One of the primary objectives of the National Cycling Strategy (NCS), which was published in 1996 and supported by the Department of the Environment, Transport and the Regions, is to encourage and enable planning and highway authorities to create a cycle-friendly road network, supplemented by cycle routes, which enables people to reach destinations safely and conveniently by cycle. These guidelines launched on 8 October 1998 by Glenda Jackson CBE, Minister for Local Transport, will help local authorities to provide better facilities for cyclists.

An important step towards achieving this is for all highway authorities to adopt cycle audit procedures. The NCS recommended that cycle audit procedures should be adopted by all highway authorities and stated that these procedures "will ensure that opportunities are not missed to enhance cycling conditions, and help avoid inadvertently making them worse".

Cycle audits are analogous to safety audits insofar as both involve regimes for ensuring that particular issues or interests are fully considered in the planning and design process. However, CARs go one step further by also examining existing highway networks.

Cycle Audit (CA) can be defined as follows:

Cycle Audit is a systematic process, applied to planned changes to the transport network, which is designed to ensure that opportunities to encourage cycling are considered comprehensively and that cycling conditions are not inadvertently made worse.

In short, CA is used to examine new highway schemes for cycle-friendliness. It involves the auditing of schemes at various stages of design and implementation. It is important to bear in mind that CA does not in itself constitute a set of design standards for cycle facilities.Cycle Review (CR) can be defined as follows:

Cycle Review is a systematic process applied to existing transport networks, which is designed to identify their positive and negative attributes for cycling and to assess ways that those networks can be changed in order to encourage cycling.

It is a tool that can be used to examine existing transport infrastructure for ease of use by cyclists. This is a far more onerous task than CA as it potentially involves examining vast road networks. Therefore, the guidelines include a "sieving" system that should assist auditors to prioritise parts of the network for early review.

Basic Principles:

The main aim of the guidelines is to ensure that a good cycling infrastructure is achieved wherever possible. In general terms this is done by considering the five principles of good design:

Coherence; Directness; Attractiveness; Safety, and Comfort

Hierarchy of Measures:

The procedures seek to ensure that the appropriate design solution is selected for a given scheme or network. In first order of preference, these measures are as follows:

Traffic reduction; Traffic calming; Junction treatment and traffic management; Redistribution of the carriageway, and Off-road provision It should be borne in mind that these measures are not mutually exclusive. They should ideally be used as part of a larger integrated traffic management solution. Isolated facilities are rarely successful in benefiting cyclists. For example, a cycle track that frequently crosses busy roads will not be popular if a suitable crossing or means of slowing other vehicles down is not provided.

Type of Scheme to be Audited:

Generally, every new scheme should be audited for cycle friendliness. However, the Guidelines point out that the amount of time and effort an auditor puts into an audit or review should reflect both the level of cycle use or the likely extent of any suppressed demand. To enable local authorities to decide how best to deploy scarce staff resources, the guidelines provide a method of prioritising new schemes into the following categories:

Cycle Proactive Route; Cycle Friendly Route, and Cycle Neutral Route.

The Guidelines recommend that the cycle review of existing networks is also prioritised.

The Stages of Cycle Audit :

The guidelines recommend that a cycle audit should be carried out at four stages in the life of a highway improvement scheme. These stages are as follows: Preparation of a Design Brief; Preliminary Design; Detailed Design, and Substantial Completion

However, it may be necessary to tailor the number and timing of individual stages depending on the size and complexity of the scheme to be audited. Individual working practices will also have an influence in this area. For example, small local safety schemes, designed in-house, may not require the first stage.

Who Should Undertake the Audit?

The Guidelines recommend that audit should be undertaken by a team that includes someone who has both an awareness of the Authority's cycling policies and a fairly extensive background in traffic engineering. It is also very important that one of the audit team is capable of assuming a cyclist's perspective. To help ensure the maximum impartiality, the Guidelines recommend that the audit team should be independent of the original design team.

The Stages of Cycle Review:

Three stages are proposed for a cycle review:

Review of Conditions; Level of Service Assessment; Assessment of Options

Documenting Cycle Audits and Reviews:

To help achieve a consistent approach to examining new schemes and existing networks, it is recommended that a standardised approach to documentation is adopted. This practice also provides a clear historical record of the reasoning behind particular conclusions and recommendations. Blank assessment forms and typical reports on a Cycle Audit and a Cycle Review are therefore included in the Guidelines.

Purchase this publication >>