will merge. Pavementmarkings and signage should encourage cooperative merging of cyclistsand motorists into a single traffic lane. Sharrow markings can be usedto denote a desirable cyclist path, particularly through narrow or atypicalintersections. Refer to Section 4.2.1.4 for design recommendations.

Physical barriers include thosecreated by steep grades, rivers,freeways, railways, narrow bridges.

Separated facilities should be considered to bypass or overcome barriers.

Curb-to-curb width is not adequateto provide sufficient operating spacefor both motorists and cyclists.

Provide separated facilities adjacent to the roadway or within anindependent right-of-way, provide paved shoulders, widen roadwayplatform to accommodate bicycle lanes. Where this is not feasible, widecurb lanes may be considered or alternate routes may be investigated. Ifon-street parking is present, explore opportunities for it to be eliminated orreduced.

Adequate sightlines for road usersincluding both motorists and cyclists

on rural roads given design andoperating speeds.

Horizontal and vertical curves along the roadway as well as roadwaywidth should be considered when providing adequate sightlines for road

users. Regular maintenance of vegetation is also important in preservingsightlines throughout the year.

Sight distance is limited atintersections, crossing locations orwhere cyclists and motor vehiclesshare limited road space.

Improve sightlines by improving roadway geometry, removing or relocatingroadside furniture and vegetation; provide adequate space for cyclistseither on or off the roadway. Design intersection crossings to minimizeand clearly mark conflicts, and restrict parking in close proximity tointersections.

Table 3.6 – Available Space







36

As cyclist volumes increase, so does the risk of interactions with motor vehicles. Therefore, as cyclist volume

increases, practitioners should consider increased separation between motorists and cyclists.Site Characteristics Design Considerations and Application Heuristics

Low bicycle volumes(< 10 cyclists per hour)

Wide curb lanes may be adequate in some cases. However, practitionersshould carefully consider whether the low bicycle volumes represent a lackof cyclist demand or inadequate existing facilities. As improvements aremade to cycling infrastructure, bicycle volumes tend to increase.

High bicycle volumes(> 50 cyclists per hour)

Paved shoulders, bicycle lanes or separated facilities may be appropriate.The width provided for urban bicycle facilities should accommodatebicycle volumes during peak periods both midblock and at intersections.

Significant bicycle traffic generatorsare nearby

Latent bicycle demand may exist if there are employment centres,neighbourhoods, schools, parks, recreational or shopping facilities alongthe route. Transit nodes also provide the opportunity for multi-modal travel,with bicycle trips to and from the node where appropriate end-of-tripfacilities are provided (see Section 7 ). Bicycle lanes and separated facilitiesshould be considered to accommodate the anticipated volume of cyclists.

The function of the route within the bicycle facility network is very important. Bicycle facilities depend onaccessibility and connections between routes, major destinations, residential areas and recreational services.Route segments should be identified as primary or secondary routes, and ease of access to and from suchfacilities should be a major planning and design consideration.


Parallel bicycle routes already existwith bicycle facilities present

Redundancy of bicycle routes may provide an opportunity to providedifferent types of bicycle facilities within the same travel corridor. Thiswould give cyclists with different skill levels and trip purposes theopportunity to choose the facility most appropriate to their needs.

New route provides a connectionbetween adjacent existing facilities

Facility selection should provide continuity with adjacent bicycle facilitiesto the extent possible.

New route provides access to aneighbourhood, suburb or otherlocality.

Bicycle lanes and separated facilities should be considered to encouragecycling for all users.

Table 3.9 – Level of Bicycle Use

Table 3.10 – Function of Route within the Bicycle Facility Network






The type of roadway improvement project can and most often does affect the type of bicycle facility that is

appropriate for a given context. For example, retrofitting existing roads and intersections, platform width andother existing constraints will play a role in selecting the appropriate bicycle facility type. Therefore, considerationmust be given to the type of roadway improvement project whether it is new construction, reconstruction ora retrofit. Combining works in this way allows bike facilities to be installed while achieving cost efficiencies.However, practitioners should consider the completeness of the resulting bikeway network. The implementationof small sections of disconnected bicycle facilities is unlikely to provide meaningful connections for cyclists sincethose facilities may suffer from low cycling volumes. Practitioners should consider using some the resourcessaved through the aforementioned synergies to provide additional links which will properly integrate the newfacilities into the network.


New constructionAppropriate bicycle facilities should be planned and integrated with thedesign and construction of new roads and communities.

Reconstruction

Major roadway reconstruction provides an opportunity to improveprovisions for cyclists through the redistribution of existing road space(if reconstruction only involves work between the curbs) or increasedroadway width or off-road space. Efficiencies where the two projectsoverlap will reduce the cost of providing context-appropriate bike facilities.

ResurfacingAffordable solutions may be limited to redistributing existing road space.Fully paved shoulders may be considered along rural arterials or collectorsused by cyclists.

Table 3.11 – Type of Roadway Improvement Project




38

The presence of on-street parking has a considerable influence on both the safety and comfort of a cyclist using a

bicycle facility. In particular, the configuration of on-street parking, its degree of utilization and its separation fromthe bicycle facility are of concern selecting a bicycle facility type. Sound engineering judgement must be appliedin the design of these facilities. The designer must assess the potential for conflict between cyclists and motorvehicles as a result of vehicles entering or leaving parking spaces. The potential severity and number of conflictswill vary based on the volume of cyclists as well as the parking demand and turnover. In each case, the objectiveshould be to avoid or mitigate conflicts to the extent possible, while recognizing parking needs and alternatives.


Parallel on-street parking is not permittedOpportunities to provide bicycle lanes or, if not feasible, widecurb lanes should be explored and their appropriateness shouldbe evaluated.

Parallel on-street parking is permitted inlocalized areas along the route

Consistent bicycle lanes may prove difficult to provide sinceavailable roadway width is likely to change where parking isprovided. Wide curb lanes may be a compromise solution.

Parallel on-street parking is permitted butdemand is low

Opportunities to remove, restrict or relocate parking in favour ofproviding bicycle lanes should be considered.

Parallel on-street parking is permitted butturnover is low

Bicycle lanes may be appropriate. Additional buffer spacebetween bicycle and parking lanes should be provided.

Parallel on-street parking is permitted; turnover

and demand is high

Separated bicycle facilities between on-street parking and theedge of the roadway may be most appropriate. Bicycle lanesbetween vehicle travel lanes and on-street parking are notdesirable in this situation. This is due to the frequent occurrence

of conflicts between cyclists and vehicles manoeuvring in andout of the parking area. Where separated facilities cannot beaccommodated, potential provision for cyclists on alternateroutes should be investigated.

Perpendicular or diagonal parking is permittedOn-road facilities are not appropriate unless parking isreconfigured or removed. Alternate routes or opportunities toprovide a separated facility should be explored.

Table 3.12 – On-Street Parking (for urban situations)







40






4. Bicycle Facility Design

This section provides practitioners with guidancerelated to the design of on-road and in-boulevardbicycle facilities. This includes general geometricconsiderations, appropriate signage and pavementmarkings as well as intersection treatments. Thedetailed design of a bicycle facility should occurafter the bikeway network has been planned andthe appropriate facility types have been selected.Practitioners should refer to Section 2 for guidanceon bikeway network planning, and Section 3 which

relates to the selection of the appropriate bicyclefacility type.

Section 4 has been organized by facility type inorder to provide practitioners with easy referenceto the tools required for the design of a specificbicycle facility type.

Section 4.1 Shared Roadways includesinformation for the design of shared roadways andsigned bicycle routes as well as signed routes with

paved shoulders.

Section 4.2 Bicycle Lanes relates to the designof conventional bicycle lanes on roadways with andwithout on-street parking, plus separated bicyclelanes.

Section 4.3 Raised Cycle Tracks gives guidanceon the design of one-way and two-way raised cycletracks.

Section 4.4 In-Boulevard Bicycle Facilities is about

the design of one-way and two-way in-boulevardbicycle facilities where the bicycle path is distinctfrom the sidewalk. It also covers shared-use in-boulevard facilities where a single path is providedfor both cyclists and pedestrians.

Throughout this section, the design domain ispresented as a ‘desired width’ and ‘suggestedminimum’ guideline. This design domain is intendedto provide the practitioner with flexibility whendesigning bicycle facilities. It is recommended thatpractitioners design to the desired width. However,it is recognized that in retrofit situations and alongconstrained corridors, this may not be consistentlyachievable. Based on their engineering judgement,practitioners may choose to design beyond thedesired width guideline where sufficient right-of-way is available or traffic conditions warrant thistreatment.

As with the Bicycle Facility Type Selection processoutlined in Section 3 , designers are stronglyencouraged to document their rationale. This isparticularly important where proposals deviate fromdesired widths which are considered optimal froma safety perspective. This will assist the designershould they be required to defend any compromisesthey may have chosen for operational, cost or otherreasons.

The design of bicycle facilities will evolve and newideas will emerge over time. If an engineering reviewsupports an innovative or alternative design solutionthat differs from the best practice guidelines inBook 18, it is recommended that a municipalityconsider it as a pilot project and monitor it followingimplementation.

Refer to Section 5 – Additional Bicycle FacilityDesign Applications for information about additionaldesign considerations such as bicycle prioritystreets, traffic calming and integrating bicyclefacilities as part of road retrofitting projects, aswell as designing bicycle facilities at roundabouts,interchanges, ramp crossings, conflict zones, bicyclesignals, bridge structures and railway crossings.




42

4.1 Shared Roadways

4.1.1 Shared Roadways and Signed BicycleRoutes

Unless cycling is specifically restricted, all roadwaysare considered to be Shared Roadways evenif there is no signage present. However, if theshared roadway is designated as part of a bikewaynetwork, the route should be signed using a bicycleroute marker M511 (OTM) shown in Figure 4.3 , orequivalent as described in section 4.1.1.2 , and isconsidered a Signed Bicycle Route.

There are many High Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) andreserved transit lanes where cyclists are permitted.Where new reserved lanes are implemented,cyclists should be allowed to use them whereappropriate. This should be reflected in the relevantsignage and by-laws.

Prior to initiating design work on a given link,practitioners should refer to the Bicycle FacilityType Selection process in Section 3.2.2 . This willconfirm whether a shared roadway and signedbicycle route is the most suitable facility type andidentify key design considerations.

4.1.1.1 Geometry

Signed Bicycle Routes are typically implemented onlow volume, local and collector streets. Generally,there are no other provisions needed beyondsigning. On wide signed bicycle routes, cyclists areexpected to ride on the right of the shared travellane in accordance with the Highway Traffic Act.However, cyclists may position themselves in thecentre of a travel lane that is too narrow for motorvehicles to overtake them safely within the lane.

Practitioners may choose to add an optional

‘Sharrow’ or ‘Shared Use Lane Marking’ placedon the pavement surface at regular intervals alongsigned bicycle routes. The sharrow symbol isintended to alert motorists of the expectation toshare the lane with cyclists, and to guide cyclists towhere they should ride within the shared travel lane.The lateral location of the sharrow within the travellane depends on the width of the shared lane andwhether or not the roadway has on-street parking.The typical placement of the sharrow is discussed inSection 4.1.1.3 .

Table 4.1 presents the lane width design domainfor Shared Roadways and Signed Bicycle Routes.Figure 4.1 illustrates examples and Figure 4.2depicts cross-sections for shared roadways andsigned bicycle routes.







44

to brand a trail or bike route can be implemented by amunicipality or partner organization. The frequencyof the signs should be determined throughengineering judgement based on the speed ofbicycles and other traffic, as well the distancesbetween intersections, such that the signs guidecyclists and inform them of any designated routechanges. Typical sign frequency on a rural roadwayis at least one every 2.0 kilometres. On an urbanroadway in a built up area, the suggested signfrequency is at least one every 400 to 800 metres.This sign should be also located on the far side ofmajor intersections and other major decision pointsto assist in wayfinding.

4.1.1.2 Signs

All signs used for shared roadways and signedbicycle routes should be sized appropriately forinterpretation by both motorists and cyclists, andshould conform to the TAC Bikeway Traffic ControlGuidelines for Canada – 2 nd Edition (January 2012).

Bicycle Route Marker Sign

The Bicycle Route Marker sign M511 (OTM),illustrated in Figure 4.3, should be used onsegments of a shared roadway that are designatedas a bicycle route within a bikeway network. Greenis the standard colour for standard bicycle routesigns; however, alternative sign designs and colours

Narrow Signed Bicycle Route(with optional sharrow)

Wide Signed Bicycle Route(with optional sharrow)

Source: MMM, 2013

Figure 4.2 – Cross-Sections of Shared Roadways and Signed Bicycle Routes

(See Table 4.1 for more details)







46

The decision by designers to use these signs, eitherin isolation or with sharrow markings, is contextsensitive. Designers may consider implementingpermanent or temporary ‘Share the Road’ signageto clarify the application of the markings whereappropriate. They are unlikely to be required onroads without a marked directional dividing linewhere traffic volumes are sufficiently low that motorvehicles can cross the centre of the road to overtakecyclists. The same applies to very low volumestreets without parking lanes where cyclists andmotorists may have to maneuver around vehiclesparked by the curb.

Figure 4.5 – Motor Vehicle PassingProhibited Signs

Wc-19t (OTM)

(300 mm x 600 mm)

Rb-66t (OTM)

(300 mm x 600 mm)

Wc-19 (OTM)

(600 mm x 600 mm)

Rb-66 (OTM)

(600 mm x 600 mm)

Wc-24 (OTM)

(600 mm x 600 mm)

Wc-24t (OTM)

(300 mm x 600 mm)

M204 (OTM)

(300 mm x 600 mm)

Motor Vehicle Passing Prohibited Sign

The “Motor Vehicle Passing Prohibited” and “DoNot Pass Bicycles” tab signs, shown in Figure 4.5 ,should be used to restrict passing manoeuvres inareas where the passing of cyclists by motoristsis hazardous due to limited sight distance or otherconsiderations. The termination of this zone isindicated with the use of the ‘Motor Vehicle PassingProhibited’ sign with the supplementary ‘Ends’ tabsign.

Figure 4.4 – Share the Road and Shared UseLane Single File Signs )






Source: Based on the TAC Bikeway Traffic Control Guidelines forCanada, 2012 (Section 7.4.3, p. 52)

4.1.1.3 Pavement Marki ngs

Shared roadways or signed bicycle routes maybe marked with a Shared Use Lane Symbol or‘Sharrow’ unless a paved shoulder is provided. Asharrow consists of two white chevron markings,with a stroke width of 100 millimetres spaced 100millimetres apart above a white bicycle marking1.0 metre wide by 2.0 metres long. Figure 4.6illustrates a typical sharrow pavement marking andassociated dimensioning.

Sharrows are an optional treatment and context

specific. They are used on streets where dedicatedbicycle lanes are desirable but are not feasible dueto physical or other constraints. The maximumsuitable traffic speed is 50 km/h for single file, or 60km/h for side-by-side travel. Sharrows are also usedto guide cyclists, for example around parking andthrough intersections.

Where sharrows are applied to a shared roadwayor signed bicycle route, they should be placedimmediately beyond an intersection or transitionfrom a bicycle lane, and prior to an intersection ortransition to a bicycle lane. Furthermore, sharrowsshould be placed at typical intervals of 75 metres toremind road users of the suggested positioning ofcyclists in the lane, or with less separation wherethey are used at transitions or conflict zones.

The lateral placement of the sharrow within thetravel lane is described for various applications inSection 4.1.1.4 . Refer to Section 4.2.1.4 fortypical transition applications where ‘Share theRoad’ and ‘Shared Use Lane Single File’ signs maybe used with sharrow markings in advance of anintroduced bicycle lane or after a bicycle lane isdiscontinued.

Figure 4.6 – ‘Sharrow’ Pavement Marking




48

75m (Typical)

Source: MMM/ALTA, 2013

decided to include the optional sharrow treatmenton a wide signed bicycle route without on-streetparking and there are no site constraints, the centreof the sharrow should be placed 1.0 metre from theface of the curb as illustrated in Figure 4.7.

treatment on a wide signed bicycle route with fulltime on-street parking, the centre of the sharrowshould be placed at least 1.3 metres from the edgeof the parking lane as illustrated in Figure 4.8 . Thisdirects the cyclist to ride a sufficient distance fromparked vehicles to avoid colliding with an openingcar door or alighting passenger. If the shared travellane is less than 4.0 metres wide from the edge ofthe parking lane, the sharrow should be placed inthe centre of the travel lane, as shown in Figure 4.9 .

4.1.1.4 Design Applicati ons

Wide Signed Bicycle Route without On-StreetParking

On shared roadways designated as part of a bikewaynetwork, the route should be signed with a greenbicycle route marker M511 (OTM). The ‘Share theRoad’ sign Wc-19 (OTM) and corresponding tab signWc-19t (OTM) may be installed to supplement thegreen bicycle route marker. If the practitioner has

Wide Shared Roadway / Signed Bicycle Routewith On-Street Parking

On shared roadways designated as part of abikeway network, the route should be signed with agreen bicycle route marker M511 (OTM). The ‘Sharethe Road’ sign Wc-19 (OTM) and corresponding tabsign Wc-19t (OTM) may be installed to supplementthe green bicycle route marker. If the practitionerhas decided to include the optional sharrow

Figure 4.7 – Wide Signed Bicycle Route without On-Street Parking








Figure 4.9 – Narrow Signed Bicycle Route without On-Street Parking


Figure 4.8 – Wide Signed Bicycle Route with On-Street Parking






50


be installed to indicate this. The posted speeds onthese roadways should be 50km/h or less. If thepractitioner has decided to include the optionalsharrow treatment, the sharrow should be placedin the centre of the travel lane. This is also the casewhere a parking lane is present, as shown in Figure4.10.

Narrow Shared Roadway

On shared roadways designated as part of a bikewaynetwork, the route should be signed with a greenbicycle route marker M511 (OTM). On roadwayswhere the travel lane is too narrow for motorists tosafely pass cyclists in a single lane, motorists andcyclists are encouraged to travel in single file andcyclists are encouraged to use the full lane. The‘Shared Use Lane Single File’ sign Wc-24 (OTM)and supplementary tab sign Wc-24t (OTM) should

Figure 4.10 – Narrow Signed Bicycle Route with On-Street Parking







4.1.2 Signed Bicycle Route with PavedShoulder

A paved shoulder is a portion of a roadway whichis contiguous with the travelled way and provideslateral support for the pavement structure. Itaccommodates stopped and emergency vehicles,pedestrians and cyclists. It is often used by cyclistsfor travel since it provides them with an area forriding that is adjacent to but separate from themotor vehicular travel portion of the roadway.Cyclists must travel in the same direction as themotor vehicle traffic immediately adjacent to the

paved shoulder.

At the time of publication, it is considered thatcycling on paved shoulders along municipalroads is permitted under section 185(2) of theHighway Traffic Act (HTA). If the roadway with apaved shoulder is designated as part of a bikewaynetwork, the roadway should be signed with thegreen bicycle route marker M511 (OTM).

4.1.2.1 Geometry

Signed bicycle routes with paved shoulders shouldtypically have shoulders between 1.5 and 2.0metres in width depending on the volume, speedand mix of vehicular traffic. As motor vehiclevolumes increase, practitioners may consider widerpaved shoulders or a buffered zone, as indicated inTable 4.2. However, in situations where the facilitytype selection process has identified the need fora paved shoulder within a constrained corridor,practitioners may consider providing a minimumpaved shoulder width of 1.2 metres after applyinggood engineering judgement and consideration ofthe context specific conditions.

Where a signed bicycle route with paved shouldershas a shoulder width of 2.0 metres or wider, theshoulder must include a minimum 0.5 metre widebuffer zone. The buffer zone may consist of a marked

buffer or a rumble strip on rural roads. On roadwayswhere the speed or volume of motor vehicles inthe adjacent travel lane is high, the shoulder widthand buffer zone may be increased to provide greaterseparation between motorists and cyclists. Refer toSection 4.1.2.4 for design information on rumblestrips.

Along wide shared roadways with urban cross-sections, practitioners may choose to apply a whiteedge line to designate an ‘urban shoulder’. Cyclistsand motorists may interpret this space as a bicyclelane even though no bicycle pavement markings

are applied to this area. However, it should benoted that urban shoulders are not an alternative tobicycle lanes but may be used on roadways wherethere is a strong, site specific justification for notimplementing conventional bicycle lanes.

If 2.0 metres in width or greater, the urban shouldermay also act as a space for on-street parking.Consideration should be given to the number ofparked vehicles and their impact on the trajectoryof cyclists. Because urban shoulders will be used

by cyclists, bike friendly features such as side inletcatch basins should be incorporated. Please refer toSection 5.9.1 for more details.

On rural roads without curbs, practitioners shouldavoid the creation of edge drop-offs; these occurwhere the vertical distance between the pavementsurface and the adjacent material is too great. Carefulattention should be paid to the vertical alignmentof the pavement near the edge of the shoulder,particularly when designing or implementing ruralpaved shoulders. Please refer to Section 8.2.4 inSection 8 for more information on the associatedsafety risks and mitigating measures.




52

Credit: MMM, 2011

Figure 4.11 – Examples of Signed Bicycle Routes with Paved Shoulders

Credit: MMM, 2013 Credit: MMM, 2012

of the shoulder for cyclists. Figure 4.12 illustratescross-sections for a signed bicycle route with pavedshoulders.

The images in Figure 4.11 show examples ofpaved shoulders. The picture on the right highlightsthe importance of considering the level of on-street parking and its impact on the effectiveness

Motor Vehicle AADT b Desired Width c Suggested Minimum Width

701 – 1,500 1.5 m 1.2 m d

1,501 – 3,000 1.5 m 1.2 m

3,001 – 4,500 1.5 m 1.2 m

> 4,500 2.0 m e 1.2 m

aThis table provides general guidance for roadways where bicycle volumes are at least 25 per day (existing or expected) or that are on routesrecommended in an Active Transportation Plan. Practitioners should consider undertaking more detailed analysis when preparing a bicycle plan or

where site specific roadway conditions warrant it.bPaved shoulders are not required on rural roads with a motor vehicle AADT of 700 or l ess.cPractitioners should consider providing a buffer (desired width 1.0 m; suggested minimum width 0.5 m) alongside the paved shoulder if rumblestrips exist or are proposed, the road experiences truck volumes of at least 30 trucks per hour or sight lines are poor. Additional separation betweencyclists and heavy vehicles reduces the aerodynamic impact of passing trucks on cyclist stability.dOn very low volume roads, a paved shoulder of any width should be considered. Shoulder widths that are less than the suggested minimum of1.2m, however, should typically be applied only where sight li nes are good and truck volumes are low.e Where a width of 2.0 m or more is available, a paved shoulder of 1.5 m should be provided and the remaining width should be allocated t o a buffer.

Table 4.2 – Desired and Suggested Minimum Paved Shoulder Widths for Rural Cross-Sectionson Signed Bicycle Routes a

Paved Shoulder (Rural)Dufferin County

Paved Shoulder with Buffer /Rumble Strips

Urban Shoulder, Halton Hills






Signed Bicycle Routewith Buffered Paved Shoulder

Signed Bicycle Routewith Paved Shoulder

Source: MMM, 2013

Figure 4.12 – Cross-Sections of Signed Bicycle Routes with Paved Shoulder





54

M511 (OTM)

(450 mm x 450 mm)

Figure 4.14 – Solid White Edge Line

The Bicycle Route Marker sign M511 (OTM),illustrated in Figure 4.13 , should be used onsegments of a shared roadway that are designatedas a bicycle route within a bikeway network. Greenis the standard colour for standard bicycle routesigns however alternative sign designs and coloursto brand a trail or bike route can be implementedby a municipality or partner organization. Thefrequency of the sign should be determined throughengineering judgement based on the speed ofbicycles and other traffic, as well the distances

between intersections, such that the signs guidecyclists and inform them of any designated routechanges. Typical sign frequency on a rural roadwayis at least one every 2.0 kilometres. On an urbanroadway in a built up area, the suggested signfrequency is at least one every 400 to 800 metres.

4.1.2.2 Signs

All roadways, unless cycling is specificallyrestricted, are considered to be shared roadwayseven if there is no signage present. All signs usedfor shared roadways and signed bicycle routesshould be sized appropriately for interpretation byboth motorists and cyclists, and should conform tothe TAC Bikeway Traffic Control Guidelines forCanada – 2 nd Edition (January 2012).

This sign should be also located on the far side ofmajor intersections and other major decision pointsto assist in wayfinding.

4.1.2.3 Pavement Markings

Paved shoulders are delineated using a 100millimetre wide white edge line, shown in Figure4.14 , placed between the travelled portion of theroadway and the paved shoulder.

A buffered paved shoulder is delineated using two100-millimetre solid white lines spaced 0.5 to 1.5metres apart with optional diagonal hatching or a‘skip pattern’ rumble strip between the two edgelines. If the latter is used, it is recommended thatthe line closest to the paved shoulder follow thesame skip pattern to alert cyclists when there is abreak in the rumble strip. Alternatively, the buffermay be delineated by a 100-millimetre solid whiteline, which defines the boundary between thebuffer and the paved shoulder, and a solid whiteline 100 to 200 millimetres wide, which defines theboundary between the buffer and the travel lane,as indicatively shown in Figures 4.15 and 4.16 .Signed bicycle routes with paved shoulders do notrequire any other pavement markings.

Refer to Section 4.1.2.4 for examples of thesetwo design applications of a buffered paved shoul-der: with diagonal hatching or with a rumble strip.

Bicycle Route Marker Sign

Figure 4.13 – Bicycle Route Marker Sign

Source: TAC Bikeway Traffic Control Guidelines for Canada, 2012 (Table 7-1)








4.1.2.4 Design Applications

Figure 4.15 – Signed Bicycle Route with Paved Shoulders and Marked Buffer


Figure 4.16 – Signed Bicycle Route with Paved Shoulders and Rumble Strips





56

If diagonal hatched lines are applied within thebuffer, the lines should be 100 mm wide, and placedat an angle of 45 degrees in the direction of travel.The spacing between the diagonal lines is generallya function of vehicular speed. Diagonal lines shouldbe spaced 18 m apart on low to moderate speedroadways, and 36 m on high speed roadways. Thefrequency of hatching on the far side or near sideof an intersection should start at 3 m, and graduallyincrease to 18 m for low to moderate speedroadways, and 36 m for high speed roadways.

If shoulder rumble strips with a skip pattern are

applied within the buffer, then it is recommendedthat the line which is furthest from the motor vehicletravel lanes should follow the skip pattern to alertcyclists when there is a break in the rumble strip.

The design of the shoulder rumble strips shouldbe consistent with MTOD 503.070 for 0.5 m widebuffers, MTOD 503.080 for 1.0 m wide buffers andMTOD 503.090 for 1.5 m wide buffers. See Figures4.17a, b and c respectively.

Design Considerations for Rumble Strips

A Rumble Strip is a grooved pattern separating thetravelled portion of the roadway from the pavedshoulder.

Rumble strips are typically implemented as a roadsafety measure to benefit motorists. They alertdrivers through sound and vibrations to the factthat they are drifting out of the travel lane onto theshoulder. However, from the cyclist’s perspectivethere are safety issues associated with rumblestrips on rural roadways designated as bicycle

routes.

At best, rumble strips will cause discomfort forcyclists riding over them. At worst, they maycompromise a cyclist’s control of the bicycle,which is particularly dangerous where cyclists aretravelling alongside fast-moving or heavy vehicles.Similarly, by restricting manoeuvrability aroundobstacles on the paved shoulder, rumble strips maycause cyclists to veer into the travel lane or off theedge of the paved roadway.

If rumble strips are proposed for a road that isdesignated as a bicycle route, their design shouldconsider that most cyclists will use the pavedshoulder. Accordingly, a rumble strip with a skippattern should be implemented. The skip patternallows cyclists to manoeuvre in and out of the pavedshoulder to pass stopped cars and other cyclists, aswell as to avoid debris on the shoulder. Periodic gaplengths of 3.6 m should be provided between each18.3 m minimum set of shoulder rumble strips toprovide cyclists with enough room to exit or enterthe paved shoulder without riding over the rumblestrip.






Source: MTO

Figure 4.17a – Shoulder Rumble Strips for 0.5m Bicycle Buffer Zone (as per MTOD 503.070)




58

Source: MTO

Figure 4.17b – Shoulder Rumble Strips for 1.0m Bicycle Buffer Zone (as per MTOD 503.080)






Source: MTO

Figure 4.17c – Shoulder Rumble Strips for 1.5m Bicycle Buffer Zone (as per MTOD 503.090)




60

4.2 Bicycle Lanes

4.2.1 Conventional Bicycle Lanes

A Bicycle Lane is a portion of a roadway whichhas been designated by pavement markings andsignage for preferential or exclusive use by cyclists.Motor vehicles are typically not permitted to enterthe bicycle lane except if a dashed line is used,for example at the approach to an intersectionpermitting motor vehicles to enter the bicyclelane to complete a right turn manoeuvre. Bicyclelanes are typically implemented along urban

thoroughfares with higher traffic volumes andoperating speeds than local roadways.

Prior to initiating design work on a given link,practitioners should refer to the Bicycle FacilityType Selection process in Section 3.2.2 . This willconfirm whether the conventional bicycle laneis the most suitable facility type and identify keydesign considerations.

4.2.1.1 Geometry

Curbside conventional bicycle lanes should be 1.8metres wide, measured to the face of the curb or, inits absence, the edge of the roadway. Practitionersmay provide a 2.0 metre facility on roadways withhigher bicycle volumes to facilitate overtaking

within the bicycle lane. However, conventional bikelanes are typically no wider than this so that they arenot misinterpreted as being for general traffic use.Bicycle lanes should be at least 1.5 metres wide toallow for lateral movement within the lane, and toenable cyclists to avoid debris or pavement defectsfor example.

In some situations, a painted buffer may beappropriate to protect the cyclist from collidingwith or clipping stationary objects. Cyclists willassume that they can safely use the full width of anydesignated bike facility. Provision of a buffer clarifies

where cyclists should ride to minimize their risk.Where there are motor vehicle travel lanes on eitherside of the bicycle lane, practitioners should providethe maximum 2.0 metre width to give cyclists addedprotection from moving traffic.

Table 4.3 presents the desired and suggestedminimum lane widths for conventional bicycle lanes.It is recommended that practitioners always designto the desired width. However, through the use ofsound engineering judgement, a practitioner may

consider reducing the width to a value greater thanor equal to the suggested minimum, but only forcontext specific situations on segments or corridorswith constrained right-of-way widths.






Figure 4.18 illustrates examples of the scenarios

shown in Table 4.3 , and Figure 4.19 depictstypical cross-sections.

Conventional bicycle lanes located on roadwayswith on-street parking are typically positionedbetween the motor vehicle travel lane and theparking lane. However, they may also be locatedbetween the parking lane and the curb (discussedin Section 4.2.2 on Separated Bicycle Lanes). Inboth situations, practitioners should consider thepotential hazard of motor vehicle doors opening

into the travelled portion of the bicycle lane andimpacting cyclists.

It is recommended that practitioners minimize this

risk by providing a 0.5 to 1.0 metre buffer to guidecyclists away from the conflict zone. In this case it ispreferable for the bicycle lane to be 1.5 metres wide,with additional available right-of-way being used forthe buffer instead of a wider bicycle lane.

It is recognized that the parking lane width mayvary between 2.0 and 2.5 metres. However, it isrecommended that practitioners design to theminimum parking lane width in order to encouragemotorists to park closer to the curb. Section 4.2.1.4

provides further detail on the design application ofbicycle lanes on roadways with on-street parking.

Facility Desired Width SuggestedMinimum

Conventional Bicycle Lane e 1.8 m a 1.5 m b

Conventional Bicycle Lane splitting two travel lanes c 2.0 m 1.8 m

Conventional Bicycle Lane adjacent to on-street parking1.5 m lane +1.0 m buffer

1.5 m lane +0.5 m d buffer

aUp to 2.0 metres where high volumes of cyclists are anticipated, to facilitate overtaking within the bike lane.bIn a low volume, low speed constrained corridor wi th no gutter, this may be reduced to 1.2 metres. Cyclists may have to cross into the adjacent travellane with little warning to avoid any debris or pavement defects.c

Includes bike lanes between through lanes and turn lanes on the approach to an intersection. Also applies to bike lanes between through lanesand merge lanes downstream of an intersection.dAssumes a parking lane width of 2.5 metres, although where possible the buffer width should be increased by reallocating road space from theparking lane. This is to encourage motorists to park closer to the curb, thus reducing the conflict zone between cyclists and car doors that may openwithout warning. In a low volume, l ow speed constrained corridor, a minimum 1.8-metre wide bi cycle lane may be provided without a buffer. However,the practitioner should consider the increased risk of collisions between cyclists and opening car doors or alighting passengers.e Includes bicycle lanes alongside continuous barriers such as guiderails and underpass walls. Where intermittent obstructions (for example, signposts) are present alongside the bicycle l ane, a width of 1.8 – 2.0 metres is recommended.

Table 4.3 – Desired and Suggested Minimum Widths for Bicycle Lanes (to the face of curb)

Source: Based on the AASHTO Guide for the Planning, Design and Operation of Bicycle Facilities, 2012




62

Credit: City of Burlington, 2012 Credit: bikecalgary.org Credit: City of Winnipeg, 2011

Conventional Bicycle Lane

Figure 4.19 – Cross-Sections of Conventional Bicycle Lanes

(See Table 4.3 for more details. As an option, directional arrows may be applied within the bicycle lane.)

Bicycle Lane Adjacent toOn-Street Parking

Figure 4.18 – Examples of Conventional Bicycle Lanes

Conventional Bicycle Lane,

Bicycle Lane with MarkedBuffer beside On-Street

Parking

Bicycle Lane with UnmarkedBuffer beside On-Street

Parking

Source: MMM, 2013






be attached below the first Rb-84 or Rb-84A sign.If TAC signs are being used, the Reserved BicycleLane Ends sign RB-92 should be installed at the endof the reserved lane instead of the RB-90 or RB-91sign.

Figure 4.20b – Reserved Lane Begins and EndsTab Signs (OTM)

4.2.1.2 Signs

Signing is required to indicate to cyclists andmotorists the exact location of the bicycle lane, andto alert them to the introduction of a facility. A signis also available to remind motorists to yield whencrossing a cyclist’s line of travel.

Reserved Bicycle Lane Signs

A Reserved Bicycle Lane sign must be used todesignate an on-road lane for the exclusive useof cyclists. Practitioners should use the OTM

signs shown in Figure 4.20a and 4.20b or thesigns found in the TAC Bikeway Traffic ControlGuidelines for Canada, as illustrated in Figure4.21 . Where the bicycle lane is immediatelyadjacent to the curb, the ground-mounted versionof the Reserved Bicycle Lane sign Rb-84A (OTM)or RB-91 (TAC) should be installed. Otherwise,the overhead mounted version of the ReservedBicycle Lane sign Rb-84 (OTM) or RB-90 (TAC)should be installed on a cantilever and centredabove the designated lane. Where OTM signs are

used, the standard Reserved Lane Ends tab sign(Rb-85t) in Figure 4.20b must be attached belowthe last Rb-84 or Rb-84A standard Reserved BicycleLane sign, and the Begins tab sign (Rb-84t) may

RB-90 (TAC)

(600 mm x 750 mm)

Figure 4.21 – Reserved Bicycle Lane Signs (TAC)

Rb-84 (OTM)

(600 mm x 600 mm)

Rb-84t (OTM)

(200 mm x 600 mm)

Rb-85t (OTM)

(200 mm x 600 mm)

Rb-84A (OTM)

(600 mm x 600 mm)

Figure 4.20a – Overhead and Ground-mountedReserved Bicycle Lane Signs (OTM)

RB-91 (TAC)

(600 mm x 750 mm)

RB-92 (TAC)

(600 mm x 750 mm)




64

The placement of this sign along a bicycle lane isdiscussed for various design applications in Section4.2.1.4 . The frequency of the reserved bicycle lanesign between intersections should be determinedthrough engineering judgement based on the speedof bicycles and other traffic, as well as the distancesbetween intersections. The maximum spacing is200 metres and the signs should be repeated afterevery intersection.

Oversize versions of the Reserved Bicycle Lane signand tab signs may be used in areas where trafficconditions warrant greater visibility. Practitioners

should refer to OTM Book 5 – Regulatory Signs for details on this sign. Section 9.2 of that bookincludes other details on Reserved Lane Signswhich may be used to designate an on-road lanefor the preferential use of cyclists along with othervehicle classes such as high occupancy or transitvehicles.

Reserved Bicycle Lane Ahead

This sign, shown in Figure 4.22 , may be placed

adjacent to or above the curb lane in advance of thestart of a reserved bicycle lane. This sign should beconsidered where motorists are required to modifytheir trajectory in order to avoid the bicycle lane.

WB-10 (TAC)

(600 mm x 600 mm)

Figure 4.22 – Reserved Bicycle Lane Ahead Sign

RB-37 (TAC)

(600 mm x 750 mm)Source: TAC Bikeway Traffic Control Guidelines for Canada, 2012(Section 3.2.3, p. 15)


Bicycle lanes are typically demarcated by a100-millimetre solid white lane line, as shown inFigure 4.24 , and are marked by two white symbols:a diamond and a bicycle. The diamond symbolshould be centred in the bicycle lane and shouldhave a stroke width of at least 75 millimetres. Thesepavement markings must be used in conjunctionwith a Reserved Bicycle Lane sign (please refer toSection 4.2.1.2 ).

Turning Vehicles Yield to Bicycles Sign

The Turning Vehicles Yield to Bicycles sign RB-37(TAC), illustrated in Figure 4.23 , may be used atconflict zones where motorists turn across a bicyclefacility and are required to yield to the cyclist. Inthe case of conventional bike lanes, this will occurwhere there is a solid bike lane marking all the wayto the stop bar indicating that right-turning vehiclesmust not encroach on the bike lane on the approachto an intersection. The sign should incorporate thetype of bicycle facility marking or treatment presentin the conflict zone. In addition to or instead of the

Turning Vehicles Yield to Bicycles sign, practitionersmay consider applying green surface treatment asdescribed in section 4.2.1.4 .

Source: TAC Bikeway Traffic Control Guidelines for Canada, 2012(Section 4.5.4, p. 36)

Figure 4.23 – Turning Vehicles Yield to BicyclesSign






Source: Based on the TAC Bikeway Traffic Control Guidelines for Canada,2012 (Table 7-1)

Source: TAC Bikeway Traffic Cont rol Guidelines for Canada, 2012(Table 7-1)

Source: TAC Bikeway Traffic Control Guidel ines for Canada, 2012(Table 7-1)

An optional directional arrow may also be usedwhere the direction of travel is not clear or additionalguidance is required. For example, the arrow maybe used on contraflow bike lines or at intersectionswhere cyclists will take different trajectories at oron the approach to an intersection depending onthe turning movement they are making. The cyclistdirectional arrow is shown with the bicycle anddiamond symbols in Figure 4.26.

The placement of the symbols along a bicyclelane is discussed for various design applications inSection 4.2.1.4. On roadway segments with longdistances between intersections and driveways,the symbols may be repeated at intervals of 300metres or more. On roadway segments withfrequent occurrences of driveways, the symbolspacing may be reduced to 30 metres.

The dashed white bicycle lane line, shown in Figure4.25 , indicates that motor vehicles will frequentlycross into the bicycle lane: on the approach to someintersections, for example. Further guidance on the

application of this pavement marking is discussedin Section 4.2.1.4 .

Figure 4.24 – Solid White Bicycle Lane Line

Figure 4.25 – Dashed White Bicycle Lane Line

Figure 4.26 – Bicycle Lane Pavement Markings




66


It is recommended that a buffer be providedbetween the parking lane and the bicycle lane. Thisguides cyclists away from car doors which may opensuddenly as passengers alight. Where additionalright-of-way is available, it is preferable to have awider buffer alongside the 1.5-metre bicycle lane forextra protection. Please refer to Figure 4.19 andTable 4.3 for guidance.

4.2.1.4 Design Applicati ons

Bicycle Lane Adjacent to Permanent On-StreetParking

Figure 4.27 illustrates the typical signage fora bicycle lane adjacent to permanent on-streetparking, along with an example pavement markingapplication. Dashed white bicycle lane lines shouldbe used to indicate where a vehicle may cross intothe bicycle facility to exit the parking lane.

Figure 4.27 – Bicycle Lane on Two-Lane Two-Way Road with On-Street Parking

(A buffer is recommended where a bicycle lane is adjacent to on-street parking: see Table 4.3. As an option, directionalarrows may be applied within the bicycle lane.)






Source: Based on TAC Bikeway Traffic Control Guideli nes for Canada, 2012 (Figure 10, p. 72)

the curb radius. The Reserved Bicycle Lane signwith ‘Ends’ tab sign should be installed up to 15metres upstream of the end of the bicycle lane.

Following the end of a bicycle lane, a Share the Roadsign Wc-19 (OTM) and supplementary tab Wc-19t(OTM) should be erected to indicate to users thatthey are entering a shared space. Practitionersshould refer to Section 4.1.1 for guidance onShared Roadways and signed bicycle routes.

The application of sharrow markings is to guidecyclists through the transition while also raising the

motorists’ awareness of them. This treatment isoptional and should be considered on a site-by-sitebasis.

Introduced and Discontinued Bicycle Lanes

Figures 4.28 to 4.31 illustrate typical designapplications for the introduction and discontinuationof a bicycle lane. This includes typical transitionzones between a bicycle lane and a shared roadway

/ signed bicycle route.

Upstream of the initiation of a bicycle lane, theroadway should be signed with a Reserved BicycleLane Ahead sign WB-10 (TAC). This sign should beplaced no more than 15 metres from the start ofthe bicycle lane and repeated at least every 200

metres. Repeater signs should also be placeddownstream of each intersection along the bicyclelane, at a maximum of 15 metres from the end of

Figure 4.28 – Introduced and Discontinued Bicycle Lanes at an Intersection

(As an option, directional arrows may be applied within the bicycle lane and the ‘Reserved Bicycle Lane Ahead’ sign maybe applied. An exclusive right-turn lane or on-street parking may be provided opposite the introduced or discontinued

bicycle lane.)







Source: TAC Bikeway Traffic Control Guideli nes for Canada, 2012 (Figure 9, p. 71)

Figure 4.31 – Midblock Bicycle Lane (Transition to Through Lane with Shared Facility)

(As an option, directional arrows may be applied within the bicycle lane)

the curb) and the bicycle lane width should have aminimum ratio of 6:1.

Typical Bicycle Lane Transitions at Intersectionswith Exclusive Right Turn Lanes

On roadways with an exclusive right-turn lane, it isrecommended that cyclists navigate to the left of right-

turning motorists. By providing this guidance to cyclistsand motorists on the approach to the intersection,the potential conflict zone is positioned prior to theintersection where cyclist movements are more visibleand predictable to motorists. As a result, right turnconflicts within the intersection can be significantlyreduced. Dashed white guide lines indicate where amotor vehicle may cross a cyclist’s line of travel.

Figures 4.33 to 4.35 illustrate typical plan viewsof the transition from a bicycle lane into a shared

roadway on the approach to an intersection forroadways with and without on-street parking. InFigures 4.34 and 4.35 , the sharrow is shown tothe left of the turn arrow to indicate to cyclists theirrecommended placement to continue through theintersection. However, in right-turn lanes less than4.0m wide, cyclists and motorists will travel in singlefile.

Wherever possible, practitioners are encouragedto provide consistent facilities along the entirelength of blocks. However, there may be situationswhere the road width between the curbs remainsconstant but the effective lane width varies. Wherea bicycle lane begins or ends midblock, designersshould provide a broken lane line between the curband the end of the solid bicycle lane line, as shownin Figure 4.32. The taper length (measured along

Source: Bicycle Lane Design Guidelines, City of Toronto, 2004.

Figure 4.32 – Tapers for Introducedand Discontinued Bicycle Lanes with

No Change in Pavement Width

(See Table 4.3 for desired and suggested minimumwidths for bicycle lanes)




70

B I C Y C L E S

E X C E P T E D

Source: TAC Bikeway Traffic Control Guidelines for Canada, 2012 (Figure 19, p. 76)

Figure 4.34 – Bicycle Lane Transition to Shared Right-Turn (Except Bicycles) Lane on Roadwith On-Street Parking

(A buffer is recommended where bicycle lanes are adjacent to on-street parking. See Table 4.3 for desired andsuggested minimum widths for bicycle lanes. As an option, directional arrows may be applied within the bicycle lane)

Figure 4.33 – Bicycle Lane Transition to Shared Through Lane on Road with On-Street Parking

(A buffer is recommended where bicycle lanes are adjacent to on-street parking. See Table 4.3 for desired andsuggested minimum widths for bicycle lanes. As an option, directional arrows may be applied within the bicycle lane.)












discourages motorists from entering the bicyclefacility on the approach to the intersection whenmaking a right turn. This makes it easier for cycliststo reach the intersection since their lane will not beblocked by motor vehicles. Thus, cyclists can makeright turns on red more easily.

Figure 4.41 shows an optional staggered stopbar treatment. This allows cyclists to positionthemselves ahead of motorists during a red signalindication, which makes them more visible to right-turning motorists.

Where the path of right-turning vehicles crossesthat of cyclists travelling through the intersection,motorists are expected to yield. To clarify this, andto mitigate the risk of drivers not looking for cyclists

Typical Bicycle Lane Transitions at Intersectionswith Shared Through / Right-Turn Lanes

On roadways with a shared through / right-turnmotor vehicle lane, there are three alternatesolutions that can be considered for the design ofthe bicycle lane on the approach to the intersection.Figure 4.39 illustrates a bicycle lane with aminimum 15 metre dashed line on the approach tothe intersection, consistent with the TAC BikewayTraffic Control Guidelines for Canada . Thistreatment indicates to motorists that they arepermitted to cross into the bicycle lane (when safeto do so) to make a right turn.

Figure 4.40 depicts a bicycle lane with a solid lineon the approach to the intersection. This treatment

Figure 4.38 – Bicycle Lane Adjacent to Parking and Introduced Right-Turn Lane

(A buffer should be considered where bicycle lanes are adjacent to on-street parking and space permits.See Table 4.3 for desired and suggested minimum widths for bicycle lanes. As an option, directional arrows may be

applied within the bicycle lane.)




74

Figure 4.39 – Bicycle Lane Adjacent to Combined Through / Right-Turn Lane (Dashed Line)

(See Table 4.3 for desired and suggested minimum widths for bicycle lanes. As an option, directional arrows may beapplied within the bicycle lane)

• sharrows at 1.5 m to 15 m spacing;

• dashed guide lines (with optional bikestencils or chevrons but not sharrows);

• green surface treatment; or

• dashed guide lines (with optional bikestencils or chevrons but not sharrows) andgreen surface treatment.

Elephant’s feet markings are reserved for crossridesat intersections. They should not be marked throughthe central portion of intersections themselves.

in their blind spot, practitioners may choose toprovide pavement markings or treatment throughthe intersection. This will highlight the conflict areasbetween cyclists and motor vehicles so that eachuser group is more aware of the other. It may alsohelp to guide cyclists between facilities on eitherside of the intersection. The available treatmentoptions in increasing order of visibility are:

• no treatment;

• bike stencils or chevrons at 1.5 m to 10 mspacing (with optional directional arrows toclarify cyclists’ trajectories);








Figure 4.40 – Bicycle Lane Adjacent to Combined Through / Right-Turn Lane (Solid Line)





76


• no treatment;






Pavement Markings at Intersections / ConflictZones for Through Moving Cyclists

Intersections are shared space zones. The entiretyof the area where two streets intersect can beused by all vehicles, including cyclists. At certainlocations, there may be a benefit to providingpavement markings or treatment through theintersection. Such markings may help to guidecyclists between facilities on either side of the

intersection. They also highlight conflict areaswhere cyclists and motor vehicles will cross pathsso that each user group is more aware of theother. The designer should consider whether andhow to intersections may be marked. The availabletreatment options in increasing order of visibilityare:

Figure 4.41 – Bicycle Lane Adjacent to Combined Through / Right-Turn Lane(Solid Line with Optional Staggered Stop Bars)








78


intersection. Where the geometry of the roadwaynecessitates that motor vehicles cross the bicyclelane, the practitioner should consider using

the aforementioned hierarchy of markings andtreatments to indicate the conflict zone.

Where sharrow markings or stencils are applied,the minimum separation should be 1.5 metres.Refer to Section 5.4.1 for more information.

Typical Bicycle Lane Applications Downstreamof Intersections

Figures 4.44 to 4.47 illustrate various designtreatments on the downstream side of theintersection, which may consist of a bus bay or afar-side lane drop. In each of these situations, thebicycle lane following the intersection remainsaligned with the bicycle lane preceding the

Figure 4.43 – Optional Sharrow Application in an Intersection









Figure 4.44 – Bicycle Lane Adjacent to Merge Lane with Island


Figure 4.45 – Bicycle Lane Adjacent to Far Side Bus Bay





80



Figure 4.46 – Bicycle Lane Adjacent to Right-Turn Lane and Downstream Merge Lane


Figure 4.47 – Bicycle Lane Adjacent to Shared Through / Right-Turn Lane andDownstream Merge Lane







Source: Based on TAC Bikeway Traffic Control Guidelines for Canada, 2012 (Figure 14, p. 74)

from the turning slot to the bicycle lane on the farside of the intersection. On roads with multiplethrough lanes in each direction, practitioners mayconsider the application of left-turn queue boxes toassist less confident cyclists, as described later inthis section. See Figure 4.51 and Section 4.2.2.4 for more information.

An alternative design solution for left-turning cyclists,which may be implemented for a T-intersection andwhere road right-of-way is available, features a leftturn bicycle jug handle. Practitioners should refer toSection 4.4.1.4 for further details on this design

application.

Typical Bicycle Lane Applications for LeftTurning Cyclists

At an intersection where two roadways withbicycle lanes meet, consideration should begiven to facilitating left-turn cycling manoeuvres.Figure 4.48 illustrates a typical plan view of anintersection with a separate left-turn bicycle lane‘slot’ or ‘pocket’. Cyclists intending to make a leftturn are expected to weave safely across the motorvehicle lanes prior to entering the bicycle laneslot. Designers may provide sharrow markings, ordashed guide lines as shown in Figure 4.49, to

assist left-turning cyclists through the intersection

Figure 4.48 – Exclusive Left-Turn Bicycle Lane Slot

(On roads with multiple through lanes in each direction, practitioners may consider the application of left turn queueboxes to assist less confident cyclists. See Table 4.3 for desired and suggested minimum widths for bicycle lanes. As

an option, directional arrows may be applied within the bicycle lane.)




82

Source: Based on the TAC Bikeway Traffic Control Guidelines for Canada, 2012 (Figure 24, p. 80)

Practitioners should consider providing bike boxesat intersections with high motor vehicle volumes,(especially right turns) and where large numbers ofcyclists may be expected. In particular, bike boxesshould be provided where a bicycle route turns leftor connects with another designated facility, or atany other intersection with high left-turn cyclistmovements.

The depth of the bike box, specifically the distancebetween the crosswalk and the vehicular stopbar, should be 5.0 metres to cater to the volumeof cyclists as well as bicycles with trailers. Inconstrained situations, this may be reduced to aminimum of 4.0 metres. Bicycle pavement marking

Bike Box

A bike box is a designated area placed betweenthe crosswalk and the stop bar for motorizedtraffic at a signalized intersection. This enablescyclists to wait ahead of queuing traffic during thered signal indication before proceeding ahead ofmotorists on the green indication. This designatedarea significantly increases the visibility of cyclists,making motorists more aware of their presence. Ifthe bike box extends across the entire intersectionapproach, cyclists can transition from the rightside of the roadway towards the left during a redindication in order to make a left turn movementrather than weaving through motorized traffic.

Figure 4.49 – Left-Turn Bicycle Lane Guide Lines Through Intersection

(See Table 4.3 for desired and suggested minimum widths for bicycle lanes. On roads with multiple through lanes ineach direction, practitioners may consider the application of left-turn queue boxes to assist less confident cyclists.)






S T O P

H E R E

O N

R E D

S I G N A L

B I C Y C L E S

E X C E P T E D


There is also potential for a conflict between cycliststransitioning from the right side of the roadwayto the left side of the bike box during a red signalindication in order to make a left turn movement.Consequently, designers should consider restrictingright turns on red where bike boxes are present, inparticular during peak traffic periods.

Figure 4.50 illustrates an example of a bike boxapplication.

symbols should be applied between the crosswalkand the stop bar for motor vehicles. Green surfacetreatment may also be considered to enhance thevisibility of the bike box.

In order to make a right turn on red, motoristswill have to cross into the bike box, potentiallywaiting within it for a gap in traffic to completetheir manoeuvre. This may prevent cyclists fromaccessing the entirety of their designated area.

Figure 4.50 – Bike Box Design

(Standard sized bicycle symbols may be used within the bike box if desired. See Table 4.3 for desired and suggestedminimum widths for bicycle lanes. As an option, directional arrows may be applied within the bicycle lane, and right

turns on red may be restricted.)




84

Two-Stage Left Turn Queue Box

A two-stage left turn queue box is a designatedarea within the signalized intersection that allowscyclists to safely wait while making a two-stageleft turn movement. The queue box should bealigned with a parking lane or be downstream of anexclusive right-turn lane, to the right of the throughlanes from the street where the turn is initiated.Although not marked through the intersection,a conventional bike lane or buffer should beprovided on the street where the turn is initiated.This will separate the queue box from the path of

cyclists who are proceeding straight through theintersection.

This designated space should be marked with awhite rectangular or square box using 100 mm widesolid lines surrounding a turn arrow pointing in thedirection in which cyclists will leave the intersection,plus a bicycle symbol oriented according to thedirection from which they entered.

Cyclists waiting in the left turn queue box will besituated in front of the stop bar of the cross street.At this time the traffic signal indication for the crossstreet may be red. Given that cyclists in the queuebox may obstruct the right turn movement from thecross street, designers should consider restrictingthis right turn on red.

The queue box concept permitting cyclists to waitin front of the stop bar is new in Ontario. In orderto communicate the legitimacy of the facility todrivers and to give cyclists the confidence to placethemselves in this location, green surface treatment

is required to enhance the visibility of the two-stageleft turn queue box.

An example of an intersection design featuring aqueue box is shown in Figure 4.51 . This designfeature should also be applied with separatedbicycle lanes. Please refer to Section 4.2.2.4 formore details.






P


See Section 4.4.1.4 for guidance on situations

where the facility opposite the jug handle is withinthe boulevard.

Credit: City of Mississauga

Jug Handles at Urban T-intersections

At T-intersections, designers may use the spaceavailable due to the absence of the fourth leg toinstall a jug handle. This allows cyclists to reorientthemselves to cross the road, and serves a similarfunction to that of a two-stage left turn queue boxin a four-legged intersection. An example is shownin Figure 4.52 .

This is effectively the fourth leg of the signalizedintersection, so practitioners should provide trafficsignals that are visible to cyclists waiting there.Bicycle traffic signal heads similar to the onesshown in Section 5.8.2 may be provided.

The alignment of the jug handle should allowcyclists to easily cross the intersection andaccess the on-road bicycle facility on the exit leg.

Figure 4.51 – Two-Stage Left Turn Queue Box Aligned with Parking Lane Adjacent to Bicycle Lane

(See Table 4.3 for desired and suggested minimum widths for bicycle lanes. As an option, directional arrows may beapplied within the bicycle lane, and right turns on red from the cross street may be restricted.)

Figure 4.52 – An Example of a Jug Handle at anUrban T-intersection







Facility Desired Width SuggestedMinimum

Marked Buffer1.8 m lane +1.2 m buffer

1.5 m lane +0.5 m b buffer

Flexible Bollards2.0 m c lane +1.2 m buffer

1.5 m d lane +0.5 m buffer

Planters / Concrete Curb / Median2.0 m c lane +1.2 m buffer

1.8 m d lane +0.5 m buffer

On-Street Parking1.8 m lane +1.2 m buffer

1.5 m lane +0.8 m e buffer

aFor bidirectional separated facilities, the same desired and minimum lane widths apply (per lane). Barrier widths are independent of the numberof lanes. Where facilities are vertically separated, practiti oners should refer to Table 4.6 – Desired and Suggested Minimum Widths for Raised CycleTracks.

bMaintenance standards for marked buffers should be the same as for lanes since cyclists may use them for overtaking.

cPractitioners should provide a minimum of 2.0 m effective width between the curb and the physical component of the barrier where high volumes ofcyclists are anticipated. This will reduce the risk of cyclists clipping the physical buffer or curb while overtaking other cyclists.

dMaintenance procedures and costs should be considered since small street sweeper vehicles typically require 2.0m of unobstructed running width,otherwise the removal of f lex bollards may be required before they can be used. Designers should check the requirements for their municipality andfactor in higher maintenance costs should their chosen facility widths require the use of specialized equipment or manual sweeping. See Section 8 forfurther information on maintenance considerations. Impacts on drainage and garbage collection should also be taken into account.

e Practitioners should provide the widest buffer possible to reduce the risk of a cyclist colliding wi th an opening car door, recognizing that the spaceavailable for avoiding debris or imperfections and overtaking is limited.

Table 4.4 – Desired and Suggested Minimum Widths for Separated Bicycle Lanes a

Source: Adapted from AASHTO Guide for Planning, Design and Operation of Bicycle Facilities, 2012




88

Figure 4.53 – Examples of Separated Bicycle Lanes

Marked Buffer Concrete Curb Planters

Credit: City of Burlington Credit: City of Ottawa Credit: MMM, 2012

Parking Lane Flex Bollards(North Bay)

Medians

Credit: Kyle Gradinger Credit: MMM, 2013 Credit: Erica Barnett of SLOG News & Arts







90

Rb-84 (OTM)

(600 mm x 600 mm)

Rb-84t (OTM)

(200 mm x 600 mm)Rb-84A (OTM)

(600 mm x 600 mm)

Rb-85t (OTM)

(200 mm x 600 mm)

The frequency of the reserved bicycle lane signbetween intersections should be determinedthrough engineering judgement based on thespeed of bicycles and other traffic, as well as thedistances between intersections. The maximumspacing is 200 metres and the signs should berepeated after every intersection.

Oversize versions of the Reserved Bicycle Lanesign and tab signs may be used at locations whereprevailing traffic conditions warrant greatervisibility or emphasis. This can occur in complexvisual environments where many signs andother devices compete for driver attention, or at

Source: TAC Bikeway Traffic Control Guidelines for Canada, 2012 (Section 3.7.9, p. 24)

high traffic volume locations where drivers mustconcentrate more on the driving task. Practitionersshould refer to OTM Book 5 – Regulatory Signs for details on this sign.

Reserved Bicycle Lane Ahead

The Reserved Bicycle Lane Ahead sign WB-10 (TAC),shown in Figure 4.57 , may be placed adjacent toor above the curb lane in advance of a reservedbicycle lane. This sign should be considered wheremotorists are required to manoeuvre their vehicle inorder to avoid the bicycle lane.

RB-90 (TAC)

(600 mm x 750 mm)

RB-91 (TAC)

(600 mm x 750 mm)

RB-92 (TAC)

(600 mm x 750 mm)










Separated bicycle lanes are marked by two whitesymbols: a diamond and a bicycle symbol. Thediamond symbol should be centred in the bicyclelane and should have a stroke width of at least 75millimetres. These pavement markings must beused in conjunction with a Reserved Bicycle Lanesign (discussed in Section 4.2.2.2 ). An optionaldirectional arrow may be used where the directionof travel is not clear or additional guidance isrequired. For example, the arrow may be used oncontraflow bike lanes or at intersections where

cyclists will take different trajectories at or on theapproach to an intersection depending on theturning movement they are making. The cyclistdirectional arrow is shown with the bicycle symboland diamond symbol in Figure 4.59 .

Where intersections are more than 400 metresapart, bicycle symbols should be placed with aminimum spacing of 200 metres. However, thedesigner may determine that site specific factorsrequire symbols to be placed more frequently to

highlight the possible presence of cyclists, such asin conflict zones.

Separated bicycle lanes are typically demarcatedby a 100 millimetre solid white lane line, shownin Figure 4.60 , spaced at least 0.5 metres apart,which defines the buffer between the bicycle laneand the travel lane. Physical barriers may be placedwithin this buffer space to provide added separationbetween motorists and cyclists.

Alternatively, the buffer may be delineated by a100-millimetre solid white line, which defines theboundary between the buffer and the bicycle lane,and a solid white line 100 to 200 millimetres wide,which defines the boundary between the buffer andthe travel lane.

WB-10 (TAC)

(600 mm x 600 mm)


Turning Vehicles Yield to Bicycles Sign

The Turning Vehicles Yield to Bicycles sign RB-37(TAC), illustrated in Figure 4.58 , may be used atconflict zones where motorists turn across a bicyclefacility and are required to yield to the cyclist. Forseparated bicycle lanes, this will coincide withlocations where the barrier is discontinued to allowfor turning vehicles. The sign should incorporate thetype of bicycle facility marking or treatment presentin the conflict zone. In addition to or instead of the

Turning Vehicles Yield to Bicycles sign, practitionersmay consider applying green surface treatment asdescribed in Section 4.2.2.4 .

RB-37 (TAC)

(600 mm x 750 mm)


Figure 4.57 – Reserved Bicycle Lane Ahead Sign









Separated Bicycle Lanes at Intersections

Separated bicycle lanes are located on the right-side of the motor vehicle lanes adjacent to the curb.The recommended treatment at an intersectionconsists of an advanced stop bar for cyclists toposition themselves ahead of motorists during a redsignal indication. This makes cyclists more visible toright-turning vehicles. Figure 4.63 depicts a typicaltreatment, which includes two-stage left turn queueboxes as described on the next page.

As with conventional bicycle lanes, the designershould consider whether the characteristicsof a site warrant the application of pavement

markings or green surface treatment through theintersection. This serves to highlight conflict areaswhere cyclists and motor vehicles will cross pathsso that each user group is more aware of the other.

The available treatment options in increasing orderof visibility are:

• no treatment;






Elephant’s feet markings are reserved for crossridesat intersections. They should not be used throughthe central portion of intersections themselves.

Municipalities should be consistent in whateverapplication they select for marking conventional bikelanes, separated bike lanes and raised cycle tracksthrough the intersection. This includes the option ofno treatment.


Figure 4.62 – Dashed White Bicycle Lane Line







Two-Stage Left Turn Queue Box

Since cyclists are expected to stay within theseparated bicycle lane on the approach to anintersection, cyclists intending to make a left-turnmanoeuvre at an intersection have to completethis movement in two stages. A two-stage left turnqueue box, as illustrated in Figures 4.63, 4.64and 4.65 , should be provided to allow the left-turnmovement of cyclists from a separated bicycle laneinto a cross-street. The queue box is a designatedarea within the signalized intersection, which isaligned with the cross-street on-road bicycle facility

(if one is provided) and shadowed by a parking lane,buffer, crosswalk setback or on-road bicycle facility.

This designated space should be marked with awhite rectangular or square box using 100 mm widesolid lines surrounding a turn arrow pointing in thedirection in which cyclists will leave the intersection,plus a bicycle symbol oriented according to thedirection from which they entered.

Cyclists waiting in the left turn queue box will besituated in front of the stop bar of the cross street.At this time the traffic signal indication for the crossstreet will be red. Given that cyclists in the queuebox may obstruct the right turn movement from thecross street, designers should consider restrictingthis right turn on red.

The queue box concept permitting cyclists to waitin front of the stop bar is new in Ontario. In orderto communicate the legitimacy of the facility to

drivers and to give cyclists the confidence to placethemselves in this location, green surface treatmentshould be used to enhance the visibility of the two-stage left turn queue box.

This facility may also be applied also for aconventional bicycle lane or a raised cycle track.Refer to Section 4.2.1.4 for other designapplications of left turn queue boxes.




96

P

P



Figure 4.64 – Two-Stage Left Turn Queue Box in Curb Area

(See Table 4.4. As an option, directional arrows may be applied within the bicycle lane, and right turns on red from thecross street may be restricted.)

Figure 4.65 – Two-Stage Left Turn Queue Box With Parking LaneAdjacent to Buffered Bicycle Lane

(See Table 4.4. As an option, directional arrows may be applied within the bicycle lane, and right turns on red from thecross street may be restricted. For cases not involving a parking lane, refer to Figure 4.37)






Source: York Regi on

may initiate their movement into the intersectionahead of the turning vehicles.

It is important to note that this innovative solution isyet to be implemented; therefore it is not currentlya recommended practice but can be consideredwhere the context is appropriate. Monitoringof the operations for this design application isrecommended.

An alternative solution may be considered thatdoes not require right turns on red from thecross street to be restricted. Figure 4.66 depictsan example of a queue box located within theboulevard corner instead of within the intersection,with the sidewalk and pedestrian crosswalk setback from the intersection. A three to five secondleading pedestrian and bicycle interval could also beconsidered such that both pedestrians and cyclists

Figure 4.66 – An Example of a Context Specific Two-Stage Queue Box within the Boulevard




98

4.2.3 Contraflow Bicycle Lanes

Contraflow bicycle lanes are used to enable two-way bicycle travel on a roadway that is designatedas one-way for motor vehicles. A cyclist riding withina contraflow bicycle lane travels in the oppositedirection to the motor vehicle traffic. Contraflowbicycle lanes may be applied to provide greaterconnectivity within a bikeway network where theroute using non-contraflow bicycle lanes would bemuch longer. When planning and designing thisfacility type, consideration should be given to thenumber of intersecting driveways and streets on

the side of the road with the contraflow bicycle lane.Furthermore, contraflow bicycle lanes may requirethe installation of bicycle signals. Practitionersshould refer to Section 5.8 and OTM Book 12A for guidance on signalization for bicycles.

4.2.3.1 Geometry

The geometry of the contraflow bicycle lanedepends on the operating speed and traffic volumeof the roadway, as well as the presence of on-street

parking and available right-of-way for the roadwaycorridor. Contraflow bicycle lanes should be 2.0metres wide to allow cyclists additional space to

Table 4.5 - Desired and Suggested Minimum Widths for a Contraflow Bicycle Lane (to the face of curb)

manoeuvre around any obstacles or overtake othercyclists without crossing the directional dividing line.A buffer should be provided between the contraflowlane and any on-street parking alongside it. Whereadditional width is available (or in the unusualscenario of high oncoming vehicle speed or volume)a marked buffer may be provided to separate cyclistsfrom opposing traffic or parked vehicles. Pleaserefer to Section 4.2.3.4 for guidance on positioningthe contraflow bicycle lane.

Table 4.5 presents desired width and suggestedminimum lane widths for contraflow bicycle

lanes. Practitioners should always design to thedesired width. However, through the use of soundengineering judgement, a practitioner may considerreducing the width to a value greater than or equalto the suggested minimum, but only for contextspecific situations on segments or corridors withconstrained right-of-way widths. Figure 4.67 includes several examples of contraflow bicyclelanes.

Practitioners should refer to Section 4.2.1 for

design details on the bicycle lane on the non-contraflow side of the street.

Facility Desired Width Suggested Minimum

Contraflow Bicycle Lane 2.0 m 1.8 m a

Contraflow Bicycle Lane adjacent toon-street parking

2.0 m lane +1.0 m buffer to parking

1.8 m b lane +0.5 m c buffer to parking

aA width of 2.0m is recommended to allow cyclists to overtake one another within the contraflow lane. A buffer zone (desired width 1.0 m; suggestedminimum 0.5 m) may be provided along the centre line where the speed or volume of oncoming vehicles is high.

bWhere the contraflow lane is proposed to be buffered by a concrete curb, median or planters, maintenance procedures and costs should beconsidered since small street sweeper vehicles t ypically require 2.0m of unobstructed running width. Designers should check the requirementsfor their municipality and factor in higher maintenance costs should their chosen facility widths require the use of specialized equipment or manualsweeping. See Section 8 for further information on maintenance considerations.

cAssumes a parking lane width of 2.5m, although where possible the buffer width should be increased by real locating road space from the parkinglane. This is to encourage motorists to park closer to t he curb, thus reducing the conflict zone between cyclists and car doors that may open wi thoutwarning. In a low volume, low speed constrained corridor, a minimum 1.8m wide bicycle lane may be provided without a buffer. However, thepractitioner should consider the increased risk of collisions between cyclists and opening car doors or alighting passengers.







100

Rb-84 (OTM)

(600 mm x 600 mm

Rb-84t (OTM)

(200 mm x 600 mm)

Rb-84A (OTM)

(600 mm x 600 mm)

Rb-85t (OTM)

(200 mm x 600 mm)

Where OTM signs are used, the standardReserved Lane Ends tab sign (Rb-85t) in Figure4.69b must be attached below the last Rb-84 or Rb-84A standard Reserved Bicycle Lane sign, and theBegins tab sign (Rb-84t) may be attached below thefirst Rb-84 or Rb-84A sign. If TAC signs are beingused, the Reserved Bicycle Lane Ends sign RB-92should be installed at the end of the reserved laneinstead of the RB-90 or RB-91 sign.

The placement of this sign along a contraflowbicycle lane is shown for various design applicationsin Section 4.2.3.4 . Additionally, the frequency

of the reserved bicycle lane sign betweenintersections should be determined throughengineering judgement based on the speed ofbicycles and other traffic, plus the distancesbetween intersections. The maximum spacing is200 metres and the signs should be repeated afterevery intersection.

Oversized versions of the Reserved Bicycle Lanesign and tab signs may be used in areas where trafficconditions warrant greater visibility. Practitioners

should refer to OTM Book 5 – Regulatory Signsfor details on this sign.


RB-90 (TAC)

(600 mm x 750 mm)

RB-91 (TAC)

(600 mm x 750 mm)

RB-92 (TAC)

(600 mm x 750 mm)









Contraflow Bicycle Lane Crossing Sign

The Contraflow Bicycle Lane Crossing sign WC-43(TAC), shown in Figure 4.71 , should be installedon the approach to an intersection with one-way motor vehicle movement and two-way cyclistmovement.


Contraflow bicycle lanes should be delineated byusing a 200 millimetre solid yellow line, shown inFigure 4.72 , between the contraflow bicycle laneand the motor vehicle lane, and are marked bytwo white symbols: a diamond and a bicycle. Thediamond symbol should be centred in the bicyclelane and should have a stroke width of at least 75millimetres. A directional arrow should be usedfor contraflow bicycle lanes to provide additional

guidance to both cyclists and motorists. The cyclistdirectional arrow is shown with the bicyclesymbol and diamond symbol in Figure 4.73 .


WC-43 (TAC)

(600 mm x 600 mm)

Source: TAC Bikeway Traffic Control Guidelines for Canada, 2012(Table 7-1)

A designated buffer space may be applied toseparate the bicycle lane from the adjacent motorvehicle lane. Physical barriers, such as flexiblebollards, may be placed within this buffer space toprovide added separation between motorists andcyclists. The buffer for a contraflow bicycle laneconsists of two 200 millimetre solid yellow linesspaced at least 0.5 metres apart, with optionaldiagonal hatched lines.

Diagonal hatched lines are typically applied fora bicycle lane separated by a marked buffer.The spacing between the diagonal hatches

is generally a function of vehicular speed. Onroadways with faster moving motor vehicles, thehatched lines should be spaced farther apart. Onroadways with slower moving motor vehicles,the hatched lines should occur more frequently.Diagonal hatched lines are optional for a bicyclelane separated by a physical barrier.

Figure 4.71 – Contraflow Bicycle Lane CrossingSign

Figure 4.72 – Yellow Contraflow Lane Line




102

Source: Based on the TAC Bikeway Traffic Control Guidelines forCanada, 2012 (Table 7-1)

OptionalArrow







Source: Based on the TAC Bikeway Traffic Control Guidelines for Canada, 2012 (Figure 25, p. 81)

One Way Rb-21 (OTM), No Entry Rb-19 (OTM)and Turn Prohibition Rb-11 or Rb-12 (OTM) signsshould be provided as shown in the figures, with aBicycles Excepted tab below each sign. However,the application of signage and pavement markingsshould reflect context specific location and designconditions.

The optional provision of a bike lane in the non-contraflow direction is based on traffic volumes andspeeds in that direction. On low volume streets,

sharrows may be appropriate, or no markings at all.Practitioners should refer to Section 4.2.1 for thedesign of the bicycle lane on the non-contraflowside of the road.


Figure 4.74 illustrates the typical plan view of acontraflow bicycle lane located on the side of theroadway without on-street parking. On roadwayswith on-street parking on one side of the street, theparking should be located on the non-contraflowside of the road. If this is not possible, or wherea roadway has on-street parking on both sides ofthe street, the contraflow bicycle lane may belocated between the parking lane and the curb,as illustrated in Figure 4.75 . In cases where itthere is a high risk of debris accumulation, due

to overhanging deciduous trees for example, andmotor vehicle volumes are low, the contraflowbicycle lane may be situated between thedirectional dividing line and the on-street parking.

Figure 4.74 – Contraflow Bicycle Lane (on-street parking on one side of the road)

(A with-flow bicycle lane is optional, depending on motor vehicle speed and volumes. A buffer is recommended whereconventional and contraflow bike lanes are adjacent to on-street parking.

See Tables 4.3 & 4.5. Directional arrows should be applied within the bicycle lane. Signs not directly related to thebicycle facility, such as stop signs, have been omitted for clarity.)







4.3 Raised Cycle Tracks

4.3.1 One-way and Two-way Raised CycleTracks

A Raised Cycle Track is a bicycle facility adjacentto and vertically separated from the roadway. Itis designated for exclusive use by cyclists and isdistinct from the sidewalk. Raised cycle tracks canbe one-way or two-way.

One-way raised cycle tracks should be providedfor cyclists travelling in each direction to ensure

continuity and connectivity. If this is not possible onthe same street, then an alternate bicycle facilityshould be provided on a parallel street. One-wayraised cycle tracks are vertically separated fromthe roadway by a rolled or barrier curb, and may belocated within the boulevard of the roadway (referto Section 4.4.1 ).

A two-way raised cycle track is located on oneside of the roadway. In addition to being verticallyseparated, it may also be laterally separated by aphysical barrier as described in Section 4.2.2 .

When designing raised cycle tracks, a keyconsideration is the delineation of the raisedcycle track relative to the sidewalk. Particularconsideration should be given to persons withdisabilities, especially those who are visuallyimpaired.

Prior to initiating design work on a given link,practitioners should refer to the Bicycle FacilityType Selection process in Section 3.2.2 . This

will confirm whether the raised cycle track is themost suitable facility type and identify key designconsiderations.

4.3.1.1 Geometr y

The width of a raised cycle track depends on theconfiguration of the facility (one-way or two-way),vehicle speed and volume, as well as availableright-of-way. Desired widths are 2.0 metres for one-way raised cycle tracks and 4.0 metres if the facilityis bidirectional.

Table 4.6 and Figure 4.77 present the desiredand suggested minimum widths for one-way andtwo-way raised cycle tracks. It is recommendedthat practitioners always design to the desired

width. However, a practitioner through the useof sound engineering judgement may considerreducing the width to a value greater than or equalto the suggested minimum, but only for contextspecific situations on segments or corridors withconstrained right-of-way widths.

Unlike unidirectional facilities, which should beprovided on each side of the roadway, bidirectionalfacilities may be located on one side only.Compared to two unidirectional raised cycle tracks,

bidirectional facilities may offer some savings interms of installation cost. Restrictions associatedwith maintenance vehicle operating widths are alsoeliminated. However, transitioning to shared trafficlanes or conventional bike lanes is more problematic,and they are incompatible with bike boxes.

The introduction of bidirectional facilities also leadsto considerably greater conflicts with turning motorvehicles at intersections (see Section 5.4.1.2 ).Practitioners should consider the mitigationstrategies outlined in that section.

Where a raised cycle track is located adjacent to asidewalk, practitioners may consider delineating theseparation between them with a boulevard strip orcontrasting pavement material. Designers shouldgive this careful consideration where the sidewalk




106

is frequented by children, dog walkers or otherpedestrians who may stray beyond the edge of thesidewalk.

Designers may specify that rolled curbs be providedto separate the raised cycle track from the adjacentmotor vehicle lane. These allow cyclists to makecomfortable transitions between the two. However,there is an increased risk of motorists making thesame manoeuvre, for example in parking lanes.

To afford cyclists more protection from this, barriercurbs with a vertical face may be specified. A

‘splash strip’ should be provided between theraised cycle track and the barrier curb. Splash

Table 4.6 – Desired and Suggested Minimum Widths for Raised Cycle Tracks (excluding curb totravel lane) a

strips provide a buffer to keep cyclists away fromthe hazardous vertical drop-off at the curb face.They are also used to store plowed snow so that itdoes not obstruct the adjacent raised cycle track.A typical splash strip is 1.0 metres wide and is,therefore, too narrow to function as a sidewalk orother active transportation facility. However, in theaforementioned case of a barrier curb alongside aparking lane, this also acts as a buffer to reduce therisk of cyclists colliding with opening car doors andalighting passengers.

Examples of raised cycle tracks are depicted in

Figure 4.76 .


One-Way Raised Cycle Track 2.0 m 1.5 m b

Two-Way Raised Cycle Track 4.0 m 3.0 m

aWhere there is on-street parking alongside the raised cycle track, a minimum clearance of 1.0m should be provided between the raised cycle tr ackand the face of the barrier curb. This is to reduce the ri sk of cyclists colliding wi th opening car doors and alighting passengers.

bMaintenance procedures and costs should be considered since small street sweeper vehicles typically require 2.0m of unobstructed running width.Designers should check the requirements for their municipality and factor i n higher maintenance costs should their chosen facility widths require theuse of specialized equipment or manual sweeping. See Section 8 for further information on maintenance considerations.

Source: Based on information fr om AASHTO Guide for Planning, Design and Operation of Bicycle Facilities, 2012and the NACTO Urban Bikeway Design Guide, 2011






Source: MMM, 2013

One-Way Raised Cycle Track Two-Way Raised Cycle Track

Credit: MMM, 2013Credit: MMM, 2011 Credit: MMM, 2012

Figure 4.76 – Examples of One-Way and Two-Way Raised Cycle Tracks

One-Way Raised Cycle Track,Toronto

One-Way Raised Cycle Track,Guelph

Two-Way Raised Cycle Track,Montreal

Figure 4.77 – Cross-Sections of One-way and Two-Way Raised Cycle Tracks





108

4.3.1.2 Signs

All signs used for raised cycle tracks should besized appropriately for interpretation by bothmotorists and cyclists, and should conform to thestandards outlined in OTM Book 5 – RegulatorySigns (March 2000) or TAC Bikeway TrafficControl Guidelines for Canada – 2 nd Edition(January 2012) as indicated.

Reserved Bicycle Lane Signs

A Reserved Bicycle Lane sign must be used to

designate an on-road lane for the exclusive useof cyclists. Practitioners should use the OTM signsshown in Figure 4.78a and 4.78b . Alternatively,practitioners may choose to use the signs foundin the TAC Bikeway Traffic Control Guidelinesfor Canada , as illustrated in Figure 4.79 . Wherethe bicycle lane is immediately adjacent to thecurb, the ground-mounted version of the ReservedBicycle Lane sign Rb-84A (OTM) or RB-91 (TAC)should be installed. Otherwise, the overheadmounted version of the Reserved Bicycle Lane

sign Rb-84 (OTM) or RB-90 (TAC) should beinstalled on a cantilever and centred above thedesignated lane.

Rb-84 (OTM)

(600 mm x 600 mm

Rb-84t (OTM)

(200 mm x 600 mm)

Rb-84A (OTM)

(600 mm x 600 mm)

Rb-85t (OTM)

(200 mm x 600 mm)


RB-90 (TAC)

(600 mm x 750 mm)

RB-91 (TAC)

(600 mm x 750 mm)

RB-92 (TAC)

(600 mm x 750 mm)









WC-44R (TAC)

(30 cm x 45 cm)

WC-44L (TAC)

(30 cm x 45 cm)



WC-44T (TAC)

(30 cm x 60 cm)

Turning Vehicles Yield to Bicycles Signs

The Turning Vehicles Yield to Bicycles sign (Rb-37),illustrated in Figure 4.82, may be used at conflictzones where motorists turn across a bicycle facilityand are required to yield to the cyclist. Where araised cycle track transitions to a conventionalbicycle lane on the approach to an intersection,as shown in Figure 4.86 , this sign should beconsidered. The practitioner should also considerinstalling the sign at any driveways where thevertical separation of the raised cycle track has beenreduced and there is a significant movement ofright turning vehicles across the bicycle facility. Thesign should incorporate the type of bicycle facilitymarking or treatment present in the conflict zone. Inaddition to or instead of the Turning Vehicles Yield to

Where OTM signs are used, the standardReserved Lane Ends tab sign (Rb-85t) in Figure4.78b must be attached below the last Rb-84or Rb-84A standard Reserved Bicycle Lane sign,and the Begins tab sign (Rb-84t) may be attachedbelow the first Rb-84 or Rb-84A sign. If TAC signsare being used, the Reserved Bicycle Lane Endssign RB-92 should be installed at the end of thereser ved lane instead of the RB-90 or RB-91 sign.

The placement of this sign along a cycle track isdiscussed for various design applications in Section4.3.1.4 . Additionally, the frequency of the reserved

bicycle lane sign between intersections should bedetermined through engineering judgement basedon the speed of bicycles and other traffic, plus thedistances between intersections. The maximumspacing is 20 metres, and the signs should berepeated after every intersection.

Bicycle Trail Crossing Side Street Sign

The Bicycle Trail Crossing Side Street sign WC-44(TAC), shown in Figure 4.80 , should be placed onthe roadway at the approach to an intersection witha side street where a parallel raised cycle trackcrosses the side street close to the through road.The right or left version of the sign should be usedas appropriate. If the left version is used, the signshould be installed on both sides of the road sothat it is clearly visible to left-turning traffic. The TrailCrossing tab sign WC-44T (TAC), shown in Figure4.81 , may be attached below WC-44L or WC-44R(TAC) to convey the meaning of the sign.

Figure 4.80 – Bicycle Trail Crossing Side StreetSign

Figure 4.81 – Trail Crossing Tab Sign




110

Bicycles sign, practitioners may consider applyinggreen surface treatment as described in section4.3.1.4.

RB-37 (TAC)(60 cm x 75 cm)


4.3.1.3 Pavement Markin gs

Raised cycle tracks, which are raised and curbseparated, are marked by a white diamond symbol,a white bicycle symbol and a directional arrow,

which are depicted in Figure 4.83 . The diamondsymbol should be centred in the bicycle laneand should have a stroke width of at least 75millimetres. Directional arrows are important inproviding guidance to cyclists, particularly on two-way raised cycle tracks. These pavement markingsmust be used in conjunction with a ReservedBicycle Lane sign as discussed in Section 4.3.1.2 .

A one-way raised cycle track should be markedwith a bicycle symbol, a diamond and an arrow toreinforce the direction of travel. This should be thesame direction as for motor vehicle traffic in theadjacent lane.

A two-way raised cycle track should be markedwith a directional arrow followed by a bicyclesymbol and diamond for both directions of travel. Inaddition, a 100 millimetre yellow directional dividing

Source: Based on the TAC Bikeway Traffic Control Guidelines for Canada,2012 (Section 7.4)

line should be placed in the centre of the two-wayraised cycle track to separate bidirectional travel.This directional dividing line should be solid alongsegments with reduced sightlines and visibility inorder to discourage passing manoeuvres. A broken(dashed) directional dividing line should be providedalong segments where passing is permitted.

OptionalArrow









Raised Cycle Tracks at Intersections

Practitioners may transition a one-way raised cycletrack down a ramp to a conventional bicycle laneon the approach to an intersection as illustrated inFigure 4.86 , and then transition back up a ramp to araised cycle track following the intersection.

This design increases the visibility between right-turning motorists and through cyclists in advanceof the conflict point. This may be appropriate for

locations where cyclists on the raised cycle trackare obscured from motorists by on-street parking.In that case, a triangular taper should be providedallowing a 10 to 15 metre gap between the end ofthe parking lane and the point at which cyclists willbe alongside and parallel to the travel lane.

The ideal offset from this point to the stop bar willvary between sites. Practitioners should considerthe configuration of the approach to the intersection,particularly sight lines, and the behaviour of driversand cyclists. Consideration should also be givento cyclists who must merge with traffic to makea vehicular left turn. Designers may considerproviding a two-stage left turn queue box or bike boxto facilitate this movement. The layout for the queuebox will be similar to that for separated bike lanes.Please refer to Section 4.2.2.4 for more details.

Alternatively, practitioners may design the raisedcycle track through the intersection as a crossride,as shown in Figure 4.87 . A suggested minimumoffset of 4.0 metres is recommended betweenthe crossride and the travel lane. This means thatturning motorists will approach the crossride at anangle that allows them good visibility of crossingcyclists. This design may require the side roadstop bar to be set back. The impact of this on thevisibility that motorists turning right from the side

Source: TAC Bikeway Traffic Control Guidelines for Canada, 2012(Table 7-1)

Credit: MMM, 2012

A solid white edge line, as shown in Figure 4.84 ,may be applied to raised cycle tracks that may beintermittently flush with the roadway at drivewaysalong the route. Although white is the standardcolour for edge lines, other colours are permittedfor branding purposes, as with the example shownin Figure 4.85 .

Figure 4.85 – Cycle Track Raised at Bus Stop,Toronto

Figure 4.84 – Solid White Bicycle Lane Line




112

road have of through traffic on the main road shouldalso be considered. The adequacy of pedestrianstorage at the intersection should also be reviewed,particularly where cyclist or pedestrian volumes areexpected to be high.

Where the facility intersects the sidewalk, guidanceshould be provided on where cyclists should waitat the intersection. A white stop bar should beplaced one metre from the sidewalk and shouldbe accompanied by a “Cyclists Stop Here on RedSignal” sign, together with a cyclist pushbutton ifthe approach is actuated. A solid yellow centrelineshould extend 15 metres from the stop bar wherea “SLOW Watch for Turning Vehicles” sign maybe installed to warn cyclists approaching theintersection while a “Bicycle Crossing on SideStreet” sign may be installed to warn motoristsapproaching the intersection.

A Yield to Pedestrians sign RB-39 (TAC), illustratedin Figure 4.92 , may be installed to remind cycliststhat they are approaching a pedestrian zone. Yieldlines may be used in place of a stop bar to indicatethe point at which bicycles are required to yieldin compliance with a yield condition. Yield linestypically consist of a row of solid white isoscelestriangles pointing toward approaching bicycle trafficextending across the approach to indicate the pointat which the yield is intended or required to bemade. The individual triangles comprising the yieldline should have a base of 30 to 60 centimetreswide and a height equal to 1.5 times the base. Thespace between the triangles should be 5 to 30centimetres.”

Practitioners should refer to Sections 4.4.1.4 and 5.8.1 for more information on the design ofcrossrides.






Source: Based on NACTO Urban Bikeway Design Guide

Figure 4.86 – Raised Cycle Track Transition to a Conventional Bike Lane on the approach to anIntersection

(Design elements not to scale. Maximum slope of ramp between raised cycle track and bike lane is 1:8.Practitionersshould consider providing a two-stage left turn queue box or bike box.

Directional arrows should be applied within the raised cycle track)




114

S L O W

WA T C H F O R

T U R N I N

G

V E H I C L E S

S L O W

W A T C H F O R

T U R N I N G

V E H I C L E S

C Y C L I S T S

S T O

P

H E R E

O N

R E D S I G N A L

C Y C L I S T S

S T O P

H E R E

O N

R E D

S I G N A L


Considerations for Two-Way Raised CycleTracks at Intersections

Unlike the design shown in Figure 4.86 , thelayout shown in Figure 4.87 may also be usedto carry a bi-directional raised cycle track throughan intersection. However, practitioners should

Figure 4.87 – Raised Cycle Track Carried Through an Intersection

(Directional arrows should be applied within the raised cycle track)

consider driver expectations at such locations, andtake mitigating measures where appropriate. Seesection 5.4.1.2 for further guidance.






4.4 In-Boulevard Facilities

4.4.1 In-Boulevard Bicycle Facilities and In-Boulevard Active Transportation Facilities

In-Boulevard Bicycle Facilities are separated frommotor vehicle traffic by a boulevard or a vergewithin the roadway right-of-way. These are typicallyimplemented adjacent to roadways with highermotor vehicle speeds and volumes along keycycling corridors. An in-boulevard facility can beconstructed with the bicycle path distinct fromthe sidewalk or with a single facility shared by

cyclists and pedestrians. In the former case, thein-boulevard facility may transition to a raisedcycle track that is immediately adjacent to the curb,as described in Section 4.3.1 . Examples of in-boulevard facilities are depicted in Figure 4.88 .

Prior to initiating design work on a given link,practitioners should refer to the Bicycle FacilityType Selection process in Section 3.2.2 . Thiswill confirm whether the in-boulevard bicyclefacility is the most suitable and identify key designconsiderations.

4.4.1.1 Geometr y

In-boulevard facilities are located outsidethe travelled portion of the roadway and do

Table 4.7 – Desired and Suggested Minimum Widths for In-Boulevard Bicycle Facilities a

not necessarily follow its geometric design.Practitioners should consider several geometricelements including the width, design speed, grade,stopping sight distance, horizontal curvature, crestvertical curves and lateral clear zones.

One- and two-way in-boulevard bicycle facilitiesshould be 2.0 metres or 4.0 metres widerespectively. Table 4.7 presents the desired andminimum widths for in-boulevard bicycle facilities,and Figure 4.89 illustrates typical cross sections.It is recommended that practitioners always designto the desired width. However, through the use of

sound engineering judgement, a practitioner mayconsider reducing the width to a value greater thanor equal to the suggested minimum, but only forcontext specific situations on segments or corridorswith constrained right-of-way widths.

In addition, a ‘splash strip’ should be providedbetween the in-boulevard facility and the curb.Splash strips provide a buffer to keep cyclists andother users away from the hazardous vertical drop-off at the curb face. They are also used to store

plowed snow so that it does not obstruct theadjacent in-boulevard facility. A typical splash stripis 1.0 metres wide and is, therefore, too narrow tofunction as a sidewalk or other active transportationfacility.


One-Way In-Boulevard Bicycle Facility 2.0 m 1.8 mTwo-Way In-Boulevard Bicycle Facility 4.0 m 3.0 m b

Two-Way In-Boulevard Shared Facility 4.0 m 3.0 m b

aExcludes splash strip (typical width 1.0 metre) where the in-boulevard facility abuts the curb.

bThis may be reduced to 2.4 metres over very short distances in order t o avoid utility poles or other infrastructure that may be costly to relocate.

Source: Based on AASHTO Guide for Planning, Design and Operation of Bicycle Facilities, 2012; NACTO Urban Bikeway Design Guide, 2011




116

Credit: MMM, 2013

Source: MMM, 2013

One-Way In-BoulevardBicycle Facility

Credit: Cit y of Toronto

Two-way In-Boulevard BicycleFacility

Credit: MMM, 2013

Two-way In-BoulevardShared-Use Facility

Figure 4.88 – Examples of In-Boulevard Facilities

(As an option, directional arrows may be applied within the in-boulevard facility)

One-Way In-BoulevardBicycle Facility (Brampton)

Two-way In-BoulevardBicycle Facility (Toronto)

Two-way In-BoulevardShared-Use Facility(Mississauga)

Figure 4.89 – Cross-Sections of In-Boulevard Facilities

(See Table 4.7 for more details. As an option, directional arrows may be applied within the in-boulevard facility.)






4.4.1.2 S igns

This section focuses on the signs used wherethe in-boulevard facility crosses a roadway. Signsthat are only intended for cyclists and other activetransportation users may have a reduced size.Otherwise, signs should be sized appropriately forinterpretation by both motorists and cyclists.

Since cyclists may deviate slightly from the pavedarea, all signs should be mounted with a minimumclearance of 2.5m between the pavement surfaceand the lower edge of the sign. This is equivalent

to the height of the cyclist’s operating space and isto provide sufficient headroom for cyclists to passthem safely.

Practitioners should reference the standards inthe TAC Bikeway Traffic Control Guidelines forCanada – 2 nd Edition (January 2012) for furtherguidance on signs for in-boulevard facilities.

Shared Pathway Sign

The Shared Pathway sign Rb-71 (OTM), shown inFigure 4.90 , should be installed along in-boulevardshared-use active transportation facilities toindicate that users are expected to share the spaceon the path. It should be placed on the far side ofintersections and other decision points.

Figure 4.90 – Shared Pathway Sign

Rb-71 (OTM)

(300 mm x 450 mm)

Rb - 72a (OTM )

(300 mm x 450 mm)

Rb - 72b (OTM)

(300 mm x 450 mm)

Pathway Organization Sign

Within in-boulevard shared-use active transportationfacilities, segregation of cyclists and pedestriansshould be avoided where possible. Instead, adirectional dividing line may be marked on thepathway, thus allowing it to operate as a “miniatureroadway”. This relies on users obeying the basicpremise that slower moving pedestrians andcyclists should keep right, and faster moving pathusers should pass on the left. However, the PathwayOrganization Sign Rb-72a or Rb-72b (OTM) , shownin Figure 4.91 , may be used on the approach

to intersections where there is delineationbetween the pedestrian and cyclist space withina crossride. An example of this treatment is whenan in-boulevard bicycle facility crosses a roadwayparallel to a sidewalk and pedestrian crossing.Where pedestrians are directed to the left side ofthe crossing, Rb-72a (OTM) should be used. Wherepedestrians are directed to the right side of thecrossing, Rb-72b (OTM) should be used.

Figure 4.91 – Pathway Organization Sign




118

Yield to Pedestrians Sign

The Yield to Pedestrians sign Rb-73 (OTM) shouldbe placed in advance of locations that areexclusively for pedestrians, for example at busstops. This sign, shown in Figure 4.92 , indicatesto cyclists that they are required to yield topedestrians in these areas.

Pedestrian and Bicycle Crossing Ahead Sign

The Pedestrian and Bicycle Crossing Ahead sign Wc-15 (OTM), shown in Figure 4.94 , should be placed

on the roadway at the approach to an in-boulevardfacility. The right or left version of the sign should beused as appropriate such that the pedestrian andbicycle symbols are oriented towards the centreof the road. The Crossing tab sign Wc-32t (OTM),shown in Figure 4.95 must be attached below Wc-15 (OTM) to convey the meaning of the sign.

Rb-73 (OTM)

(300 mm x 450 mm)

Wc-15 (OTM)

(600 mm x 600 mm)

Dismount and Walk Sign

The option of asking cyclists to dismount andwalk their bikes should not be relied upon in lieuof adequately accommodating cyclists throughappropriate road design. Being propelled bymuscular power, cyclists more than any othervehicle operators will prefer to sustain theirmomentum and avoid stopping. Cyclists usually findit difficult to rationalize why “dismount and walk”restrictions are in place, and conclude that theywere a poor, illogical or arbitrary decision. Thus, iffacility designs cause cyclists to make what theyconsider to be unnecessary stops, this will increasethe likelihood that they will ignore or disobey trafficcontrols.

Rb-70 (OTM)

(300 mm x 300 mm)

Consequently, the Dismount and Walk sign Rb-70(OTM), shown in Figure 4.93 should be used onlyin exceptional cases, such as where an in-boulevardfacility ends, and cyclists would discharge into asidewalk or pedestrian zone.

Figure 4.92 – Yield to Pedestrians Sign

Figure 4.93 – Dismount and Walk Sign

Figure 4.94 – Pedestrian and Bicycle CrossingAhead Sign






Source: TAC Bikeway Traffic Control Guidelines for Canada, 2012 (Section4.6.5, p. 34)

WC-44T (TAC)

(300 mm x 600 mm)Wc-32t (OTM)

(300 mm x 600 mm)

Source: TAC Bikeway Traffic Control Guidelines for Canada, 2012 (Section4.6.5, p. 38)

WC-44L (TAC)

(300 mm x 450 mm)

WC-44R (TAC)

(300 mm x 450 mm)

4.4.1.3 Pavement Mark ings

In-boulevard bicycle facilities should be marked by awhite bicycle symbol. A pedestrian symbol shouldalso be used where pedestrians and other activetransportation users are permitted to share thein-boulevard facility. Practitioners have the optionof adding a white directional arrow to guide userson where to place themselves on bidirectional in-boulevard facilities.

A solid yellow 100-millimetre directional dividing

line should be used on in-boulevard facilitieswith bidirectional bicycle or shared-use activetransportation traffic where passing should bediscouraged on horizontal or crest vertical curveswith poor sightlines, and on the approach tointersections. A broken yellow 100-millimetre centreline is an optional treatment and may be providedwhere sightlines are good and passing is permitted.Some road authorities may choose not to use acentre line between intersections. Figures 4.98 and 4.99 illustrate the typical pavement markingsfor in-boulevard facilities.

Where an in-boulevard facility crosses the roadway,practitioners should apply white elephant’s feetpavement markings, as shown in Figure 4.100 , toshow the edge of the crossride. See Section 5.8.1 for further guidance.

Bicycle Trail Crossing Side Street Sign

The Bicycle Trail Crossing Side Street sign WC-44(TAC), shown in Figure 4.96 , should be placed onthe roadway at the approach to an intersectionwith a side street where a parallel in-boulevardfacility crosses the side street close to the throughroad. The right or left version of the sign should beused as appropriate. If the left version is used, thesign should be installed on both sides of the roadso that it is clearly visible to left-turning traffic.

The Trail Crossing tab sign WC-44T (TAC), shownin Figure 4.97 , may be attached below WC-44L orWC-44R (TAC) to convey the meaning of the sign.

Figure 4.95 – Pedestrian and Bicycle CrossingTab Sign

Figure 4.96 – Bicycle Trail Crossing Side StreetSign

Figure 4.97 – Trail Crossing Tab Sign




120


Source: MMM, 2013 Source: TAC Bikeway Traffic Control Guidelines for Canada, 2012 (Table 7-1)

Figure 4.98 – Typical Pavement Markings forTwo-Way In-Boulevard Shared Use Paths

(Broken versus solid yellow centre line)(Pavement stencils optional)

Figure 4.99 – Bicycle Pavement Markings

Figure 4.100 – Typical Elephant’s Feet Pavement Markings for Crossrides






4.4.1.4 Design Appli cation

Crossrides

At crosswalks, cyclists are required to dismountand cross as a pedestrian by walking their bicycle.Where a crossride is provided in place of acrosswalk, a cyclist may ride their bicycle within thecrossing without dismounting.

Practitioners may provide a crossing with separatespace for cyclists and pedestrians. Alternatively,the option exists to provide a combined crossing,

with the cyclist crossing areas on each side ofthe pedestrian crossing. Where pedestrian andcyclist volumes are low, a reduced width mixedcrossing may be proposed. This allows cyclistsand pedestrians to mix, and for each to use the fullwidth of the crossing, although cyclists must yieldthe right-of-way to pedestrians within the crossing.

Each of these crossing configurations may be usedat both signalized and unsignalized intersections,although the mixed crossing is more frequently

applicable in the latter case. Practitioners shouldrefer to section 5.8.1 or OTM Book 12A fordetails regarding bicycle signalization.

Proposed multi-use paths may cross majorintersections where channelized right turns arecurrently present. This configuration consists of asmall triangular island separating the through lanesfrom the right turn channel.

Although crossings over the through and left turnlanes are signalized, those between the sidewalkand the triangular islands are not. These may besigned to indicate to right-turning drivers thatthey should yield to pedestrians however, due tothe speed of a vehicle’s approach and confusionover who has priority, this is not always effective.Allowing bicycles to use these crossing points

would compound these safety issues; cyclists wouldoccupy the limited storage space on the islandsand would be at a greater risk of collision with rightturning vehicles. In such cases, it is recommendedthat channelized right turns be removed. Theyshould be replaced with dedicated or shared rightturn lanes depending on the capacity and geometricconstraints at the intersection.

Figures 4.101 to 4.103 show typical applications ofthe three types of crossride presented in Section5.8.1 . Figure 4.101 illustrates the application of asignalized crossing with separate space for cyclistsand pedestrians. It allows the cyclist to cross theintersection without having to ride with vehiculartraffic. The optimal positioning of cyclists relativeto pedestrians on a crossride is site specific. Thepractitioner may adjust markings according to thedesire lines of each user group in order to minimizeconflicts between them.

The appropriate Pathway Organization Sign Rb-72a or Rb-72b (OTM) may be used between thesidewalk and the in-boulevard bicycle facility in

advance of the separated crossride. Where thefacility intersects the sidewalk, guidance shouldbe provided on where cyclists should wait at theintersection. A white stop bar should be placed1.0 metres from the sidewalk, and should beaccompanied by a “Cyclists Stop Here on RedSignal” sign plus a cyclist pushbutton if the crossingis actuated. A solid yellow directional dividing lineshould extend a minimum of 15 metres from thestop bar where a “SLOW Watch for Turning Vehicles”sign may be installed to warn cyclists approaching

the intersection while a “Bicycle Crossing on SideStreet” sign may be installed to warn motoristsapproaching the intersection. A Yield to Pedestrianssign Rb-73 (OTM) may also be installed to remindcyclists that they are approaching a pedestrian zone.




122

C Y C L I S T S

S T O P

H E R E

O N

R E D

S I G N A L

S L O W

WA T C H F O R

T U R N I N

G

V E H I C L E S

S L O W

W A T C H F O R

T U R N I N G

V E H I C L E S

C Y C L I S T S

S T O P

H E R E

O N

R E D

S I G N A L


Figure 4.101 – Separate Pedestrian and Cyclist Crossride (Signalized Example)

(As an option, directional arrows may be applied within the in-boulevard facility)






C Y C L I S T S

S T O P

H E R E

O N

R E D

S I G N A L

S L O W

WA T C H F O R

T U R N I N

G

V E H I C L E S

S L O W

W A T C H F O R

T U R N I N G

V E H I C L E S

C Y C L I S T S

S T O P

H E R E

O N

R E D

S I G N A L


placed 1.0 metres from the sidewalk, and shouldbe accompanied by a “Cyclists Stop Here on RedSignal” sign and a cyclist pushbutton if the crossingis actuated. A solid yellow centreline should extend15 metres from the stop bar where a “SLOWWatch for Turning Vehicles” sign may be installedto warn cyclists approaching the intersection,while a “Bicycle Crossing on Side Street” signmay be installed to warn motorists approachingthe intersection. A Yield to Pedestrians sign Rb-73 (OTM), illustrated in Figure 4.92 , may also beinstalled to remind cyclists that they are approachinga pedestrian zone.

Figure 4.102 illustrates the recommendedapplication of a signalized combined crossride inplace of a crosswalk at an intersection. Elephant’sfeet pavement markings are placed on either sideof the pedestrian zebra markings permitting bothcyclists and pedestrians to use the same space forcrossing the intersection. Cyclists are permitted toride across the combined crossing, but are requiredto ride in between the elephant’s feet and the zebramarkings.

Where the facility intersects the sidewalk, guidanceshould be provided on where cyclists should waitat the intersection. A white stop bar should be

Figure 4.102 – Combined Pedestrian and Cyclist Crossride (Signalized Example)




124

S L O W

WA T C H F O R

T U R N I N

G

V E H I C L E S

S L O W

W A T C H F O R

T U R N I N G

V E H I C L E S


site conditions and where cyclist and pedestrianvolumes are very low, UK practitioners havereduced this to a minimum of 3.0 metres, howeverthis has been the exception rather than the rule. Thiswidth may be considered in Ontario, but only underconstrained or retrofit conditions and following anengineering review. As always, practitioners shouldfully document their rationale in case they arerequired to justify their decisions in the future.

The fact that the mixed crossride is narrower thanthe combined crossride may assist practitioners inretrofitting existing crosswalks to also be used bycyclists. However, the width of any existing crossingshould not be used as the sole factor in determining

For low volume crossings, particularly atunsignalized locations where practitioners do notanticipate any queuing of pedestrians or cyclists,a mixed crossride may be implemented in placeof a crosswalk, as shown in Figure 4.103 . Thisallows cyclists and pedestrians to mix, and foreach to use the full width of the crossing. Theresult is space-saving efficiencies where cyclist andpedestrian volumes are sufficiently low that eachuser can safely negotiate across the roadwaywithout impeding another user.

The operation will be similar to that of a toucancrossing in the United Kingdom. The standardwidth for a toucan is 4.0 metres. Under constrained

Figure 4.103 – Mixed Pedestrian and Cyclist Crossride (Unsignalized Example)






the width of the proposed facility. Practitionersshould use their engineering judgement based onobservations of pedestrians crossing and projectedcyclist volumes. Following implementation,practitioners should regularly monitor sites wheremixed crossrides have been implemented to ensuretheir safe operation. Mitigating steps, includingwidening or conversion to a separate or combinedcrossing should be taken where necessary.

Refer to Section 5.8.1 regarding crossride types.

Transitions Between On-Road and Off-RoadFacilities

A comprehensive cycling network will include bothon-road and off-road facilities. To maximize networkconnectivity, cyclists should be able to transferbetween facilities, however such transitions shouldbe designed in a way that is clear and safe.

The most obvious feature of such a transition, yetone which is often overlooked, is a curb cut. Theoff-road facility should be flush with the pavement

surface for the full width of the bicycle facility socyclists can make a smooth transition.

Barrier curbs are difficult for cyclists to mount.Attempting this at speed may cause a cyclist tolose control and may result in wheel damage.Alternatively, cyclists may slow down on theapproach; this behaviour may surprise drivers andtrying to mount the curb may leave the cyclistexposed in the roadway, increasing the risk of acollision.

Cyclists may be tempted to use the curb cutprovided for the nearest pedestrian facility,increasing the risk to pedestrians at a point that

is not designed to accommodate both groups.Practitioners are reminded that on designatedshared use facilities such as multi-use paths,curb cuts are also required so as not to impedewheelchair users from accessing them.

Where cyclists are transferring to or from an off-roadfacility that runs parallel to the roadway, the droppedcurb should be perpendicular to the cyclists’ line oftravel. This is to avoid twisting of the front wheelwhich may cause a cyclist to lose control. Goodvisibility between drivers and cyclists is paramountto safety. Transitions should not be placed near

conflict points where motor vehicles may cross thepath of a cyclist that has just entered an on-roadfacility. Although drivers may see a cyclist using theoff-road facility prior to the transition, they may notbe aware of the transition ahead and the impendingconflict. The ideal transition will be similar to the oneshown in Figure 4.86 for raised cycle tracks.

Where cyclists are transferring to or from an off-road facility that runs perpendicular to the roadway,practitioners should consider providing a mid-block

crossride as shown in Figure 5.38 . This will enablecyclists to cross over without dismounting to reachthe continuation of the off-road facility, wherepresent. It will also assist cyclists turning left onto oroff of an on-road facility. If there is no off-road facilitydesignated for cyclists, the receiving area of thecrossride should be designated as shared use, and aseparate curb cut should be provided for cyclists totransition to the on-road facility.




126

Credit: City of Ottawa

At rural locations within a cycling network wheretwo-way in-boulevard facilities meet one-way on-road facilities, designers should consider providinga jug-handle to assist cyclists in making thatmanoeuvre.

At T-intersections, designers may use the spaceavailable due to the absence of the fourth leg toinstall a jug handle. This allows cyclists to reorientthemselves without mixing with general traffic, andthen cross the road in a separate movement. Thealignment of the jug handle should allow cycliststo easily cross the intersection and access the in-boulevard facility on the opposite side. An exampleof this is shown in Figure 4.104.

This is a situation where the formal adoption ofcrossride facilities in Ontario gives an opportunity

In all cases, the designation of areas for cyclistuse should be indicated by the signs for ‘SharedPathway’ Rb-71 (OTM), ‘Yield to Pedestrians’Rb-73 (OTM) and ‘Dismount and Walk’ Rb-70(OTM) as shown in Figures 4.90, 4.92 and 4.93 respectively.

It is not desirable for cyclists to have to mergeinto the travel lanes on an intersection approach,undertake a vehicular left turn, and then enter an in-boulevard facility on the corner of the intersection.The cyclist’s placement and movement within theintersection will be different to that of a motorvehicle turning into the cross street. This maycause confusion to other road users and increasethe likelihood of a collision. Also, cyclists accessingthe in-boulevard facility from the intersection maydo so at speed, limiting their ability to yield topedestrians.

Figure 4.104 – Jug Handle Treatment at Rural T-intersection






to clarify the traffic signal control provisions forcyclists. The existing crosswalk may be upgradedto a crossride so that cyclists may ride across on agreen indication.

When deciding whether to provide a one-way ortwo-way crossride for cyclists, practitioners shouldconsider which cyclist movements are supportedby the facilities provided. Where a jug handle is atthe point where the facility ends on that side of theroad and continues in-boulevard across the road,the crossride should be one-way. This provides forcyclists who are crossing to enter the in-boulevardfacility, but not for those exiting since there is nofacility on the opposite side to receive them. Wherea facility continues past the jug handle, a two-waycrossride should be provided.

See Section 4.2.1.4 for guidance on jug handles aturban intersections.

Section 5 – Additional Bicycle Facility DesignApplications builds upon the information presentedin this section. It discusses additional design

considerations such as bicycle priority streets,traffic calming and integrating bicycle facilities aspart of road retrofitting projects, as well as designingbicycle facilities at roundabouts, interchanges, rampcrossings, conflict zones, bridge structures andrailway crossings.




128






5. Additional Bicycle FacilityDesign Applications

This section provides practitioners with additionalinformation related to designing bicycle facilities.It builds upon Section 4 and discusses contextsensitive design applications related to bicyclepriority streets, road retrofits, roundabouts, conflictzones, interchanges, railway crossings and gradeseparations, as well as other design considerationssuch as bicycle signals, lighting, fencing, drainageand temporary conditions. Practitioners shouldrefer to Section 2 – Bikeway Network Planning for guidance on bikeway network planning androute selection as well as Section 3 – BicycleFacility Selection Tool for guidance on selectingthe appropriate bicycle facility type. Practitionersshould also use this chapter in conjunction with theappropriate facility type discussed in Section 4 –Bicycle Facility Design .

Section 5.1 — Bicycle Priority Streets discussesthe typical design elements to be included within

a low volume, low speed street specificallydesignated for bicycle travel. This section alsodiscusses design applications for streets with trafficcalming.

Section 5.2 — Integrating Bicycle Facilitiesthrough Road Retrofits includes considerations forpractitioners when implementing bicycle facilitieson an existing roadway through reconstruction orthrough space reallocation.

Section 5.3 — Integrating Bicycle Facilitiesat Roundabouts includes information for thedesign of bicycle facilities at single and multi-laneroundabouts.

Section 5.4 — Conflict Zones includes informationfor optional pavement marking treatments wherevera cyclist may interact and have conflict with amotorist.

Section 5.5 — Integrating Bicycle Facilities atInterchanges and Ramp Crossings discusses variousdesign applications for bicycle facilities at low-speedand high-speed ramp terminals.

Section 5.6 — Integrating Bicycle Facilities atGrade Separations discusses considerations forpractitioners when implementing a bicycle facility

on a bridge or tunnel to overcome a barrier such as ahighway or watercourse.

Section 5.7 — Integrating Bicycle Facilities at RailwayCrossings discusses various design applicationswhere a bicycle facility crosses a railway track at askewed angle.

Section 5.8 — Bicycle Signals discusses thesignage and pavement marking treatments thatshould be applied where a bicycle facility contains abicycle signal.

Section 5.9 — Other Design Considerationsprovides a brief overview of other design elementsthat may be included within a bicycle facilityincluding drainage, fences, barriers and lighting.

Section 5.10 — Temporary Conditions discussesthe signage treatments that may be consideredwhen a bicycle facility is closed because of atemporary construction zone.




130

Signage

TrafficReductions

Intersection Treatment

TrafficCalming

Priority

Source: IBPI Fundamentals of Bicycle Boulevard Planning & Design, 2009

Traffic Reduction on bicycle boulevards may beachieved through the implementation of culs-de-sac to restrict through motorized traffic while stillproviding through access for non-motorized traffic.

Intersection Treatments such as bike boxes,advanced stop bars, bicycle actuated signals, cross-rides and refuge islands can improve a cyclist’sability to cross a major roadway more comfortablyand safely.

Priority given to travel on Bicycle Boulevard throughthe use of pavement markings as well as stop and

yield signs on intersecting roadways.

Traffic Calming measures such as roundabouts,speed tables, road diets and reduced speed limitsaim to reduce the speed and volume of motorvehicle traffic on a particular roadway. However,consideration must be given to ensure trafficcalming designs do not adversely affect cyclists(refer to Section 5.1.1 for design guidance).

Figure 5.2 illustrates the implementation of thesedesign elements within a typical Bicycle PriorityStreet.

5.1 Bicycle Priority Streets

In some areas, particularly residentialneighbourhoods, design treatments can be usedto create ‘Bicycle Priority Streets’, which are oftenreferred to as ‘Bicycle Boulevards’ or ‘Local BicycleStreets’.

Bicycle Priority Streets are typically low-volume,low-speed streets that have been optimized forbicycle travel through treatments such as trafficcalming, traffic reduction, signage, pavementmarkings and intersection crossing treatments.

These treatments allow through movements forcyclists while discouraging similar through trips bynon-local motorized traffic.

Figure 5.1 illustrates a variety of design elementswhich may be considered by practitioners whendesigning a bicycle boulevard. Some of the designelements, such as signage and pavement markingsare already an integral part of on-road bicyclefacilities such as signed bicycle routes and bicyclelanes. Practitioners should refer to the appropriatesubsection within Section 4 for design guidance.The other design elements discussed below arecontext sensitive and should be considered basedon the unique set of site characteristics of thecorridor.

Figure 5.1 – Bicycle Priority Street Design Elements






Source: IBPI Fundamentals of Bicycle Boulevard Planning & Design, 2009

Figure 5.2 – Design Elements on a Typical Bicycle Priority Street

(Signs not directly related to the bicycle facility, including some stop signs, have been omitted for clarity)




132


Figure 5.3 , shared use lane markings should not beused. Cyclists are expected to negotiate the right-of-way with other users on the roadway and take theentire lane when navigating around the chicanes.

Alternatively, the chicanes may reduce the widthof the travel lanes but not restrict two-way trafficmovement, as indicated in Figure 5.4 . In this case,sharrows should be used to provide guidance tocyclists and motorists on the expected positioningof cyclists within the lane. The sharrow shouldbe placed in the centre of the travel lane in eachdirection. A Shared Use Lane Single File sign Wc-

24 (OTM) and accompanying tab sign Wc-24t (OTM)should also be used in advance of the chicanes.Practitioners should refer to Sections 4.1.1.2 and4.1.1.3 for details on the Shared Use Lane SingleFile sign and sharrows, respectively.

5.1.1 Design Applications

Traffic calming devices are design features intendedto reduce motor vehicle speeds and volumes. Thesedevices include but are not limited to chicanes,speed humps, curb extensions and road diets.Traffic calming devices should be designed suchthat cyclist travel on roadways is not restricted.

Chicanes and Shared Roadways

Chicanes are a physical feature built into theroadway intended to reduce motor vehicle speeds.

They are placed such that bump-outs on oppositesides of the road require drivers to zigzag or slalomthrough the chicane. On a shared roadway with two-way traffic where the chicanes restrict concurrenttraffic movement in both directions, as indicated in

Figure 5.3 – One-Lane Chicane Roadway with Two-Way Traffic








Practitioners should refer to Section 4.2.1 forfurther information on the design of ConventionalBicycle Lanes and Section 4.2.3 for the design ofContraflow Bicycle Lanes.

Chicanes and Bicycle Lanes

On a roadway with bicycle lanes and chicanes,the bicycle lane should be placed between thecurb and the chicane, as illustrated in Figure 5.5 .

Figure 5.4 – Shared Use Markings on Two-Lane Chicaned Roadway

Figure 5.5 - Bicycle Lane on Chicaned Roadway

(See Table 4.3 for desired and suggested minimum widths for bicycle lanes. As an option, directional arrowsmay be applied within the bicycle lane)




134

Source: TAC Bikeway Traffic Control Guidelines for Canada, 2012 (Figure52, p. 100)

Speed Humps and Bicycle Lanes

Where a bicycle lane is located on a roadwaywith speed humps, carrying the bicycle lane overthe hump is optional. However, the bicycle laneshould be marked with the triangular pavementmarking indicating the start of the speed hump, asillustrated in Figure 5.6 . The vertical profile of thehump tapers to the same grade as the surroundingpavement in the vicinity of the edge of the gutter(or in its absence, 0.3m from the face of curb) tofacilitate drainage.

5.2 Integrating Bicycle Facilities throughRoad Retrofits

For new roadways that are identified as potentialcycling routes, appropriate bicycle facilities shouldbe planned and integrated at the design stage.However for existing roadways and highways, bicyclefacilities may be accommodated and integratedinto the roadway through the reconstruction or thereallocation of roadway space. An EnvironmentalAssessment (EA) is often not required for the simpleimplementation of bike facilities as a standaloneproject. If incorporated into another project, the

value of that will determine the need for the EA.

5.2.1 Retrofitting by Widening the Roadway(Reconstruction)

If the opportunity is available, roadway wideningallows for the provision of bicycle facilities withgreater separation between motorists and cyclists.Significant budgetary efficiencies may be availablewhen road widening projects for the implementationof bicycle facilities are completed in conjunction with

repaving or reconstruction projects that are alsoplanned for the roadway cross-section of interest.

5.2.2 Retrofitting Without Roadway Widening(Reallocation of Road Space)

Retrofitting existing roadways without roadwaywidening involves the reallocation of space forthe implementation of bicycle facilities. This mayinclude:

• Narrowing of vehicular travel lanes where

practical and safe;

• Reducing the number of through vehiculartravel lanes; or

• Reconfiguring on-street parking or removingit on roadways with low demand.

Figure 5.6 – Bicycle Lane Markings across aSpeed Hump

(See Table 4.3 for desired and suggested minimumwidths for bicycle lanes. As an option, directional arrows

may be applied within the bicycle lane)






Source: “Complete the Streets – Laying the Foundation” Presentation by John LaPlante, P.E., PTOE, TCAT Conference, April 2012

lanes to provide enough width for a bicycle lane.Another option would be to convert a travel laneinto a separated bicycle lane with a buffer.

If roadspace reallocation is not feasible,practitioners may provide shared lane markings(sharrows) or pave the gravel shoulders on a ruralroadway to provide additional space for cyclists.

Figure 5.7 shows a site-specific example of howbicycle lanes may be accommodated without theloss of any roadway capacity by taking excess widthfrom vehicular lanes and the median. Figure

5.8 illustrates another case where the numberand width of travel lanes remains unchanged, yetsufficient width has been found for a bicycle lane ineach direction by eliminating parking on one sideof the street and reducing its width on the other.

Bicycle facility widths should adhere to thedimensions given in Section 4 . Vehicular lane widthsshould be consistent with municipal or regionalguidance; where this is not available , practitionersshould refer to the TAC Geometric Design Gui defor Canadian Roads . If there is insufficient spacefor bicycle lanes, the designer should considerimplementing shared use lane pavement markingsand signage. Where the addition of bicycle lanes isplanned through roadway reallocation but there isa short segment where there is insufficient width,shared lane markings should be used to providecontinuity through the constrained section. Signagemust be used to indicate where the bicycle laneends and where it begins again.

A typical reallocation of road space would involvereducing the width of a wide curb lane or other

Figure 5.7 – An Example of Narrowing Vehicular Lane Widths for the Implementation of BicycleFacilities

(Dimensions will vary within the design domain)




136

Source: Oregon Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan, Oregon DOT

the curb and using it to widen the boulevard. Thismay provide enough width for a multi-use trail,benefitting both cyclists and pedestrians. In somecases, there may be sufficient boulevard width forthis without moving the curbs. Even where utilitypoles, light standards, other municipal infrastructureand trees are present, it is often possible to plot apath around the obstacles with minimal relocations.Where spare boulevard width is available on eitherside of the road, practitioners should undertake afeasibility assessment to compare the two options.Factors will include utility and municipal relocations,retaining wall requirements, street trees and businfrastructure.

Practitioners should refer to the AASHTO Guide forthe Planning, Design and Operation of BicycleFacilities for more information about retrofittingroadways.

5.2.3 Road Diet

Another possible reallocation scenario includesa ‘road diet’, where spare roadway capacityassociated with excess lanes is redistributed toother modes such as transit or cyclists. The transferof facilities from automobile to sustainable usesaims to encourage a similar modal shift of roadusers.

A common example of this is the conversion of afour-lane cross section with no existing median totwo travel lanes with a centre left turn lane and twobicycle lanes or raised cycle tracks. This may alsoinclude pedestrian refuge islands in the median atkey midblock locations.

5.2.4 In-Boulevard Facilities

Another road diet example may be a curbrealignment, taking space that was between

Figure 5.8 – An Example of Removing and Narrowing Parking Lanes for the Implementation of BicycleFacilities

(Dimensions will vary within the design domain)







should transition to a shared roadway in advance ofthe roundabout. A Shared Use Lane Single File signWc-19 (OTM) with supplementary tab Wc-19t (OTM)and sharrows should be provided to remind usersof the expected positioning of the cyclist within theroundabout. Figure 5.9 illustrates a typical bicyclefacility at a single lane roundabout. Practitionersshould refer to Sections 4.1.1.2 and 4.1.1.3 fordetails on the Shared Use Lane Single File sign andsharrows, respectively.

As an option where cyclists are likely to take the firstexit of the roundabout, a bypass may be provided

5.3 Integrating Bicycle Facilities atRoundabouts

A roundabout is an intersection treatment that isbeing increasingly used in place of traffic signalsor stop signs. Vehicles are expected to enter theroundabout in order to navigate to their intendeddestination leg.

5.3.1 Single Lane Roundabout

At single-lane roundabouts, cyclists are expectedto share the roadway with motorists. A bicycle lane

Figure 5.9 – Bicycle Lane at a Single Lane Roundabout, No Bicycle Bypass

(Signs not directly related to the bicycle facilities have been omitted for clarity. See Table 4.3 for desired and suggestedminimum widths for bicycle lanes. As an option, directional arrows may be applied within the bicycle lane)




138

Source: FHWA (Figure 19)

just beyond the bicycle ramp up from the roadwayto the multi-use pathway to advise pedestrians thatbikes may be merging into the shared use pathway.

For sidewalks adjacent to the asphalt shared usepathway, designers should use concrete slabs orsome other contrasting material. This will highlightthe transition between the two facilities, anddiscourage cyclists from riding on the sidewalk.Practitioners have the option of installing a‘Dismount and Walk’ sign (Rb-70, Figure 4.93 ) atthe transition from shared pathway to sidewalk.However, the cyclist should have a clear view of the

Reserved Bicycle Lane sign so they realize they cantake the ramp down to the adjacent on-road bicyclelane, and hence continue without dismounting.Crossrides (typically unsignalized) should beprovided where the pathway intersects with theroadway. Wayfinding signs should be providedwhere a particular site warrants it.

Practitioners should refer to Section 4.2.1 for thedesign of a bicycle lane and Section 4.4.1 for thedesign of an in-boulevard shared use pathway and a

crossride. Figure 5.11 illustrates a typical plan viewof a bicycle facility at a multi-lane roundabout.

in the form of an in-boulevard shared use path,similar to the treatment described for multi-laneroundabouts in Section 5.3.2 . Cyclist access toand from the bypass facility should be provided bytapered ramps as shown in Figure 5.10 .

5.3.2 Multi-Lane Roundabouts

Where roundabouts have more than one circulatorylane, there is a greater risk of motor vehicles collidingwith cyclists than for single-lane roundabouts.Consequently, cyclists should be given a choicebetween sharing the roadway with motorists and

transitioning to an in-boulevard bypass facility.

The in-boulevard bypass will be a shared usepathway. This gives users the greatest flexibility toavoid conflicts, although where their paths cross,cyclists should yield to pedestrians. The bypassshould be surfaced with asphalt, have a desiredwidth of 4 metres (which may be reduced to 3metres under constrained conditions) and have ayellow directional dividing line.

The bicycle lane should transition to a sharedroadway in advance of the roundabout. The bicyclelane lines should be dashed approximately 30 to 45metres in advance of the end of the bicycle lane toindicate that the cyclist may merge into the adjacentlane.

Bicycle ramps should be provided at the end of thebicycle lane to allow access to the boulevard of theroadway. Designers may decide to taper these sothat a cyclist transitioning from the roadway to theshared pathway area is forced to slow down by being

deflected laterally as well as vertically. A detectablewarning surface should also be provided so thatvisual impaired pedestrians do not misinterpret theramp as a transition to a crosswalk. A sample rampconfiguration is shown in Figure 5.10. A bicyclestencil may be applied on the asphalt landing area

Figure 5.10 – Tapered Ramp Example







where motorists may be turning. Further guidance isgiven in Section 5.4.1.2 .

5.4.1.1 On-Road Con flicts

This configuration of conflict zones for motorists andcyclists includes intersections, interchange rampsand private entrances. Pavement markings may beapplied to provide guidance to cyclists and motoristsin conflict zones.

Several examples of intersection treatments andassociated signage are given in Section 4 . Inaddition to these, practitioners should give particular

5.4 Conflict Zones

A conflict zone is an area where different types ofroad user cross travel paths and, therefore, the riskof collisions is higher.

5.4.1 Motorist – Cyclist Conflicts

These conflicts generally occur where a cyclistis making a through movement and a motoristis turning. They can occur within the roadway,particularly through intersections and ramp entryand exit points, as discussed in Section 5.4.1.1 .

They can also occur when facilities that are outsideof the travelled way cross a leg of an intersection

Figure 5.11 – Bicycle Lane at a Multi-lane Roundabout with Bicycle Bypass

(Signs not directly related to the bicycle facilities have been omitted for clarity. See Table 4.3 for desired and suggestedminimum widths for bicycle lanes. As an option, directional arrows may be applied within the bicycle lane)




140


Elephant’s feet markings are reserved for crossridesat intersections. They should not be marked throughthe intersections themselves.

In all cases, the measure used should extendthrough the conflict zone, whether at an intersectionor elsewhere.

Additionally, practitioners may consider the useof green surface treatment or separation throughconflict zones to increase the visibility of the bicyclefacility. Refer to Section 5.5.1 for an exampledesign application.

Practitioners should also consider situations wherecyclists are travelling or waiting between activeor stationary traffic. Please refer to Table 4.3 forguidance where conventional bike lanes are splittingtwo travel lanes at an intersection, operating in acontraflow direction or alongside on-street parking.

attention to interchanges and ramp crossings sincethe speed differential between cyclists and motorvehicle traffic will be significant at these locations.

The measures available for marking a bicycle facilitythrough a conflict zone, in increasing order ofvisibility are:

• no treatment;

• bike stencils or chevrons at 1.5 m to 10 mspacing (with optional directional arrows toclarify cyclist trajectories);

• sharrows at 1.5 m to 15 m spacing as shownin Figure 5.12 ;

• dashed guide lines (with optional bikestencils or chevrons but not sharrows) asshown in Figures 5.13 and 5.14 ;



Figure 5.12 – Sharrow Markings in a Conflict Zone








Figure 5.13 – White Dashed Markings in a Conflict Zone


Figure 5.14 – White Dashed Bicycle Markings and Bicycle Stencils in a Conflict Zone

(See Table 4.3 for desired and suggested minimum widths for bicycle lanes. As an option, directional arrows may be

applied within the bicycle lane)




142

5.4.1.2 Crossin g Point Conflicts

Raised cycle tracks, in-boulevard facilities andseparated bike lanes are physically apart from thetravelled portion of the roadway. This may presentconflicts for both one-way and two-way facilitieswhere they cross the leg of an intersection.However, this section considers the bidirectionalcase since it covers the largest number of conflicts.

Cyclists may be less visible to drivers becausestreet furniture, utility infrastructure and otherobjects in the boulevard may obscure their view of

the cyclist. This is particularly true of in-boulevardfacilities.

Where a two-way facility crosses an intersection,drivers may not expect to encounter a cyclisttravelling in the opposite direction to motor vehiclesin the adjacent roadway. The issue is compoundedby the fact that two-way raised cycle tracks arephysically separate from the travelled portion of theroadway. Hence, cyclists using them are sometimesless visible to the driver.

Conflict points exist at roadway and drivewaycrossings, creating operational and safety problemsfor both cyclists and motorists using two-wayfacilities. The following issues may arise:

• Motorists entering or crossing the roadway(Driver A in Figure 5.15 ) from a cross-streetor driveway are looking for traffic comingfrom the left and may not notice cyclistsapproaching from the right.

• Motorists turning left from the main roadwayparallel to the raised cycle track onto thecross-street or driveway (Driver B in Figure5.16 ) are looking for traffic ahead and mayfail to notice cyclists travelling in the same

direction as them.

• Motorists turning right from the mainroadway parallel to the raised cycle trackonto the cross-street or driveway (Driver Cin Figure 5.17 ) may not expect a cyclist tobe crossing since the two-way raised cycletrack is physically separate from the travelledportion of the roadway and is sometimes lessvisible to the driver.

• Motorists stopped on a cross-street ordriveway may block cyclists travelling alongan in-boulevard facility, as shown in Figure

5.18 . Therefore, in-boulevard facilities maynot be suitable on routes where there area large number of side streets or drivewayentrance and exit points.

• At the end of a two-way raised cycle track,cyclists travelling in the opposite direction toadjacent motor vehicle traffic may continuealong the wrong side of the roadway,sometimes to access an in-boulevard facilityentrance point.

Practitioners should consider the followingmitigation measures:

• Where no signal control is present for raisedcycle track and in-boulevard crossings,signalized crossrides may be installed.Dedicated bicycle signals and separatephasing are required to accommodate two-way cyclist travel on one side of the roadway,whereas conventional traffic signals aresufficient for one-way operation. Crossridesshould not be used for two-way separatedbicycle lanes. Instead, a dedicated signalphase should be introduced within theintersection operation.






Figure 5.15 –Contraflow cyclist /

side-street driver

Figure 5.17With-flow cyclist /main-street driver

Figure 5.16 –Contraflow cyclist /

main-street driver

Figure 5.18 – Stoppedmotor vehicles may

block the path

Source: AASHTO, 2012

• Practitioners may wish to only apply two-way raised cycle tracks alongside one-waystreets. Vehicles in the roadway parallel tothe raised cycle track will only approach fromone direction, thus reducing the number ofconflicts with cyclists.

Figures 5.15 – 5.17 show how different conflictsituations may arise depending on the direction ofthe cyclist relative to traffic in the adjacent generaltraffic lane and the road from which the driver ismaking the turn. Where the practitioner believes thatany of these conflicts are particularly problematic,

the corresponding turning movement may berestricted.

• Improve sightlines by removing or relocatingroadside furniture and vegetation. Provideadequate space for cyclists either on or offthe roadway. Design intersection crossingsto minimize and clearly mark conflicts,and restrict parking in close proximity tointersections.

• Where the two-way facility crosses adriveway with high vehicle volumes, theTurning Vehicles Yield to Bicycles sign RB-37(TAC) may be installed at the practitioner’sdiscretion. The bicycle facility shown on thesign should match the facility provided on theground;

(The ladder markings indicate the crossing area and are not recommended as pavement markings)




144

5.4.2 Transit Stops

Where on-road bicycle facilities coincide with transitroutes, practitioners should carefully consider theon-road interaction of cyclists with buses, streetcarsand other transit vehicles. This is particularly criticalat transit stops where bus bays are present. In thissituation, buses must cross the curbside bicyclelane to access the bus bay. This area is indicatedby dashed lines as shown in Figure 5.19 . Unlikepermanent on-street parking, bus bays do notrequire buffers since no passengers will be alightingon the side of the bicycle lane.

Where no bus bay is provided, buses mustmanoeuvre up to the curb to minimize the gapacross which passengers must board or alight, thusencroaching on any curbside bicycle lane. Transitvehicles will decelerate and move laterally on theapproach to a stop, causing cyclists to also slowor change position. In such cases, practitionersmay consider incorporating the bicycle facility

into the transit platform as shown in Figures 5.20and 5.21 . Designers should take care to minimizeconflicts with passengers boarding, alighting orwaiting for transit. The bicycle facility should featurea ramp up to the platform to slow cyclists as theyapproach the conflict area. The paving materials forthe sidewalk should contrast with the asphalt raisedcycle track. It is also recommended that the areawhere passengers board and alight be surroundedby bright yellow tactile paving. This clearly definesthe conflict zone for all users, including those whoare visually impaired.

For in-boulevard facilities, practitioners shoulddesign the bicycle facility to pass behind transitstops. Where this is not feasible due to right-of-wayconstraints, the shelter should be located as farfrom the bicycle facility as possible to attract waitingtransit users away from the conflict area.






Credit: Google, 2013


Credit: Ci ty of Toronto

Figure 5.19 – Bicycle Lane Passing a Transit Stop


Figure 5.20 – Cycle Facility at Transit Stop(Roncesvalles Avenue, Toronto)

Figure 5.21 – Cycle Facility at Transit Stop(Sherbourne Street, Toronto)




146


using dashed white guide lines beginning 30 metresin advance of the ramp. Figure 5.22 provides aplan of this application. Practitioners may considerapplying alternative conflict zone markings withinthe bicycle lane at the ramp entrance. Please referto Section 5.4.1.1 for guidance on the optionsavailable.

treatment or pavement markings and with whitebicycle symbols. Please refer to Section 5.4.1.1 for guidance on the available treatments and Table4 of OTM Book 6 for guidance on the placement ofsigns directed at motor vehicles. These pavementmarkings reinforce to both cyclists and motoriststhat they may cross paths within the conflict zone atthe ramp entrance.

5.5 Integrating Bicycle Facilities atInterchanges and Ramp Crossings

5.5.1 Bicycle Lane Across Lower SpeedDiverging Ramp Facility

At a lower speed (less than or equal to 70 km/h)diverging ramp with a through curb lane, the bicyclelane should be carried across the ramp entrance

At a low-speed ramp where road right-of-waywidths do not allow for the implementation of a jughandle, a context specific design application maybe considered. Figure 5.23 illustrates an exampleplan view where the bicycle lane continuesadjacent to the curb lane across the ramp. Withinthe conflict zone across the entrance to the ramp,the bicycle lane may be marked with green surface

Figure 5.22 – Bicycle Lane across Lower Speed ( ≤ 70 km/h) Diverging Ramp Facility

(See Table 4.3 for desired and suggested minimum widths for bicycle lanes. As an option, directional arrows may be








Source: TAC Bikeway Traffic Control Guideli nes for Canada, 2012 (Figure 28, p. 84)

lane, at which point a Reserved Bicycle Lane signRb-84A (OTM) or RB-91 (TAC) should be installed.Figure 5.24 provides a plan showing one possibletreatment, namely the dashed guide lines. Pleaserefer to Section 5.4.1.1 for details of the optionsavailable and Table 4 of OTM Book 6 for guidance onthe placement of signs directed at motor vehicles.

5.5.2 Bicycle Lane Across Lower SpeedDiverging Ramp Facility with Parallel Lane

At a lower speed (less than or equal to 70 km/h)diverging ramp with a parallel exit curb lane, thebicycle lane should be located between the throughlane and the exit lane. The treatment should begina minimum of 15 metres in advance of the parallel

Figure 5.23 – Context Specific Example of Cyclist Crossing at Low-Speed On-Ramp with GreenSurface Treatment and Pavement Markings


Figure 5.24 – Bicycle Lane across Lower Speed ( ≤ 70 km/h) Diverging Ramp Facility with Parallel Lane





148


Lane Sign Rb-84A (OTM) or RB-91 (TAC) shouldbe placed on the far side of the merging ramp.Figure 5.25 provides a plan of this applicationwith dashed white guide lines. Practitioners mayconsider applying alternative conflict zone markingswithin the bicycle lane at the ramp entrance. Pleaserefer to Section 5.4.1.1 for details of the optionsavailable and Table 4 of OTM Book 6 for guidance onthe placement of signs directed at motor vehicles.

5.5.3 Bicycle Lane Across Lower SpeedMerging Ramp Facility

At a lower speed (less than or equal to 70km/h)merging ramp without an acceleration lane, thebicycle lane may be carried straight across usingconflict zone markings. A Reserved Bicycle LaneAhead sign WB-10 (TAC) and a yield sign Ra-2(OTM) should be placed on the ramp upstreamof the conflict point to warn motorists of theapproaching bicycle facility. A Reserved Bicycle

Figure 5.25 – Bicycle Lane across Lower Speed ( ≤ 70 km/h) Merging Ramp Facility







Figure 5.26 – Bicycle Lane across Lower Speed ( ≤ 70 km/h) Merging Ramp Facility withAcceleration Lane


to warn motorists of the upcoming cycling facility. AReserved Bicycle Lane Sign Rb-84A (OTM) or RB-91(TAC) may be placed on the far side of the mergingramp. Figure 5.26 provides a plan of the applicationwith dashed white guide lines. Practitioners mayconsider applying alternative conflict zone markingswithin the bicycle lane at the ramp entrance. Pleaserefer to Section 5.4.1.1 for details of the optionsavailable and Table 4 of OTM Book 6 for guidance onthe placement of signs directed at motor vehicles.

5.5.4 Bicycle Lane Across Lower SpeedMerging Ramp Facility with AccelerationLane

At a lower speed merging ramp with a parallelacceleration lane, the bicycle lane should be locatedbetween the through lane and the acceleration lane,and should be marked with two dashed white lines.A Bicycle Crossing Ahead sign WC-7 (TAC) and aReserved Bicycle Lane Ahead sign WB-10 (TAC)should be placed upstream of the acceleration lane





150


crossing the ramp facility. The green Bicycle RouteMarker M511 (OTM) should be installed to indicateto cyclists and motorists the route deviations nearthe ramp facility. A Bicycle Yield at High Speed Rampsign RB-40 (TAC) should also be installed near theintended crossing. Figure 5.27 illustrates a typicalplan view. Please refer to Table 4 of OTM Book 6for guidance on the placement of signs directed atmotor vehicles.

Practitioners should evaluate the characteristicsof the traffic flow on the roadway, in particular theamount of time cyclists will be required to wait for

a gap before crossing the ramp as indicated by themarkings and signage. Where ramps are frequentand wait times will be significant, alternate routesfor cyclists should be considered.

5.5.5 Bicycle Crossing of a High-SpeedDiverging Ramp

Due to the speed differential between motorvehicles on a high-speed (greater than 70km/h)diverging ramp and cyclists crossing the ramp,practitioners should pay special attention to suchlocations. Bicycle crossings should be locateddownstream from the diverge point of the ramp tocreate a shorter crossing distance and improve sightlines for both cyclists and motorists. A widenedshoulder may be provided near the crossing toallow cyclists to position themselves and wait for

a safe gap in traffic to cross. The Bicycle CrossingAhead sign WC-7 (TAC) and supplementary tabWC-7S (TAC) should be placed in advance of theramp to indicate to motorists that cyclists may be

Figure 5.27 – Bicycle Crossing at a High-Speed Diverging Ramp

(See Table 4.3 for desired and suggested minimum widths for bicycle lanes. As an option, directional arrows may beapplied within the bicycle lane. The cycling facility can be signed using either the green bike route marker or reserved

bicycle lane signage depending on the facility type across the interchange.)







the ramp facility. A yield sign Ra-2 (OTM) should alsobe installed at the intended crossing. Figure 5.28illustrates a typical plan view. Please refer to Table4 of OTM Book 6 for guidance on the placement ofsigns directed at motor vehicles.

Practitioners should evaluate the characteristicsof the traffic flow on the roadway, in particular theamount of time cyclists will be required to wait fora gap before crossing the ramp as indicated by themarkings and signage. Where ramps are frequentand wait times will be significant, alternate routesfor cyclists should be considered.

5.5.6 Bicycle Lane Jug Handle at DivergingRamp Facility

The Jug Handle is an optional treatment for adiverging ramp facility that may be applied whereright-of-way is available. It is an extension of thebicycle lane within the boulevard of the ramp. Itenables cyclists to cross as close to a right angleas possible at the ramp. The green Bicycle RouteMarker M511 (OTM) should be installed to indicateto cyclists and motorists that the route deviatesnear the ramp facility. The Bicycle Crossing Aheadsign WC-7 (TAC) and supplementary tab WC-7S

(TAC) should be placed in advance of the crossing toindicate to motorists that cyclists may be crossing

Figure 5.28 – Bicycle Lane Jug Handle at Diverging Ramp Facility

(See Table 4.3 for desired and suggested minimum widths for bicycle lanes. As an option, directional arrows may beapplied within the bicycle lane. The cycling facility can be signed using either the green bike route marker or reserved

bicycle lane signage depending on the facility type across the interchange.)




152

Figure 5.29 – Bicycle Crossing at a High-Speed Merging Ramp


should also be installed. A Bicycle Crossing Aheadsign WC-7 (TAC) and supplementary tab WC-7S(TAC) should be installed on the ramp warningmotorists of the bicycle crossing ahead. Figure 5.29illustrates a typical plan view. Please refer to Table 4of OTM Book 6 for guidance on the placement ofsigns directed at motor vehicles.

Practitioners should evaluate the characteristicsof the traffic flow on the roadway, in particular theamount of time cyclists will be required to wait fora gap before crossing the ramp as indicated by themarkings and signage. Where ramps are frequent

and wait times will be significant, alternate routesfor cyclists should be considered.

5.5.7 Bicycle Crossing at a High-Speed MergingRamp

Due to the speed differential between motorvehicles on a high-speed (greater than 70km/h)merging ramp and cyclists crossing the ramp,practitioners should pay special attention to suchlocations. Cyclists should be encouraged to crossnear the bullnose where the crossing distanceis shorter and there is improved task separationfor both cyclists and motorists. The green BicycleRoute Marker M511 (OTM) should be installed atthe bullnose to indicate to cyclists and motorists

that the route deviates near the ramp facility. ABicycle Yield at High Speed Ramp Sign (RB-40)







5.6 Integrating Bicycle Facilities at GradeSeparations

Cyclists frequently need to use a grade separationto cross major barriers such as highways andwaterways to reach key destinations. A bikewaymust sometimes continue over a bridge or througha tunnel to overcome these major obstacles.Existing structures may need to be modified tosafely integrate cyclists with other roadway users.A bicycle facility may be integrated into a gradeseparation structure by:

• Narrowing vehicular travel lanes, wherepractical and safe, to implement a bicyclelane or a signed bicycle route with a pavedshoulder; or

• Converting and widening the sidewalk into ashared use active transportation path, whereavailable right-of-way exists.

Practitioners should exercise good engineeringjudgement to design a bicycle facility appropriatefor the local conditions at a grade separation. The

design considerations include traffic volume,posted speed, roadway geometry and availableright-of-way width. Bicycle facility lane widthsshould adhere to the design domain outlinedwithin Sections 4.1 to 4.4 , and vehicular lanewidths should be in accordance with the 1999TAC Geometric Design Guide for Canadian Roads.If it is not possible to provide a facility that meetsat least the suggested minimum widths, alternateroutes that avoid the constrained location shouldbe considered. Refer to Section 5.2.2 for moreinformation on the reallocation of roadway space.

The design of new structures or the modification ofexisting bridges must comply with the standardsof the Canadian Highway Bridge Design Code(2002) .

When reconstructing bridge decks, practitionersshould consider the feasibility of introducing bicyclelanes. Section D.7.2.3 of the MTO GeometricDesign Standards for Ontario Highways provides guidance with regard to sidewalks, curbsand bicycle routes on bridges.

Table 5.1 and Figure 5.30 set out the minimumside clearances at bridges prescribed by MTO. Thisis the distance between the edge of the travelled

way and the adjacent curb or barrier. The sideclearance on the bridge deck should match theshoulders on the approaches, but should not be lessthan the minimum side clearance specified in Table5.1 . Practitioners should refer to Section 5.9.2 forguidance on fences, railings and barriers.

Section D.7.2.5 of the MTO Geometric DesignStandards for Ontario Highways also providesguidance with regard to roadways at underpasses:

• Where practicable, underpassing roadwaycross-sections should match that of theapproach roadway; and

• Horizontal clearances from the edge ofthe through travelled way to the face of anabutment or pier should meet or exceedminimum clear zone widths in the Ministry’sRoadside Safety Manual.

Practitioners may also consider the design andimplementation of a separated bicycle andpedestrian crossing outside the road right-of-way.OTM Book 15 – Pedestrian Crossing Facilities:Section 4 – Physically Separated Facilities provides guidance on a need and feasibilityassessment process for grade separated pedestriancrossings.




154

Source: MTO Geometric Design Standards for Ontario Highways – Revision Information Sheet, February 2002, Table D7-1

Table 5.1 – Minimum Side Clearances at Bridges






Source: MTO Geometric Design Standards for Ontario Highways – Revision Information Sheet, February 2002, Figure D.7-1

Figure 5.30 – Side Clearances at Bridges




156

5.7 Integrating Bicycle Facilities at RailwayCrossings

Railway tracks crossing roadways pose a hazard tocyclists for the following reasons:

• There may be surface elevation differencesbetween the roadway pavement, gradecrossing and rails;

• There may be gaps on either side of the railwhich can trap a bicycle wheel; and

• Rails can be slippery when wet.

Railway tracks can be especially difficult to crossfor cyclists if the railway is not perpendicular tothe bicycle facility. Crossings should be designedas close to a right angle as possible. In situationswhere the road and the rails cannot intersect ator near a 90 degree angle, the shoulder may bewidened in advance of the crossing. This allowscyclists to compensate by reducing their speed andpositioning themselves more appropriately.

If space permits, another option is to design a

bicycle lane jug handle at the skewed railwaycrossing which allows for the bicycle facility to bealigned perpendicular to the railway tracks. In both

cases an Automobiles and Motorcycles Prohibitedsign RB-89 (TAC) should be used. Figures 5.31 and5.32 illustrate a bicycle lane (with no jug handle) ata skewed railway crossing, with and without gatecontrol, respectively.

Where a bicycle lane crosses a skewed railway andthe road right-of-way is restricted, practitioners havethe option of providing a dashed bicycle lane linefor at least 15 metres in advance of the crossingto indicate to both motorists and cyclists that thecyclist may merge into the adjacent lane in order toposition themselves to cross the railway.

Figure 5.33 and 5.34 illustrate bicycle lanes witha jug handle at a skewed railway crossing with andwithout gate control, respectively. The ‘Automobilesand Motorcycles Prohibited’ sign (RB-89) should beinstalled on the jug handle as shown.

A bike box may be placed between the vehicle stopbar and the gate to allow cyclists to advance in frontof the motor vehicle queue and thereby cross therailway at close to a right angle once the gates are

raised. Please refer to Section 4.2.1.4 for furtherguidance regarding bike boxes.








Figure 5.31 – Bicycle Lane at Skewed Railway Crossing – Gate Controlled


Figure 5.32 – Bicycle Lane at Skewed Railway Crossing – Ungated Control(See Table 4.3 for desired and suggested minimum widths for bicycle lanes. As an option, directional arrows may be





158

Source: Based on TAC Bikeway Traffic Control Guidelines for C anada, 2012 (Figure 45, p. 96)

Source: Based on TAC Bikeway Traffic Control Guidelines for C anada, 2012 (Figure 43, p. 95)

Figure 5.33 – Bicycle Lane Jug Handle at Skewed Railway Crossing – Gate Controlled


Figure 5.34 – Bicycle Lane Jug Handle at Skewed Railway Crossing – Ungated Control







5.8 Bicycle Signals

Where bicycle facilities require cyclists to passthrough signalized intersections in order to continuealong a designated route, a crossride should beconsidered in place of a crosswalk. This allowscyclists to cross the road without dismounting. Seesection 5.8.1 for further details.

Practitioners should review the existing operationof that intersection and any additional conflicts thatwill be introduced by the proposed facilities. Whererequired, dedicated bicycle signal phases can be

provided, as outlined in section 5.8.2 .

5.8.1 Crossrides

At crosswalks, cyclists are required to dismountand cross as a pedestrian by walking their bicycle.Where a crossride is provided in place of acrosswalk, a cyclist may ride their bicycle withinthe crossing without dismounting. There are threecrossride configurations for practitioners to select:

• a separate crossing, with separate space forcyclists and pedestrians, as shown in Figure5.35 ;

• a full-sized combined crossing, withcyclist crossing areas on both sides of thepedestrian crossing, as shown in Figure5.36 ; or

• a reduced width combined crossing, asshown in Figure 5.37 .

Each of these crossing configurations may be usedat both signalized and unsignalized intersections,although the mixed crossing is more frequentlyapplicable in the latter case.

For all types of crossride, designers should take careto ensure that signal poles are positioned outside ofthe line of travel for cyclists. This will reduce the riskof collisions in poor visibility conditions. The same

Source: Based on TAC Bikeway Traffic Control Guidelines for Canada, 2012(Figure 39, p. 92)

5.8.1.2 Combine d Crossride

Alternatively, a combined crossride may beproposed with the cyclists crossing on either sideof the pedestrian area. Again, the configuration offacilities on the approach to the crossing shouldbe considered. In particular, care must be takento ensure that cyclists are not funnelled onto asidewalk. This layout may, therefore, be moreappropriate at midblock crossings.

applies to the pedestrian section of the crossing forvisually impaired users.

See sections 4.3.1.4 and 4.4.1.4 for applications inconjunction with raised cycle tracks and in-boulevardfacilities respectively, including appropriate signageand pavement markings on the approaches.

5.8.1.1 Separat e Crossride

This configuration provides separate space forcyclists and pedestrians. This is generally appliedwhere pedestrians and cyclists are segregated into

exclusive facilities on the approach to the crossing.The relative positioning of the cyclist and pedestriancrossing areas may be reversed depending on siteconditions.

Figure 5.35 – Separate Crossride




160

Source: MMM/ALTA, 2013Source: TAC Bikeway Traffic Control Guidelines for Canada, 2012(Figure 38, p. 91)

The fact that the mixed crossride is narrower thanthe combined crossride may assist practitioners inretrofitting existing crosswalks to also be used bycyclists. However, the width of any existing crossingshould not be used as the sole factor in determiningthe width of the proposed facility. Practitionersshould use their engineering judgement based onobservations of pedestrians crossing and projectedcyclist volumes. Following implementation,

practitioners should regularly monitor sites wheremixed crossrides have been implemented to ensuretheir safe operation. Mitigating steps, includingwidening or conversion to a separate or combinedcrossing should be taken where necessary.

5.8.1.4 MidBl ock Crossride

Cyclists and pedestrians using a raised cycle track orin-boulevard facility may want to reach a destinationor transit stop on the other side of the street.They may wish to continue their journey along anintersecting street or another designated facilitythat cannot be accessed without crossing the road.

The distances between signalized intersectionsmay be too far to reasonably expect cyclists orpedestrians to travel there, cross over and travelback. On sections where the nearest signalized

5.8.1.3 Mixed Cro ssride

For low volume crossings, particularly atunsignalized locations where practitioners do notanticipate queuing of pedestrians or cyclists, amixed crossride may be implemented. This allowscyclists and pedestrians to mix and, therefore, eachmay use the full width of the crossing. The result

is space-saving efficiencies where cyclist andpedestrian volumes are sufficiently low such thateach user can safely negotiate across the roadwaywithout impeding another user.

The operation will be similar to that of a “toucan”crossing in the United Kingdom. The standardwidth for a toucan is 4.0 metres. Under constrainedsite conditions and where cyclist and pedestrianvolumes are very low, UK practitioners havereduced this to a minimum width of 3.0 metres.However, this is the exception rather than therule. This width may be considered in Ontario,but only under constrained or retrofit conditionsand following an engineering review. As always,practitioners should fully document their rationalein case they are required to justify their decisions inthe future.

Figure 5.37 – Mixed CrossrideFigure 5.36 – Combined Crossride






intersection or pedestrian crossover is more than215 metres away, practitioners should consider theprovision of a midblock crossride. Particular attentionshould be paid where there is provision for a user groupon only one side of the road, or where there are populardestinations and connections on only one side.

For unsignalized midblock crossings on multi-laneroadways, a protected space in the centre of theroad, known as a ‘median refuge island’, may beprovided. This enables cyclists, pedestrians andother trail users to cross traffic approaching fromone direction at a time. The median island should

be a minimum of 2.0 metres wide to accommodateregular bicycles and pedestrians with pushchairs.Where feasible, a width of 3.0 metres should beprovided to accommodate bicycles with trailers.

Median refuge islands are not required for signalizedmidblock crossrides since pedestrians and cyclists

should be able to cross on their signal indication inone attempt. However, significant portions of manymajor roadways have existing medians. Installation of asignalized crossing may be warranted at such a location,however it may be impractical to remove the median.In such a circumstance, the median may be retained;however, pushbuttons should be installed on themedian island. This will allow any user who started tocross but was unable to reach the other side to wait onthe median and register their demand for their phase.

Where a midblock pedestrian signal is not provided,the pedestrian crossing pavement markings should

not be applied to avoid any confusion regarding right-of-way. Figure 5.38 is an example of a signalizedmidblock pedestrian crossing with a median refugeisland. While not the focus of OTM Book 18, off-roadmulti-use trails frequently cross roadways midblock.These crossings may also warrant the provision offormalized crossing facilities.


Figure 5.38 – MidBlock Crossride




162

5.8.2 Intersection Signals

At intersections where bicycle facilities areprovided, cyclists should be considered in thetiming of the traffic signal cycle and in the selection,sensitivity and placement of traffic detectiondevices. Practitioners should refer to OTM Book12 – Traffic S ignals for design guidance on bicyclesignal heads, signal timing and detector loops.Figures 5.39 and 5.40 show examples of a bicyclesignal head approved by the Manual for UniformTraffic Control Devi ces for Canad a (MUTCDC) .

Where a bicycle signal is traffic responsive, bicyclepresence should be conveyed to the signal bypassive bicycle detectors such as in-pavementloops, microwave or infrared detectors. Activedetection, such as pushbuttons, may also be used.

A detector loop embedded within the roadway maybe used to actuate the bicycle signal. Signage and

pavement markings should be applied to provideguidance to cyclists on their appropriate positioningover the detector loop. The Bicycle Stencil Sign(ID-24), shown in Figure 5.41 , should be installedin advance of an intersection with actuated bicyclesignals. This sign should be used in conjunction withthe Signal Loop Detector Stencil marking, shown inFigures 5.42 and 5.44 , which is placed over thedetector loop. This is equivalent to the marking thathas been implemented in some areas featuringthree dots in a line. However, the stencil marking ispreferred since its function is clearer to cyclists.

Where the signal actuation is through a pushbutton,a Signalized Intersection Crossing Sign Ra-14L orRa-14R (OTM), shown in Figure 5.43 , should beinstalled at the pushbutton. Figure 5.45 provides anexample of a cyclist pushbutton application.

Credit: sf.streetsblog.org Source: MUTCDC

Figure 5.39 – Example of a Bicycle Signal Head

Figure 5.40 – Standard

Bicycle Signal Head(Pending HTA Approval)






Source: TAC Bikeway Traffic ControlGuidelines, 2012 (Section 5.2.4, pg. 44)

Source: TAC Bikeway Traffic Control Guidelines,2012 (Section 7.4.6, pg . 61)

Credit: MMM, 2012 – Portland, ORCreidit: NACTO Urban Bikeway Design Guide, 2011 – Portland, OR

Ra-14L(R) (OTM)

(130 mm x 200 mm)

ID-24 (TAC)

(130 mm x 200 mm)

Figure 5.45 - Example of Cyclist PushbuttonFigure 5.44 - Example Pavement Marking forBicycle Actuation Location

Figure 5.41 – Bicycle SignalLoop Detector Stencil Sign

Figure 5.42 – Bicycle SignalLoop Detector Stencil

Pavement Marking

Figure 5.43 – SignalizedIntersection Crossing Sign




164

5.9 Other Design Considerations

5.9.1 Drainage Grates and Utility Covers

Drainage grates and utility covers within acyclist’s path may increase the risk to the cyclist.

Table 5.2 – Cyclist Considerations for Drainage Grates and Utility Covers

Table 5.2 identifies some of the potential concernsthat drainage grates and utility covers pose forcyclists.

Source: Based on information from the AASHTO Guide for Planning, Design and Operation of Bi cycle Facilities, 2012

Danger Solution

Parallel bar grate inlets

Credit: BikePorland.org, 2008

Parallel bar drainage

grate inlets and gapsaround catch basinframes can trap bicycletires causing loss ofsteering control.

Long term solution: Replace old style grateswith bicycle-safe and hydraulically efficientinlet grates.

Short term solution: Steel cross straps, orbars perpendicular to the parallel bars may bewelded to the grate at 100 mm intervals.Temporary solution: Place a temporarypavement marking in advance of the drainagegrate hazard or utility cover.

Depression in roadway

Credit: Unknown, 2011

Drainage grates andutility covers are notflush with the roadway

or bikeway surface.

Drainage grates and utility covers that areprotruding above the roadway surface can bemade flush by resurfacing the roadway.Recessed drainage grates and utility covers

can be brought up to the roadway level byinserting collars.

Slippery when wet

Credit: http://donwatcher.blogspot.com,2008

Drainage grates tendto be slippery whenwet and can cause lossof steering control.

The slippery quality of the metal surfacesof drainage grates and utility covers can bereduced by texturing.

Potholes

Source: Rainer Asphalt and Concrete, 2009

The areas arounddrainage grates andutility covers areprime locations for theformation of potholes.

Regularly maintaining the areas arounddrainage grates and utility covers, plusrepairing potholes and other pavement issueswill reduce bicycle safety concerns.






Figure 5.47 - Example of a Drainage Gratewith Herring Bone Openings

Figure 5.46 – Catch Basin Inletwithin the Curb Face

cyclists in an adjacent paved shoulder or bike lanein most situations. Where a designated bike routeis identified on a bridge or culvert, a minimum1.37 m high barrier fence or parapet wall / railingcombination should be provided, consistent withthe Canadian Highway Bridge Design Code (S6-06).

Fences, railings and barriers should not be a moresevere hazard than the object or condition fromwhich the cyclist is being protected. The roadside

infrastructure should have a smooth surface and aminimum 0.6 metres of lateral clearance from thebicycle facility.

5.9.2 Fences, Railings and Barriers

Fences, railings or barriers should be installedto protect cyclists from potential hazards alongthe bike route and contribute to a safer trafficenvironment. Some physical hazards that cyclistmay encounter include large vertical drops, steepslopes or fixed objects that are located closeproximity to the bicycle facility.

A protective fence, railing or barrier should beconsidered for on-road bicycle facilities adjacent toa slope of 30% or more or on a bridge or culvert.Current guidance in the Geometric DesignStandards for Ontario Highways for guide railimplementation is sufficient to accommodate

However, if grates or utility covers are placed within acyclist’s path, only bicycle-safe grates with openingsperpendicular or diagonal to the line of travel shouldbe used. If grates or utility covers are placed within acyclist’s path, a grate with herring bone openings ispreferred, as illustrated in Figure 5.47 . The designof these grates should be consistent with OPSD400.020. Alternatively, some municipalities haveinstalled grates with square perforated openings asper OSPD 400.100.

When a new roadway is designed, old style gratesand utility covers should not be used and, if possible,all grates and utility covers should be kept out of acyclist’s expected path. A preferable solution is theuse of curb inlets to completely eliminate a cyclist’sexposure to grate inlets. The installation of inletswithin the curb face (designed in accordance withOPSD 400.082) may be used as a design solutionas depicted in Figure 5.46 .




166

5.9.3 Lighting

In most cases, roadway lighting is sufficient tolight on-road bicycle facilities and provide adequatecyclist visibility at night. Lighting is especiallyimportant through underpasses or tunnels, as wellas at the intersection of an in-boulevard bicycle orshared use facility and a roadway. In these cases,pedestrian scale lighting is preferred since light isdistributed from the source outward in horizontaland vertical rays. Therefore, levels of horizontal andvertical illumination should be the main performancecriteria in determining the choice of a light source.

Horizontal illumination is measured at pavementlevel and enables cyclists to see the bikewaydirection, surface markings and any obstacles.Vertical illumination is measured 1.5 m above thepavement and makes vertical surfaces visible,such as road signs or approaching cyclists.Average illumination is the average lighting for allpoints on the roadway. Consistency in lighting,which is measured using the uniformity ratio (therelationship between the average and minimum

illumination), is also an important considerationin visibility. Designers should not exceed theuniformity ratio in order to avoid sharp differences

Table 5.3 – Illumination Levels for Bicycle Facilities

Source: Based on the TAC Guide for the Design of Roadway Lighting, 2006

in brightness which could interfere with a cyclist’sability to adjust to variations in illumination intensity.

At the intersection of an in-boulevard facility andan unlit street, the off-road bicycle facility must beilluminated at the prescribed level for a distanceof 25 metres on either side of the intersection toensure that cyclists are clearly visible to motorists.Transitional lighting must be provided on the streetto enable motorists to adjust to the prescribedillumination level at the intersection. The length ofthis transition zone depends on the design speed ofthe street.

Where an in-boulevard facility crosses a lit street,the off-road bicycle facility must be illuminated to thesame level as the street for a distance of 25 metreson either side of the intersection. The uniformityratio for this section must be at least equal to thatof the street.

Table 5.3 presents bikeway illumination levelsfor on-road bicycle facilities. Designers shouldrefer to the TAC Guide for the Design of

Roadway Lighting – Chapter 9: Roadways andInterchanges for further design guidance.

Level of Pedestrian or Cyclist Activity

MaintainedAverage

HorizontalIlluminance (lux)

MaximumHorizontal

Uniformity Ratio

MinimumMaintained

VerticalIlluminance (lux)

High (> 50 / hour) 20.0 4.0 : 1 10.0

Medium (10 to 50 / hour) 5.0 4.0 : 1 2.0

Low (< 10 / hour) 3.0 6.0 : 1 0.8






5.10 Temporary Conditions

When a roadway with a bicycle facility requiresthe development of a work zone for construction,maintenance or other temporary activities, everyeffort should be made to minimize disruption tothe bicycle facility. This means that closing the bikefacility and requiring cyclists to dismount shouldbe avoided wherever possible. Cyclists shouldbe encouraged to use general traffic lanes, andmotorists should be advised to share the road if abike facility cannot be maintained or relocated.

If a work zone in or adjacent to the cycling facilityis required, temporary condition signs should beused to guide cyclists through or around the workzone. The application of these signs requires thedevelopment of a Traffic Control Plan for the workzone. Practitioners should refer to OTM Book 7– Temporary Conditions for the fundamentalprinciples of developing a temporary work zone.

All signs used for temporary conditions for bicyclesshould be sized appropriately for interpretation by

both motorists and cyclists, and should conformto the TAC Bikeway Traffic Control Guidelinesfor Canada – 2 nd Edition (January 2012). Wheremotorists and cyclists share the same detour route,separate detour signage for bicycles is not required.However, where a roadway with a narrow lane widthis used on a bikeway detour or through a work zone,Share the Road signs Wc-19 (OTM), Shared UseLane Single File signs WC-20 (TAC) or Motor VehiclePassing Prohibited signs RB-33 (TAC) may be used.Refer to Section 4.1.1.2 for the application ofthese signs and their supplementary tabs. Evenwhen there is no formal cycling facility on roadwayswith significant cycling volumes, motorists andcyclists should be provided with positive guidanceto share the road and be extra courteous.

Tc-43 (OTM)

(450 mm x 450 mm)

Bicycle Lane Detour Markers

Bicycle Lane Detour Markers TC-70 (TAC) guidecyclists along a separate alternate route where workzone activities require the closure of a bicycle lane.These markers should be placed in advance of andat intersections to indicate to cyclists the directionof the detour route. A marker may be placedbetween intersections to confirm the detour routeto the cyclist. A Bicycle Detour Ends Marker TC-71(TAC) may be installed to indicate the conclusion ofthe detour.

Bicycle Lane Closed Sign

The Bicycle Lane Closed sign TC-68 (TAC) mustbe used to warn cyclists that the reserved bicyclelane is temporarily closed. Where a separate bicycledetour is provided, this sign should be accompaniedby the appropriate Bicycle Lane Detour Markers asdescribed below.

Figure 5.48 – Bicycle Lane Closed Sign




168

Grooved Pavement Sign

The Grooved Pavement sign Tc-19 (OTM) may beused to provide warning to road users, includingmotocyclists and cyclists, where the pavementhas been milled or grooved. This sign may beaccompanied by Distance Advisory Tab signs Tc-11tA or TC-3tA (IOTM) to indicate the distance orlength of the expected condition.

Figure 5.49 – Bicycle Lane Detour Markers

Tc-19 (OTM)

(600 mm x 600 mm)

Figure 5.50 – Grooved Pavement Sign

TC-3tA (OTM)

(300 mm x 600 mm)

Figure 5.51 – Distance Advisory Tab Signs

Tc-41 (OTM)

(450 mm x 450 mm)

Tc-41AR (OTM)

(450 mm x 450 mm)

Tc-41R (OTM)

(450 mm x 450 mm)

Tc-42 (OTM)

(450 mm x 450 mm)

Tc-11tA (OTM)

(300 mm x 600 mm)






6. Implementing a BikewayNetwork

The fundamentals outlined in Section 2 (BikewayNetwork Planning), Section 3 (Bicycle FacilityType Selection) and Section 4 (Bicycle FacilityDesign) are brought together in this chapter. Section6 presents a recommended implementationprocess, including management structure and thenecessary steps required to support the review,approval, design and implementation of bicyclefacilities on roadways throughout Ontario.

6.1 Five- Stage Implementation Process

The five-stage implementation process formsthe final step in the Bicycle Network Planning,Design and Implementation Process and outlines astrategy to support the successful implementationof a bicycle network. The process is a step-by-step mechanism to guide practitioners through afeasibility assessment of each bicycle route whichis recommended to be undertaken at the time

implementation is proposed.

A key step in this process will be the review ofMunicipal or Regional Master Plans and AT routepriorities which will need to be considered in detailwhen capital infrastructure projects are identifiedand scheduled. This should include municipaland regional asset management programs forreconstructing or resurfacing roads, as well as anyinvestigation of potential new road alignments.The objective is to ensure that municipal and

regional assets, particularly roads designated in theMaster Plan for future cycling routes, are given dueregard when planning, designing and budgetingfor road and infrastructure projects. This stepshould also apply to planning studies. Without thisstep, network opportunities could be lost and costefficiencies not realized.

Building upon this primary recommendation, Figure6.1 illustrates the implementation process toolfor guiding practitioners through the planning anddesign of bicycle facilities in Ontario.

The five part process is comprised of a step-by-stepmechanism to confirm feasibility of each cyclingroute proposed. It is intended to assist practitionersfrom various municipal and regional departmentsto work together by sharing information that willfacilitate the implementation of the proposedcycling route or network. Each part of the networkimplementation process is described in thefollowing sections.







6.1.1 Phase 1: Preliminary Review

The first step in the implementation processis to identify and communicate opportunities.Practitioners should monitor all Municipal andRegional capital works programs to identifyprojects that link existing corridors and cyclingroutes identified in a Master Plan document.Through this process, road construction projectscan be coordinated with the implementation of theproposed cycling facility.

If an opportunity arises to establish a new route

not previously identified in the Master Plan,practitioners should undertake Phase 1: PreliminaryReview.

The Preliminary Review should:

• Identify the jurisdictions involved in a project;

• Compare the timing of the project tothe short and long term implementationpriorities identified within the Region orMunicipality;

• Assess whether the nature of the projectpermits the implementation of the preferredcycling facility type in a cost-effectivemanner; and

• Inform the project lead and affecteddepartments whether or not a feasibilityassessment should be undertaken toconfirm the practicality and costs forimplementing the proposed cycling route aspart of the subject project.

A key aspect of this Preliminary Review iscommunication. Staff from various departmentswithin the Region and Municipality shoulddocument all upcoming projects that may involveor impact a cycling facility designated in a MasterPlan document. From this point forward, the

project lead, with appropriate technical support,would be expected to work through the remainingthree phases of the implementation process withvarious departments at the Region or Municipality,as appropriate.

6.1.2 Phase 2: Bicycle Facility Type Selection

If a cycling project is confirmed through thePreliminary Review Process (Phase 1), the projectlead should undertake a two-part feasibilityassessment.

Part one of the assessment consists of confirmingthe feasibility of the route based on a review ofthe submitted plans, supporting route selection,planning and design criteria, as well as other relevantinformation. The Bicycle Facility Type SelectionTool presented in Section 3 should serve as thebasis for this feasibility assessment, and shouldinclude:

• A collection or confirmation of currentroadway characteristics including AADTvolumes, collision data and commercialvehicle percentages; and

• A field check for both on and off-road routesegments to measure sight distances (ifapplicable), and to identify any other sitecharacteristics that may be considered forfacility type selection.

If site-specific issues, context sensitive conditions orthe outcome of the feasibility assessment concludethat a facility cannot be constructed in associationwith a particular road improvement project, other

nearby parallel routes should be closely examined atthis time to determine their suitabili ty.

If the route location is considered complex orthere are significant constraints, then as part ofthe feasibility assessment, the practitioner should




172

conduct a multi-disciplinary Active TransportationWorkshop. The focus of this workshop would beto review the proposed route and the design,then identify and evaluate alternative designs orenhancements. Through this rigorous technicalreview and assessment of the various designalternatives, the practitioner can determine whethera proposed bicycle route and associated facility typecan be accommodated on the roadway, or whetheran alternative route should be considered.

Once a suitable route and facility type have beenselected, part two of the feasibility assessmentcan be undertaken. This involves production of apreliminary functional design for the preferred onor off-road cycling facility segment. It also includesan estimate of the implementation costs, includingconstruction and signing.

6.1.3 Phase 3: Facility Design

Once approval has been obtained to implementthe cycling route segment, the required detaileddesign should be undertaken as outlined in Section

4 (Bicycle Facility Design) . This step is typicallycompleted as part of a primary capital roads projectsuch as a road widening. The third phase of theimplementation process should also include theconfirmation of potential partners (if any) and costsharing opportunities. The project should then bescheduled into the municipal capital road program,and a suitable budget should be allocated. The finalstep involves tendering the project, followed byconstruction and implementation.

It is also possible that following the detailed designstage, a decision may be made not to proceed withthe preferred facility type because of costs or otherconstraints that may arise through the detaileddesign process.

6.1.4 Phase 4: Monitoring Phase

Once cycling facilities have been constructed, theirdesign and use should be monitored to ensure thatthey function in the manner that was intended.When necessary, the facilities should also beupgraded and maintained to ensure continuedsafe use by cyclists. A monitoring team shouldalso check that the cycling facilities comply withcurrent design guidelines. This step will involve thecollection of data to assist in the monitoring step inthe process.

6.1.5 Update to the Municipality’s Official Plan

The fifth phase of the implementation processincludes updating the Regional or Municipal OfficialPlans (when the next update is scheduled) toaccount for changes in AT policy and network routes.






bicycles. They can also contribute to more orderlysidewalks and parking areas in terms of appearanceand flow. Factors that should be considered whenplanning and designing bicycle parking include:

• Type and Location of Bicycle Parking Area;

• Visibility and Security;

• Type of Bicycle Parking Facility;

• Weather Protection; and

• Clearance Considerations.

7.1.1 Type and Location of Bicycle Parking Area

There are two types of parking facilities that may berequired by cyclists: short-term and long-term.

Short-term parking is required where bicycles willbe left for short periods of time and, therefore, ahigh degree of convenience is required. It includesbicycle racks in an easily accessible location availablefor public use, sheltered or unsheltered with little orno surveillance. For example, Figure 7.1 illustratesa post and ring rack located in front of a business.Alternatively, bike racks may be installed in place ofon street parking as a retrofit option.

Credit: City of Saskatoon, 2011

7. Support Features

This section provides information on key supportfeatures which should be considered in the planningand design of bikeway networks. Sometimes theseprovisions are overlooked, but often they play a keyrole in providing facilities that complete the bikewaysystem and encourage bicycle use.

Sections 7.1 and 7.2 provide information regardingbicycle parking facilities as well as shower andchange rooms. These are often collectively referred

to as ‘end of trip facilities’. These components areimportant for the convenience and security ofcyclists at their destinations.

Section 7.3 provides information on rest areas forrecreational bicycle routes in rural areas and urbancentres. Rest areas are most important in locationswhere users tend to stop, such as lookouts,restaurants, water fountains, access points to trailsand along waterfront promenades.

Section 7.4 provides information regardingemergency and service vehicle access, whichis especially important for in-boulevard facilitieswhere access is often limited.

Also, practitioners may refer to Section 8.7 inSection 8 for information on the maintenance ofbicycle parking facilities.

7.1 Bicycle Parking Facilities

This is an essential component of a multi-

modal transportation system and necessary forencouraging more bicycle use. A lack of adequatebicycle parking supply can deter individuals fromconsidering cycling as their primary mode oftransportation.

Properly designed and strategically located bicycleparking facilities allow cyclists to securely lock their

Figure 7.1 – An Example of Short-Term Parking




174

Long-term parking is where bicycles will be left forlong periods of time and, therefore, a high degreeof security and weather protection is required.This often includes bicycle racks in an enclosed,secure area with controlled access, or bicyclelockers which are comprised of individual secureenclosures. Long-term bicycle parking facilitiesare often required at apartment and condominiumcomplexes, places of employment, schools andtransit hubs, such as the example shown in Figure7.2 .

In general, long term bicycle parking facilities shouldbe located near washrooms and change facilities ifpossible. Also a portion of the bicycle parking areashould be protected from the weather by means ofan overhang or covered walkway, a special cover,weatherproof outdoor bicycle lockers or an indoorstorage area. This is particularly important for long-term parking facilities. Figure 7.3 illustrates asheltered bicycle parking facility.

Credit: Cit y of Toronto


Bicycle parking areas should be located as closeas possible to the entrance of the building that thefacility is intended to serve. However, the parkingfacility should not be located where it may inhibitpedestrian flow in and out of the building. Inaddition, multiple buildings in an area should notbe served by one large parking facility but rather bysmaller parking areas. These smaller parking areasshould be placed in convenient locations at each

building, but not in a manner that would obstructutility access openings, garbage disposal bins,doorways or other building access points.

7.1.2 Visibility and Security

Fear of theft or vandalism is a common reason whyindividuals do not consider cycling as a mode oftransportation. To encourage cycling, visible bicycleparking areas and secure bike racks or lockers arerequired.

Bicycle parking areas should be easy to find,clearly visible and well lit. Otherwise they will beunderutilized. Theft and vandalism can be easilydiscouraged by placing facilities in a visible locationwith adequate lighting and surveillance. This isessential for the security of both bicycles and usersalike.

Figure 7.2 – An Example of Long-term Parking

Figure 7.3 – Sheltered Bicycle Parking






Bicycle racks and lockers should be securelymounted to the ground so that they cannot be easilylifted or moved from their position. In addition,bicycle racks and lockers should be designed toresist being cut by common hand tools such as boltand pipe cutters, wrenches and pry bars which caneasily be concealed in backpacks.

7.1.3 Type of Bicycle Parking Facility

Bike Racks

Bike racks can vary from a simple post and ring

stand for two bicycles, to more elaborate systemsfor multiple bicycles at destinations where use anddemand are high. Figures 7.4 to 7.6 illustrate a fewgood examples of bike racks. Practitioners shouldbe aware that some designs of rack are susceptibleto misuse which may decrease their capacity, suchas the example shown in Figure 7.7 .


Credit: McMaster University, 2012

Credit: MMM, 2013

Credit: MMM, 2013

Figure 7.4 – Post and Ring Stand

Figure 7.7 – Improper Use of Ribbon Bike Rack

Figure 7.6 – Cora Bike Rack

Figure 7.5 – Ring Rack




176

The purpose of a bike rack is to allow cyclists tosecurely and efficiently lock up their bicycle in aconvenient location, and to provide support for thebicycle frame itself.

In general, bike racks should:

• Be installed on a hard surface and be heldfirmly in place;

• Support the bicycle upright by its frame intwo places;

• Prevent the bicycle from tipping over;

• Be made of industrial grade materials orgalvanized steel;

• Enable the bicycle frame and one or bothwheels to be secured;

• Support bicycles that have a horizontal toptube instead of a diamond-shaped frame;

• Allow front-in parking so that a ‘U-lock’ maybe used to secure the front wheel and thedown tube of an upright bicycle;

• Allow back-in parking so that a ‘U-lock’ maybe used to secure the rear wheel and seattube of the bicycle;

• Be space efficient, allowing many bicycles tobe parked in a small area; and

• They should not be placed against a wall insuch a way as to restrict loading.

Figure 7.8 illustrates a poor example of bike rackdesign. The lack of support it offers to the frame ofa parked bicycle makes the ‘Bridge Rack’ a ‘wheelbender’. The rack is also placed against a wall insuch a way that it prevents double loading. Thus, itis a poor use of space.

Credit: Pirie Enterprises, 2007

Bike Lockers

Bike lockers differ from bike racks in that they areindividual storage units most often used for long-termparking. They are enclosed and weather-protected; ifthe lock is spring loaded, the mechanism should becovered by a plastic flap to protect it from snow andice. The lockers are operated by a controlled accesssystem and may be opened using a key, swipe cardor an electronic key pad located on the locker door.Systems set up for multiple users are often coin

operated or secured with personal locks.

Bike lockers require more space than bike racks.On average, two standard car parking spaces canaccommodate 10 individual bicycle locker spacesdepending on the model size. Bike lockers shouldbe installed on a level concrete surface 10 cm deep.They should be located close to a building entranceor on the first level of a parking garage.

In general, the bike locker design should:

• Be durable;

• Be able to withstand regular use and intenseweather conditions;

Figure 7.8 – The Bridge Rack is a Poor Example ofa Bike Rack






• Protect users and their bicycles from theftand vandalism; and

• Hold the bicycle upright and prevent it fromtipping over within the storage unit.

Figures 7.9 to 7.12 provide some examples ofdifferent bike locker designs.

Credit: http://cesavage.wordpress.com, 2011

Credit: www.winnepegtransit.com, 2012

Credit: www.wikimedia.org, 2012

Credit: John Luton - http://flickrhivemind.net, 2012

7.1.4 Clearance Considerations

Adequate clearance is required around racks andlockers to give cyclists room to manoeuvre, andto prevent conflicts with pedestrians or parkedvehicles. The following factors should be consideredfor bike racks and lockers, respectively:

• In areas where more than one bicycle rack isinstalled, they should be separated by aisles,much like a typical motor vehicle parkinglot. The width between aisles should be aminimum of 1.2 metres to provide enoughspace for one person to comfortably walkthrough with a bicycle.

Figure 7.9 – 12 Sided Polygon Bike Lockers

Figure 7.10 – Bike Locker Secured with PersonalLock

Figure 7.11 – Bike Lockers located in a ParkingGarage

Figure 7.12 – Mesh Panels Allow for Surveillanceof Locker Contents




178

• In high traffic areas such as transit hubs,where many users may retrieve theirbicycle at the same time, aisles should be aminimum of 1.75 metres wide.

• A 2.0-metre depth should be provided foreach row since conventional bicycles areapproximately 1.8 metres long.

• Large bicycle rack areas with a high turnoverof arriving and departing cyclists should havemore than one entrance to help facilitateuser flow.

• If possible, the rack area should be shelteredto protect the bicycles from the elements.

• Bicycle racks and lockers should be placedas close as possible to the entrance of thebuilding that the facility is intended to servewithout inhibiting flow in and out of thebuilding. Where possible bicycle parkingareas should be 10 to 15 metres from anentrance, and should be clearly visible alonga major building approach line.

• Bicycle racks designed for double loadingshould not be placed against walls or within4.0 metres of a fire hydrant, 2.5 metres of adriveway or 10 metres of an intersection. Inaddition, parking areas should never obstruct

emergency vehicle zones, utility accessopenings, bus loading areas, delivery zones,taxi zones, garbage disposal bins, doorwaysor other building access points.

• Bike lockers should have adequate doorclearance such that there is no conflict withother bike lockers, pedestrians or parkedvehicles.

• Where bike lockers are provided in a multi-storey parking garage, they should be locatedon the first level. Lockers should also be keptaway from sidewalks and areas with high

pedestrian traffic.

The following images ( Figures 7.13 to 7.15 )illustrate basic parking configurations andclearances for individual ‘stand’ type bicycle racksas recommended by Transport Canada. Commondesigns include the post and ring stand, wide andnarrow inverted ‘U’ stand, swerve stand or thelightning bolt stand.

For more guidance, refer to bike rack and locker

supplier design specifications for clearancerequirements of specific facility types, or for bicyclefacility parking guidelines as set out by the relevantmunicipality.






Source: Transport Canada, 2012

Source: Transport Canada, 2012

Figure 7.13 – Basic Dimensions for the One Bicycle per Stand Perpendicular Configuration

Figure 7.14 – Two Partially Overlapping Rows of Perpendicular Parked Bicycles




180

7.2 Other End-of-Trip Facilities

In addition to secure bicycle parking, non-residentialdevelopments can offer a variety of other end-of-tripfacilities such as bike rooms with repair stations aswell as shower and change facilities.

7.2.1 Bike Rooms

An indoor bike room is a type of long-term bicycleparking facility. Bike racks are either securelymounted to the floor or to the walls. Secure entry

door systems may provide an additional level ofprotection. Figure 7.16 illustrates an example ofa bike room. Some bike rooms may also containself-serve bicycle repair and maintenance stationswith such items as a bike stand, air pump and basictools. See Figure 7.17 .

Source: Based on Transport Canada guidance, 2012

Credit: http://nycbikestorage.blogspot.ca, 2011

Figure 7.15 – Basic Dimensions for the Two Bicycles per Stand Perpendicular Configuration

Figure 7.16 – Bike Room






Credit: alibada.com, 2012

Credit: http://bikedenton.wordpress.com, 2011

7.3 Rest Areas

Rest areas should be strategically located alongroutes where users are expected to stop, such aslookouts, restaurants, access points to trails andalong waterfront promenades. Rest areas can beprovided for both rural and urban recreational bicycle

routes.

In general, rest areas should be provided at leastevery five kilometres on popular rural recreationalroutes, or at major intersections and gatheringplaces near bicycle facilities. In urban centres, restareas should be provided more frequently. In areaswhere demand is high such as along popular urbantrails, waterfront promenades or trails near seniors’centres, locations for sitting and resting should bemore closely spaced, typically at intervals of 100 to250 m.

Rest areas may contain a variety of amenitiessuch as tables, washrooms, waste receptaclesand parking for automobiles and bicycles as wellas bicycle route signage. The purpose, size andlocation of the rest area govern the amenities thatare provided.

7.2.2 Showers and Change Rooms

These facilities can be a strong incentive toencourage bicycle use, and are particularlyimportant for individuals who commute to work orschool. The number of shower and changing stallsprovided should be based on expected usage or

on the amount of long-term bicycle parking beingprovided. Showers and change rooms should belocated adjacent to bicycle parking facilities or inclose proximity to the building entrance for easyaccess by users. Change rooms may contain daylockers for personal items and cycling equipmentstorage. Figure 7.18 illustrates an example of achange room with locker facilities. In addition tolockers and benches, stalls should be provided forprivacy.

Figure 7.18 – An Example of a Change RoomFigure 7.17 – Bike Repair Station




182

Credit: MMM, 2012

the most economical and functional member ofthe bollard family since they are very inexpensiveand can be quickly taken down by an emergencyworkers. They are also are safer for trail users sincetheir flexibility allows them to absorb energy in theevent of a collision.

Another approach for keeping unauthorized motorvehicles off the bike path or trail, while still allowingemergency access, is to split the facility entranceinto two narrower one-way entrance paths. A lowconcrete median or bushes between the paths willdiscourage entry by unauthorized vehicles, however

emergency vehicles can drive over them in anemergency situation.

Offset gates and swing gates (also known as ‘P’gates) are not recommended. Most cyclists havedifficulty getting through offset gates withoutclipping their handle bars, and will often ride aroundthe barrier to access the path. It is also more difficultto manoeuvre through these gates if a cyclist ispulling a trailer. Furthermore when trail user volumesare high, congestion can result on both sides of

the offset gates as cyclists wait for the opposingdirection to clear. This can lead to cyclists becomingfrustrated and riding around the gates entirely.Figure 7.19 below shows a preferred solution.

7.4 Emergency and Service Vehicle Access

Additional consideration should be given toemergency access opportunities for physicallyseparated bicycle lanes, active transportation pathsand off-road bicycle facilities. These facility typesrequire special provisions to permit access toauthorized emergency and service vehicles, whileprohibiting other motorized vehicles.

The challenge lies in implementing barriers whichallow the free flow of permitted path users andaccess for authorized emergency and service

vehicles while blocking unauthorized motorvehicles. Some options that may be considered forthese circumstances include:

• Removable or Retractable Bollards;

• Flex Bollards; and

• Split Path Entrances.

Removable bollards are a simple and economicaloption. Up to three bollards are typically placed at

the access point in order to create an even numberof “lanes” for users to follow as they pass throughthe barrier. Though the removable bollard systemprovides flexible access for service and emergencycrews, the bollards can be difficult to maintain as themetal sleeves placed below grade can be damagedby equipment and can become jammed with graveland debris from the path or trail. In an emergencysituation this could prevent service vehicles fromaccessing the path.

Retractable bollards are much more expensive thanremovable bollards, however they are more reliableand are not as prone to damage. These benefitsmay be combined by using bollards that are bothremovable and retractable. In this situation thebollards are operated by an attendant manually;upon unlocking the bollard, the attendant can raiseor lower it as required. Flex bollards are perhaps

Figure 7.19 – Bollards on Finch Corridor, Toronto






8. Maintenance Strategiesfor Bicycle Facilities

This section outlines the key maintenanceconsiderations for bicycle facilities. In order tosupport the growth in trips by bike, municipalitiesmust be able to assure cyclists of infrastructure thatis:

• Safe – without surface defects that may slowcyclists or cause them to lose control;

• Comfortable – with a smooth riding surface,preferably providing good skid resistance.The riding quality of off-road facilities shouldbe at least as good as that of an adjacentroad; and

• Aesthetically acceptable.

From the municipality’s perspective, bike facilitiesshould fulfil all legal requirements and mitigateliability risks, as well as being durable and easy tomaintain.

When scheduling maintenance operations,municipalities should prioritize ‘spines’: long primaryroutes that have high connectivity with otherfacilities. These should benefit from year-roundcleaning and snow removal, as well as surfacingworks as and when required. The same shouldapply to Active Transportation paths that form keyconnections or links.

Bicycles are lighter than other vehicles and

therefore cause much less wear on road surfaces;consequently the impact of those cyclists on overallmaintenance costs is less than it would be if theywere driving motor vehicles instead. The typicallocation of bike lanes also protects catch basinsand the vulnerable edges of the pavement from

exposure to heavy loads, extending the life of thatpart of the roadway.

Monitoring is critical to effective networkmanagement. Regular inspections should beundertaken to identify defects and take remedialaction within a reasonable timeframe. In many cases,monitoring of bike facilities can be incorporated intothe existing roadway inspection regime.

Many maintenance issues can be mitigatedat the design stage. It is recommended thata maintenance audit be undertaken prior to

implementation, highlighting potential issues andmaking recommendations to the designer.

Through the Municipal Act and the Occupiers’Liability Act, road authorities owe a duty of careto reasonable persons using their facilities toprovide for safe travel. This includes maintainingthe infrastructure in a reasonably safe condition.Municipalities will ordinarily develop QualityStandards or Levels of Service for the maintenanceof facilities under their control, and it is expectedthat this same consideration will be provided forbicycle facilities.

This section of Book 18 is not intended to be aquality standard or level of service. The materialpresented herein is to draw the reader’s attentionto the fact that the planning and design of bicyclefacilities must be supported after implementation bya maintenance program that is in keeping with goodpractice for Ontario municipalities. A number of keymaintenance issues are identified, but the list is notmeant to be all inclusive.

Throughout this section, recommendedmaintenance tasks for practitioners are given inchecklist form for ease of application.




184

who may be able to safely negotiate surfaceimperfections that are hazardous for cyclists.

Potential causes of defects include tree roots,freeze-thaw processes and deterioration of thesurface due to age or excessive wear, as well asdifferential settlement of the subsoil. In all cases,the cause of the defect should be identified andaddressed so that recurrence of the defect can bemitigated.

Pavement defects can include:

• Bumps or depressions;

• Cracking;

• Potholes; and

• Pavement drop-offs at shoulders.

Credit: Ottawa Cycling Plan

8.1 Sweeping

A range of debris may accumulate on surfaces usedby cyclists including gravel, garbage, glass, sand andwet leaves. Bicycles are more affected by surfaceconditions than other vehicles, and are more likelyto lose control or suffer a punctured tire as a resultof unexpected objects in their line of travel.

Tasks:

• Perform regular roadway cleaning withmechanical sweepers to remove debris;

• Adjust the frequency of sweeping whererequired by heavy wind, seasonal changes orconstruction activities;

• Clear sand and other debris at the beginningof the spring season;

• Pay attention to road edges and pavedshoulders to avoid debris build up there;

• Provide garbage receptacles at regularintervals along in-boulevard facilities,particularly where pedestrian volumes arehigh;

• Incorporate visual monitoring of bike lanesand cycle tracks located within the right-of-way into existing road patrols. Clear minordebris and any small, dead animals. Wherehazardous conditions exist and cannot beaddressed during the patrol, erect temporarysignage if required to alert cyclists.

• Avoid sweeping debris from the roadwayonto Active Transportation paths and

sidewalks (and vice versa).

8.2 Surface Repairs

Due to the narrow width of their wheels, cyclistsare more vulnerable to pavement defects than anyother type of road user. This includes pedestrians,

Figure 8.1 – An Example of Seasonal SweepingRequirements






8.2.1 Bumps and Depressions

Bumps and depressions, if significant enough topose a hazard to cyclists, generally require theoffending materials to be broken out and reset. Thephysical extent of such work should be carefullyassessed to avoid the development of new defectsat the boundary of the construction area with theexisting pavement. Where possible, such measuresshould be coordinated with municipal resurfacingschedules. That way the entire pavement area canbe refreshed either at the same time as the remedialworks, or shortly after temporary works, and before

new defects can form.

8.2.2 Cracking

There are three principal types of cracking:longitudinal, transverse and alligator.

On paved shoulders, cracking typically occursperpendicular to the path of bicycle travel.Longitudinal cracking often arises along the line

Credit: MMM Group, 2011

between the outside edge of the motor vehicletravel path and the inside edge of the pavedshoulder. Cracks can also form around storm sewergrates and maintenance hole covers.

Crack repair brings several benefits:

• It eliminates or minimizes the intrusion ofwater into the pavement structure, reducingthe occurrence of freeze-thaw processes;

• It helps prevent the loss of aggregate fromthe edges of the cracks; and

• It reduces the rate at which the pavementdeteriorates, preventing premature failure ofthe pavement structure.

Crack sealing should be appropriate for the type,depth and width of crack. Typical crack sealant used

for motor vehicle lanes may not be appropriatefor exclusive bicycle facilities. Crack sealing is themost common way to achieve this, although itseffectiveness is limited:

• where crack widths are less than 3 mm;

• in cases of alligator cracking;Credit: The Baltimore Sun, 2010

Figure 8.2 – Poorly Maintained Bicycle Lane

Figure 8.3 – Well Maintained Bicycle Facility




186

• for moderately to severely cuppedtransverse cracks;

• where there are closely spaced multiple ortransverse cracks less than 10 metres apart,unless a decision has been made to rout andseal the pavement and there are only a fewof these cracks; and

• for longitudinal cracks within 150 mm of thepavement edge. In this case, the cracks canbe sealed without routing.

Tasks:

• Seal cracks in accordance with the timelinesoutlined in the local road authority qualitystandard, or at the earliest opportunity,unless the aforementioned limitations apply;

• For other situations, evaluate the suitabilityof crack filling as an alternative;

• Where crack filling is not appropriate orthe surface condition is particularly poor,resurfacing should be considered. However,

it should cover a sufficiently large area toavoid negating the benefits by introducingnew defects where the freshly-laid surfacemeets the surrounding pavement; and

• During re-surfacing projects, repave theshoulder of roadways designated as bikeroutes at the same time as the remainderof the travel lanes to ensure a seamlesstransition between the roadway and thepaved shoulder.

The following constraints should be considered forall resurfacing activities:

• Chip sealed surfaces are acceptable forcyclists. After some wear by motor vehicles,the surface can result in a suitable hard andrelatively smooth surface for cycling. This isespecially true when a finer granular materialis used in the top coat application. Repair andmaintenance activities should be carried outregularly in order to retain a smooth profile;

• Treatment selection decisions should factorin the type and extent of the distortion as wellas any scheduled resurfacing, rehabilitation orupgrade programs;

• Winter temperatures and their impact onconstruction materials and processes maylimit the range of treatment options availablein the short term;

• Mitigating measures should be appliedquickly to reduce the safety risks to cyclistsdue to surface distortions; and

• Where temporary measures are applied,permanent and durable solutions should beimplemented as soon as is practicable.

8.2.3 Potholes

The interaction between water and traffic can leadto pothole formation. Inadequate drainage can resultin standing water working its way into the roadsurface through tiny cracks. This seepage weakensthe subsoil and leaves it susceptible to fatigue asit flexes under the weight of passing vehicles. Asthe surface fails, more water enters and the defectbecomes progressively worse.






Credit: Ottawa Cycling Plan, 2008

to cyclists using the shoulder since they may losecontrol and fall, possibly into the travelled lane, if

they slip off the edge. This is particularly dangerousif the soil erosion has migrated beneath the pavedshoulder causing parts of it to fail.

• The integrity of patches should be checkedas part of roadway inspections until fullresurfacing can be undertaken.

8.2.4 Pavement Drop-offs At Shoulders

Edge drop-offs occur where the vertical distancebetween the pavement surface and the adjacentmaterial is too great. This can result from a lack ofconsideration of vertical alignments at the design orconstruction stages, or from erosion of the surfacenext to the roadway. The drop can be hazardous

Bicyles are light compared to other vehicles,which reduces the likelihood of potholes formingin reserved bicycle lanes compared to generalpurpose lanes. However, where cyclists share theroad with heavier vehicles, at intersections forexample, potholes can occur within a cyclist’s lineof travel.

Riding over a pothole poses a significant risk tocyclists. Rims can be bent, tires can be puncturedand cyclists can lose control and fall, potentially intothe path of motorized traffic. If there is debris orsnow on the roads, potholes may be hidden from

view, increasing the risk that cyclists may ride overthem.

Tasks:

• As part of general roadway inspections,special attention should be paid to potholesin bicycle facilities and on adjacent lanes;

• Use temporary hazard markers, as shownin Figure 8.4 , to identify potholes and warncyclists to avoid them;

• Patch potholes in accordance withthe timelines outlined in the local roadauthority quality standard, or at the earliestopportunity to prevent further deterioration;

• To patch potholes, use a mixture of driedaggregate with fluxed or cutback bitumen. Asuitable bitumen emulsion may be used forthe binder. Care should be taken to ensurethat the patch is flush with the surroundingroadway surface, and that there are no

gaps for water to seep around the edge ofthe patch which could cause the pothole toreform; and

Figure 8.4 – Pothole Identified by Hazard Marker




188

The edge drop will make it difficult for cyclists tore-enter the bicycle lane since the side of the tirewill rub along the vertical edge of the pavement,potentially causing the cyclist to fall. The cyclistmay maintain their balance by providing excessivesteering input to overcome the rubbing or friction.However, when the friction diminishes, the cyclistmay be propelled across the bicycle lane and intothe vehicle lane, or off the other side of the trail.Please refer to section 4.1.2 for more informationon paved shoulders.

Tasks:

• Inspect all paved shoulders for edge drop-offs as part of regular roadway inspections;and

• When roads are constructed or resurfaced,ensure that the gravel adjacent to the pavedshoulder is well compacted and is flush withthe surface of the asphalt.

8.3 Vegetation Management

While adding aesthetic value to bicycle facilities,trees, bushes and fallen leaves also presentmaintenance challenges. Roots may causesurfaces to break up, leaves may block drainagegrates and foliage may reduce visibility. Protrudingbranches, thorns or nettles can catch passingcyclists. The prevalence of vegetation along ActiveTransportation paths makes maintenance on thoseroutes particularly important.

Tasks:

• Install vertical steel plates or other rootbarriers;

• Remove or cut back any shrubbery, longgrass, brush or vegetation encroaching onthe bicycle facility or blocking sight lines; and

• Undertake inspections and take preventativemeasures to ensure that vegetation doesnot obscure road signs. Any encroachmentshould be cleared immediately. Removal ofobstructions at roadway intersections andtrail crossings should be prioritized.

8.4 Maintenance of Signage and PavementMarkings

As is the case with all vehicles, cyclists rely onpavement markings and signage for guidance anddirection; however, in some respects these aremore critical for cyclists. Signage allows them tofind their way through the bike facility network, anda missing or ineffective sign, particularly on an ActiveTransportation path, can cause a cyclist to lose theirway. Since many bike facilities are delineated bypavement markings, keeping them visible to all roadusers is vital to the safety of cyclists.

Pavement markings can be obscured by snow inthe winter. They can also become worn due toenvironmental factors, traffic and snow removal

operations. Signage can become discoloured andlose reflectivity. In addition, it is sometimes subjectto theft, damage and vandalism.

Tasks:

• For newly paved surfaces, apply pavementmarkings as soon as is practicable,

• Include pavement markings and signagein regular roadway inspections to ensurethey are kept in good condition. Maintain an

inventory of signs for all bicycle facilities tocheck that they are all in place;

• Regularly refresh pavement markings withthe most durable paint available or replacethem with permanent materials to ensurevisibility and clarity for all road users at anytime of year; and






• Replace signage that is discoloured,damaged or has lost reflectivity.

8.5 Drainage Improvements

Keeping cycling surfaces clear of water is necessaryfor safe riding conditions. This is particularlyimportant in Ontario where puddle formation inwinter conditions can lead to slippery surfaces, aswell as accelerating the freeze-thaw processes thatcause pavement to break down. Standing watercan also obscure debris or surface defects that maydamage bikes or cause cyclists to lose control.

Catch basin grates can become blocked due to thebuildup of sediment and debris such as wet leaves.Water can also collect due to inadequate cross-slopes. The drainage of adjacent general purposelanes should be reviewed at the same time asthat for the cycling facility. Aside from being costeffective, this will also address any splashing intothe bike facility that may occur due to standingwater in the roadway.

Tasks:

• Clean drainage facilities including catch basingrates and gutters; and

• Adjust the maintenance frequency basedon need, the season and the amount ofvegetation near the bicycle facility.

Credit: John Luton (flickr), 2006

Figure 8.5 – Poor Drainage Causes Puddling inBike Lane

8.6 Winter Maintenance

Although cycling traffic tends to decrease in thewinter, there are many people who cycle year-round.

In many cases, they do not own or have access to amotor vehicle, and cycling is their primary mode oftravel.

Apart from being difficult to ride on, snow and icecan obscure roadway defects, pavement markingsand damaging debris. For bike lanes and cycletracks, it is not acceptable to simply install ‘NoWinter Maintenance’ signs, so practitioners shouldconsider liability issues. As such, snow clearingoperations should include all designated bicyclefacilities on or adjacent to the roadway.

Paved shoulders and Active Transportation paths,particularly those used by cyclists as networkconnections, should be included in snow clearingoperations.

Tasks:

• Clear on-road bicycle facilities of snowat the same time as vehicle travel lanes,prioritizing long primary routes that have

high connectivity with other facilities andconstitute a spine of the cycling network;

• If icy conditions are found to occur,treat affected areas in accordance withthe timelines outlined in the local roadauthority quality standard, or at the earliestopportunity;




190

• Use small articulated tractors for physicallyseparated bicycle lanes and ActiveTransportation paths. They are more versatileand quieter than conventional snow plows;

• Reduce or remove snow banks wherethey restrict travel widths or sight lines forcyclists;

• Where abrasives are used, sweep on-road bicycle facilities in accordance withthe timelines outlined in the local roadauthority quality standard, or at the earliestopportunity, especially after major stormevents;

• Clear excess snow that has accumulatedadjacent to outdoor bike racks or lockers; and

• Ensure that crossrides are free from snowand are distinguishable from adjacentpedestrian-only facilities.

Credit: Hyedie, 2011 (flickr)

Figure 8.6 – Bicycle Lane is Not Cleared of Snow

Practitioners should consider the following:

• Snow plowing is the preferred method ofsnow clearing for on-road bicycle facilitiesthat are not physically separated;

• Plowed snow should be stored in such a wayso as not to block the on-road bicycle facilityor sidewalk. The boulevard between theroadway and an Active Transportation path isused for this purpose. In the case of a cycletrack, snow is stored on the splash stripbetween the cycle facility and the roadway;

• Snow melt should drain away from bicycleand pedestrian facilities so that freeze-thawcycles do not result in ice formation;

• Abrasives and de-icing agents should be usedjudiciously since they can damage bicycles,

clothing and the environment;

• If a physically separated facility or ActiveTransportation path is too narrow for smallarticulated tractors, then manual snowshovelling is necessary; and

• If an Active Transportation path is planned tobe open year round, the authority responsiblefor the path should apply reasonablemaintenance guidelines.

Credit: copenhagenize.com, 2010

Figure 8.7 – Bicycle Facility is Cleared of Snow






8.7 Parking Facilities

Increasing numbers of utilitarian trips to shoppingcentres and other public places are being madeby bike and require parking facilities. Also, as thecycling and public transit networks become moreintegrated, commuters will use their bikes forpart of their commute, and lock them up in publicbicycle parking facilities to continue their journeyby bus, subway, LRT or train. Consequently, it isincreasingly important to maximize the number ofbicycle parking facilities available, and to keep themin good working order.

Vandalism or errant motor vehicles may causedamage to bicycle parking facilities. Environmentalconditions can also affect functionality as a resultof corrosion. Utilization of parking can be furtherreduced by the presence of abandoned bikes thateffectively take the racks they occupy out of service.

Tasks:

• Inspect parking facilities and undertake on-site repairs where it is practicable and safe todo so;

• Replace facilities where repair is not feasibleor cost-effective. Parking facilities shouldbe installed such that a typical bicycle canbe easily locked to each facility and thata minimum clearance of 0.6 metres isavailable from the end of the bicycle to thenearest curb edge; and

• Where parking is being occupied by a bicyclethat is damaged or rusty, it should be taggedfor removal. If the bike has not been takenaway within the municipality’s designatedtimeframe, it should be removed. Bikeswhich are severely damaged or stripped ofparts should be removed without notice.

Refer to Section 7.1 of Section 7 for furtherinformation on bicycle parking facilities.




192






Appendix A: Glossary

Active TransportationActive transportation is any form of transportationthat is “human-powered” such as cycling, walking,running, hiking, in-line skating, skateboarding etc.

Active Transportation PathAn active transportation path, also referred to asan in-boulevard multi-use trail or path, is a cyclingfacility physically separated from motor vehicletraffic by a hard surfaced splash pad or by a grass

strip often referred to as part of a “boulevard” or“verge” within the roadway or highway right-of-way.An active transportation path is intended for non-motorized travel modes such as walking and cycling,and is typically located in place of, or adjacent to, asidewalk in the boulevard of a road right-of-way.

Application HeuristicsApplication heuristics are knowledge basedrules developed to aid practitioners. A set of 13application heuristics have been developed to aidpractitioners in Step 2 of the cycling facility typeselection process outlined in Chapter 4. Theseheuristics link specific site conditions to appropriatefacility types and supplementary design features.

Average Daily Traffic, ADT [3]

The total volume of traffic during a given timeperiod, in whole days, greater than one day and lessthan one year, divided by the number of days in thattime period.

Average Annual Daily Traffic, AADT [3]

The average, 24 hour, two-way traffic on a roadwayfor the period from January 1 st to December 31 st

within a single calendar year.

BicycleA bicycle has only two tandem wheels, propelledsolely by human power, upon which typically one or

two persons may travel. The Highway Traffic Act definition of a bicycle includes “a tricycle, a unicycleand a power-assisted bicycle, but does not include amotor-assisted bicycle.”

Bicycle Detection [5]

Bicycle detection at actuated traffic signals isachieved through the use of inductive in-pavementloops, or a variety of other technologies includingvideo, infrared, microwave and ultrasonic detectors.

Bicycle Detector LoopsBicycle detector loops are used to detect the

presence of bicycles at actuated traffic signals.Bicycle detection is usually achieved through the useof in-pavement quadrupole or diagonal quadrupoleinductive loops because they are bicycle-sensitiveover their entire area. Pavement markings shouldbe used to indicate to cyclists where they shouldposition their bicycles in order to be detected.

Bicycle FacilityA bicycle facility is a general term used to denotefacilities designed for use by cyclists. Some examplesof cycling facilities are: signed only bike routes,signed bike routes with paved shoulders, bicyclelanes, separated bicycle lanes, cycle tracks, activetransportation paths and off-road multi-use trails.

Bicycle Lane [1]

A bicycle lane is a portion of a roadway whichhas been designated by pavement markings andsignage for the exclusive use of cyclists.

Bicycle Network [1]

A bicycle network is a system of bikeways

designated through signing by the jurisdictionhaving authority. This system may include sharedroadways, signed only bike routes, signed bikeroutes with paved shoulders, bicycle lanes,separated bicycle lanes, cycle tracks, activetransportation paths, off-road multi-use trails, andother identifiable bicycle facilities.




194

Bicycle Signal Head [5]

A bicycle signal head is a traffic signal head specificfor cyclists. The circular lenses with a red, amberand green bicycle outline on a black backgrounddifferentiate the bicycle signal head from theconventional signal head used by motorizedvehicles.

Bidirectional TravelBidirectional means moving or operatingin opposite directions. Cycle tracks, activetransportation paths and off-road multi-use trailsmay all be designed for two-way travel by cyclists if

space and site conditions allow for it.

Bikeway [1] & [3]

A generic term for any road, street, path or wayprovided for bicycle travel, either for the exclusiveuse of bicycles or shared with other transportationmodes. It is made up of one or more bicycle ormulti-use lanes.

Bicycle Priority Street [7]

Bicycle priority streets are low-volume, low-speedstreets that have been optimized for bicycletravel through treatments such as traffic calmingand traffic reduction, signage and pavementmarkings, plus intersection crossing treatments.These treatments allow through movements forcyclists while discouraging similar through trips bymotorized traffic.

BoulevardA boulevard is located between the travelledportion of a highway and the edge of the right-of-way. It may include a hard surfaced splash pador landscaped strip used to physically separatea cycling facility from the roadway in an urbancontext.

BufferA spatial or physical separation.

Clearance, HorizontalThe horizontal clearance is the width required for safepassage of a cyclist as measured in a horizontal plane.The width is measured from the edge of the essentialmanoeuvring space to any fixed object capable ofinjuring or destabilizing a cyclist using the facility.

Clearance, VerticalThe vertical clearance is the height necessary for thesafe passage of a cyclist as measured in a vertical plane.

CollisionAn incident resulting in property damage, personal

injury or death. It involves the loss of control orthe striking of one or more vehicles with anothervehicle, a person, an animal or an inanimate object.

Commuter CyclistA commuter cyclist is an individual who repetitivelycycles over the same or a similar route, and uses abicycle primarily for travel to and from work, schoolor shopping.

Conflict Zone, Motorist-CyclistMotorist-cyclist conflict zones are areas where motoristsand cyclists cross travel paths and, therefore, the risk ofmotorist-cyclist collisions or conflicts is higher.

ContextContext is the circumstance that forms a specificsituation. See Design Context for more information.

Cross SectionA cross section is a diagrammatic presentation ofthe right-of-way profile which is at right angles to thecentre line at a given location.

CrossrideA crossride is a part of the roadway intended as acrossing for pedestrians and cyclists where cyclistsare permitted to ride within the crossing. This isindicated by signs, pavement markings and a trafficsignal if the crossing is signalized.






Crosswalk [3]

A crosswalk is a part of the roadway specificallyintended as a crossing for pedestrians. This isindicated by signs, pavement markings and a trafficsignal if the crossing is signalized.

CurbA vertical or sloping construction element along theedge of a pavement or shoulder forming part of agutter. It strengthens and protects the edge of thepavement, and clearly defines the edge to vehicleoperators. The surface of the curb facing the generaldirection of the pavement is called the “face”.

CyclistA cyclist is a person who operates a muscular poweredor motor assisted bicycle, tricycle or unicycle.

Cyclist Operating SpaceCyclist operating space is the space needed tomaintain stability when operating a bicycle. Theoperating space is determined by examiningtypical bicycle dimensions, space requirements formanoeuvring, plus horizontal and vertical clearance.

DelineationOne, or a combination of several types of devices(excluding Guide Signs) that regulate, warn orprovide tracking information and guidance tomotorists and cyclists.

Design ContextSite specific factors that are present create a designcontext that affects both design choices and keymitigation needs for a given situation. Context is veryimportant in the design of bicycle facilities and should

be considered during all planning and design phases.

Design Speed [3]

A speed selected for purposes of design andcorrelation of the geometric features of a road. Itis a measure of the quality of design offered by theroad.

Designated Bicycle Route [1]

A designated bicycle route is a segment of abikeway network designated through signing oridentification on a map by the jurisdiction havingauthority. Generally, designated bicycle routes aresigned using the green Bike Route Marker M511(OTM). However, it is still necessary to select theappropriate design treatment for the designatedbicycle route given the route location and roadwayconditions.

DesignerA person actively engaged in a discipline, or

profession. For the purposes of this manual, adesigner refers to a planner or engineer engaged inthe planning and design of cycling facilities.

Desired Value or DimensionThe desired value or dimension is what practitionersshould strive to achieve in their designs.

DriverA driver is a person who operates a vehicle on ahighway.

Experienced CyclistAn experienced cyclist is a rider assumed to havethe physical and judgmental skills needed to safelyand comfortably manoeuvre a bicycle in a variety oftraffic conditions.

Fitness and Sport Cyclist [1]

Fitness and sport cyclists ride their bicycles forexercise and skill training. Distances can be aslong as 100 kilometres with cyclists often reachingspeeds over 35 km/h.

Fitness and Sport Trips [1]

These types of recreational trips are often takenalong low volume rural roadways with minimal trafficinterruptions, and simulate race conditions in orderto improve fitness and skill level.




196

Freeway [3]

A fully controlled access road that is limited tothrough traffic, with access through interchanges.

Grade SeparationGrade Separation is the vertical isolation of traveledways through the use of a structure so that trafficcrosses without interruption.

GrooveA groove is a narrow longitudinal slot in the ridingsurface that could restrict the steering of a bicyclewheel, such as a gap between two concrete slabs.

GuidelineA recommended (but usually not an essential)practice, method or value for a specific designfeature or operating practice.

HighwayA highway is a general term denoting a publicroadway for the purposes of vehicular travel,including the entire area within the right-of-way.

Highway Traffic Act (HTA)The Ontario Highway Traffic Act.

Human FactorsThe consideration of human physical, perceptual andmental limitations in engineering design, so as tooptimize the relationship between people and things.The objective is to reduce error and increase usercomfort.

In-Boulevard Multi-Use PathSee Active Transporta tion Path.

Inexperienced Adult CyclistA cyclist who may have the judgemental andphysical maturity necessary to manoeuvre a bicyclein a variety of traffic conditions, but typically doesnot feel secure or comfortable riding in all trafficsituations.

InterchangeA grade-separated intersection with one or moreramps that permit traffic to move from one roadwayto another without crossing traffic streams.

Intersection [3] & [4]

The area embraced by the extension of lateral curblines or, if none, of the rights-of-way of two or morehighways that meet one another at an angle.

Intersection ApproachThat part of an intersection leg used by trafficapproaching the intersection.

Left-Turn ConflictsLeft-turn conflicts may occur when cyclists try tocross one or more lanes of opposing through trafficin order to turn left using the same path as motorizedvehicles.

Level of Cyclist ActivityThe level of cyclist activity refers to the total numberof cyclists observed in a given time period (typicallyone hour). For the purposes of this manual, cyclistactivity has been divided into three categories: ‘low’(< 10 cyclists per hour), ‘medium’ (10 to 50 cyclistsper hour) and ‘high’ (> 50 cyclists per hour).

MaintenanceThe upkeep of highways, traffic control devices,other transportation facilities, property andequipment.

Median IslandA median island is a zone or physical islandconstructed in the centre of a roadway to separate

opposing directions of traffic. In the context of trafficcalming, it may be used to reduce the overall widthof the travel lanes.

MidblockMidblock is the segment of the roadway betweentwo intersections.






MinimumSee Suggested Minimum.

MotoristA motorist is a person who operates a motor vehicleon a highway.

Motor VehicleMotor vehicles include automobiles, motorcycles,motor-assisted bicycles (mopeds), and anyother vehicle propelled or driven other than withmuscular power. It does not include streetcars, orother vehicles designed to operate on rails, power

assisted bicycles, motorized snow vehicles, tractionengines, farm equipment or road-building machines.

Motor Vehicle Operating Speed (85thPercentile)The 85th percentile motor vehicle operating speedis the speed which no more than 15% of traffic isexceeding. For the purposes of this document, 85thpercentile motor vehicle operating speed has beendivided into four categories: ‘low’ (30 to 49 km/h),‘moderate’ (50 to 69 km/h), ‘high’ (70 to 89 km/h)and ‘very high’ (> 90 km/h).

MTOMTO is synonymous with the ‘Ministry ofTransportation of Ontario’, ‘Ministry ofTransportation’ and ‘the Ministry’.

Off-Road Cycling FacilityAn off-road cycling facility for the purposes of thisdocument includes any form of a cycling facilitylocated outside the travelled portion of the roadway,but may or may not be within the road right-of-way.

It may consist of a shared facility for use by cyclistsand other non-motorized users.

Off-Road Multi-Use TrailAn off-road multi-use trail is a shared facility locatedoutside the roadway right-of-way for use by cyclists,

pedestrians and other non-motorized users. Ifpermitted by municipal by-law, multi-use trails mayalso be used by recreational motorized vehicles.

One-Way TravelSee Unidirecti onal Travel.

On-Road Cycling FacilityAn on-road cycling facility for the purposes of theseplanning and design guidelines includes any form ofa cycling facility in a road right-of-way. This includesa signed bike route or any type of designated cyclingfacility on the traveled portion of a roadway, as well

as a shoulder bikeway or an active transportationpath that is located in the boulevard of a roadway.

On-Street ParkingThe use of the roadway surface or the adjacentshoulder for vehicle parking is considered ‘on-street’.

Paved PathA paved path is a path surfaced with a hard, durablematerial such as asphalt or concrete.

Pavement MarkingsPavement markings are painted or durable lines orsymbols applied on any paved bikeway or roadwaysurface for guiding vehicular, cyclist and pedestrian traffic.

PedestrianA pedestrian is a person whose mode oftransportation is by foot. It also includes a personin a non-motorized wheelchair, or person in amotorized wheelchair that cannot travel at over 10km/h. A person pushing a bicycle or a motorizedor non-motorized wheelchair is also considered a

pedestrian. It does not include any person who is inor upon a vehicle, motorized or otherwise propelled.

Posted Speed [6]

The posted speed is the maximum vehicular speedpermitted on a roadway or highway, and is displayedon a regulatory sign.




198

PractitionerA practitioner is a person actively engaged ina discipline or profession. For the purposes ofthese guidelines, a practitioner refers to a planner,designer or engineer engaged in the planning anddesign of bicycle facilities.

Railroad CrossingA location where one or more railroad tracks cross apublic highway, road, street or private roadway. Thisincludes sidewalks and pathways at or associatedwith the crossing.

Raised Cycle TrackA raised cycle track is a cycling facility adjacent to andoften vertically separated from motor vehicle travellanes. A raised cycle track may be designed for one-wayor two-way travel, and is designated for the exclusiveuse by cyclists and is distinct from the sidewalk.

RampA ramp is an interconnecting roadway at a trafficinterchange, or any connection between highways atdifferent levels or between parallel highways, on whichthe vehicles may enter or leave a designated roadway.

Recreational CyclistA recreational cyclist is an individual who usesa bicycle for trip enjoyment, and usually takesrelatively short trips at lower speeds. The ultimatedestination is of secondary importance. Fitness andsport cyclists are one type of recreational cyclist.

Recreational Trips [1]

Recreational trips are those where the primaryobjective for the cyclist is to enjoy the ride, the

scenery and the company of other cyclists. Thesetrips usually occur along off-road bicycle facilities,on quiet neighbourhood streets and rural roadways.

Refuge IslandA refuge island is provided on a street for thesafety of pedestrians. It can be either a median

island on a wide street where the width may notpermit pedestrians to cross the street on a singlepedestrian signal indication, or as a loading island fortransit such as streetcars or LRT.

Regulatory SignRegulatory signs advise drivers of action theyshould or should not take under a given set ofcircumstances. Disregard of a regulatory sign wouldusually constitute an offence.

RetrofitA roadway may be retrofitted to improve the condition

of the roadway. These projects are opportunitiesto redistribute space among different modes oftransportation using the existing roadway platform.Retrofitting is often an appropriate and affordablesolution for the implementation of bicycle facilities.

Right-of-Way [3]

The right-of-way is the area of land acquired for ordevoted to the provision of a road.

Right-Turn ConflictsRight-turn conflicts occur when a cyclist isproceeding straight through an intersection whilea motorist is attempting to make a right turn, andto do so the motorist must cross over the on-roadbicycle facility.

RiskRisk is the probability of a situation involvingexposure to danger.

Road [3]

A road is the entire right-of-way, comprising a public

thoroughfare, including a highway, street, bridgeand any other incidental structure .

Roadway [3]

A roadway is that part of the road that is improved,designed or ordinarily used for the passage ofvehicular traffic.






RoundaboutA roundabout is a raised circular island located in thecentre of an intersection, which requires vehiclesto travel through the intersection in a counter-clockwise direction around the island.

Route Selection CriteriaRoute selection criteria are used to aid practitionersin selecting bicycle routes that meet the needs ofpotential users to form a comprehensive bikewaynetwork.

Rumble Strip [1]

A rumble strip is a textured or grooved pavementtreatment designed to create noise and vibration toalert motorists that they have entered the shoulderof a highway.

Segregated Bicycle LaneSee Separated Bicycle Lane.

Separated Bicycle LaneA separated bicycle lane is a portion of a roadwaywhich has been designated by special pavementmarkings or a physical barrier and signage for theexclusive use of cyclists. This facility type providesadditional spatial or physical separation betweenmotorists and cyclists.

Shared Lane Markings [1]

A shared lane marking is a pavement markingsymbol that indicates an appropriate position fora cyclist in a shared lane. See Sharrows for moreinformation.

Shared Roadway or Signed Bike Route [1]

A Shared Roadway or Signed Bike Route is a roadwhere both motorists and cyclists share the samevehicular travel lane.

Sharrows [4]

“Sharrow” is the term used for shared roadwaylane markings or shared lane arrows. A sharrow

consists of two white chevron markings and abicycle stencil. Sharrows are intended to guidecyclists as to where they should ride within a travellane shared by both motorists and cyclists. They arean optional treatment and are context specific.

Shoulder [3]

Shoulders are areas of gravel or hard surfaceplaced adjacent to through or auxiliary lanes. Theyare intended for emergency stopping and travel byemergency vehicles. They also provide structuralsupport for the pavement.

Sidewalk[3]

A sidewalk is a travelled way intended exclusivelyfor pedestrian use, following an alignment generallyparallel to that of the adjacent roadway.

Sight DistanceSight distance is measured along the normal travelpath of a roadway, to the roadway surface or to aspecified height above the roadway, when the viewfor the driver of a passenger vehicle or a bicycle isunobstructed by traffic.

SightlinesA sightline is the ‘line of sight’ of a motorist or cyclistat any given time. Horizontal and vertical curvesalong the roadway as well as roadway width shouldbe considered when providing adequate sightlinesfor road users. Regular maintenance of vegetation isalso important in preserving sightlines.

SignA sign is a traffic control device mounted on afixed or portable support which conveys a specific

message by means of symbols or words, and isofficially erected for the purpose of regulating,warning or guiding traffic.

Signalized IntersectionAn intersection where traffic approaching from alldirections is regulated by a traffic control signal.




200

Signed Bike Route with Paved Shoulder [1] [3]

A signed bike route with a paved shoulder is a formof bicycle facility on a road with a rural cross section.A paved shoulder is a portion of a roadway whichis contiguous with the travelled way. It providesaccommodation for stopped and emergencyvehicles, pedestrians and cyclists as well as forlateral support of the pavement structure. A pavedshoulder on a designated bike route may include abuffer zone to provide greater separation betweenmotorists and cyclists.

Skew Angle

A skew angle is less than a right angle to a bikeway;generally an angle of 45 degrees or less.

Stopping Sight DistanceStopping sight distance is the longitudinal spacerequired by a motorist or cyclist, travelling at a givenspeed, to bring their vehicle to a stop after an objecton the roadway becomes visible. It includes thedistance travelled during the perception-reactiontime plus the vehicle braking distance.

Suggested Minimum Value or DimensionThe suggested minimum value or dimension is theminimum that a practitioner should design to inconstrained situations. Good engineering judgementshould always be applied, and consideration givento the location, context and roadway characteristics.Although consistency in design and signing is animportant goal, a practitioner should never assumea “one solution fits all” approach.

Tab SignA tab sign is smaller than the primary sign withwhich it is associated, and mounted below it. Thereare two types of tab signs:

1. Supplementary Tab Sign – containsadditional, related information; and

2. Educational Tab Sign – conveys themeaning of symbols during theirintroductory period.

ThresholdA threshold is a limit value.

Touring CyclistA touring cyclist is an individual who uses a bicyclefor long distance travel, usually on multi-day tripsand carrying baggage.

Touring Trips [1]

Touring trips are often undertaken over a longerperiod of time than utilitarian or recreational trips.Trips are generally between urban areas and pointsof interest. Touring trips require more planning since

the route, destinations and accommodations areimportant factors for the cyclist.

TrafficTraffic includes pedestrians, ridden or herdedanimals, vehicles, bicycles and other conveyances,either singly or together, while using a highway forpurposes of travel.

Traffic Control DevicesTraffic control devices are signs, signals or other fixtureswhether permanent or temporary, placed on or adjacentto a traveled way by authority of a public body havingjurisdiction to regulate, warn or guide traffic.

Traffic Control SignalA traffic control signal is any power-operated trafficcontrol device, whether manually, electricallyor mechanically operated, by which traffic isalternately directed to stop and permitted toproceed. A traffic signal:

1. When used in general discussion, refersto a complete installation including signal

heads, wiring, controller, poles and otherappurtenances; or

2. When used specifically, it refers to thesignal head which conveys a message tothe observer. This consists of one set of noless than three coloured lenses, red, amberand green, mounted on a frame.






Traffic VolumeTraffic volume is the number of vehicles that pass agiven point during a specified amount of time suchas an hour, day or year.

Travelled Way [3]

The travelled way is that part of a roadway intendedfor vehicular use, excluding the shoulders. It mayhave a variety of surfaces, such as gravel, but ismost commonly hard surfaced with asphalt orconcrete.

Two-Way Travel

See Bidirectional.

Unidirectional TravelUnidirectional means moving or operating in onedirection. Most bicycle facilities are designed forone-way travel by cyclists.

Unsignalized IntersectionAn intersection where traffic approaching from alldirections is regulated by any traffic control devicethat is not a traffic control signal.

Utilitarian CyclistA utilitarian cyclist is an individual who uses a bicycleprimarily for travel to and from specific destinationssuch as work, school, shops or recreation centres.

Utilitarian Trips [1]

Utilitarian trips are those for which the purpose is toreach a particular destination and are often repetitive.These include trips to places of employment, schoolor shopping, as well as trips that are necessary as

part of an individual’s daily activities.

VehicleFor the purpose of these guidelines, a wheeledvehicle is any device which is capable of movingitself and a person, or of being moved, from place toplace. This includes a bicycle.

VergeFor bicycle facility design, a verge often refers to thestrip of grass used to physically separate a bicyclepath from the roadway in a rural context.

YieldTo cede the right-of-way.

Youthful CyclistFor the purpose of determining appropriatebicycle facilities, any person under 13 years of ageand usually operating a bicycle with wheels of amaximum diameter of 600 mm is considered a

youthful cyclist.

Sources:

[1] Guide for the Planning, Design and Operation of Bicycle

Facilities (AASHTO, 2012)

[2] Designing Walkable Urban Thoroughfares: A Context

Sensitive Approach (ITE)

[3] Geometric Design Standards for Ontario Highways

(MTO, 1985)

[4] Guidelines for the Design and Application of Bikeway

Pavement Markings (TAC, August 2007)

[5] Traffic Signal Guidelines for Bicycles (TAC, 2012)

[6] TAC Geometric Design Guide for Canadian Roads (TAC,

1999)

[7] IBPI Fundamentals of Bicycle Boulevard Planning &

Design (IBPI, 2009)






Documents

Ontario Traffic Manual Book 18