PROMOTING BICYCLE TRANSPORT ON SECONDARY ROADS OF URBAN STREET NETWORK

Krishna Saw M. Tech Student in Trans. Engg., & Planning, SVNIT, Surat e-mail: kriscivil_10@yahoo.com

Balya Manjurali I. M. Tech Student in Trans. Engg., & Planning, SVNIT, Surat e-mail: manjurali.momin@ymail.com

B.K. Katti Visiting Professor, Civil Engineering Department, SVNIT, Surat

ABSTRACT—Bicycle Transportation is vital for sustainable movements in urban area, as it helps to improve mobility, air quality, reduce congestion, and conserve fuel. Today, transportation systems in most of our cities are no longer sustainable and that is the cause of worry for the planners. Therefore promoting bicycle transportation as major part of Non Motor Vehicle system (NMV) gains due importance in both traffic planning and operation stages. Present paper aims to examine the possible solution to back up the bicycle system and provide policy guidelines to promote such system in urban areas with the focus on movement on lower hierarchical urban roads to provide sustainable transportation. It provides strategies to tilt the travel shift to bicycle usage on tertiary and secondary road of urban areas through proper integration of land use and transportation planning.

KEYWORDS: Bicycle, Secondary Road, Sustainable Transportation

1. INTRODUCTION With the rapid urbanization in developing

countries in general and India in particular, the pressure for a new set of Transport services is increasing in cities, where transport cost are not sustainable to the lower and economically weaker section. The cycle rickshaws and horse drawn tangas emerge here as part of the transportation system. The system suit to meet the rider’s requirements and employment generation in an organized way for short urban trips. Today as animal drawn travel system is fading way due to high maintenance cost, the cycling can be as most effective means of transport within smaller centres. However, the rapid growth in auto vehicle population in recent time has its impact on cycle riding. Looking at the auto traffic hazards, increased transportation cost, road safety and environmental degradation, there is no option but to search for sustainable transportation modes and system and answer lies in strengthening the NMV system with more focus on bicycle usages as it provides nearly three times higher speed than normal walking speed. More ever it is eco-friendly and cost effective for urban poor.

2. METROPOLITAN TRANSIT SCENARIO Urbanization is a significant phenomenon at

national level, after post independence era. It was

17.29% in 1951 and touched 27.75% in just five decades and touched urban population mark of 285 million out of 1027 million in 2001. Impact has been felt maximum on metropolitan transportation system in terms of substantial increase in transport demand and traffic growth resulting in sustainability crisis and distortion in modal split characteristics.

The personalized trips with cars and two wheelers found significant edge over public transit system on one hand and squeezing experience on NMV travel component. The cycling and walking travel component reduce to 10% and 20% for our mega cities respectively. Even the public transit in some of our mega cities such as Ahmedabaad, Hyderabad and Banglore etc are not at the desired mass transit levels. The model split particulars for seven major cities in India reported by Ministry of Urban Development are as shown in Table 1.

Table 1: Modal Split of Few Cities

City Walk Cycle 2 W PT Car IPT Ahm. 22 14 25 16 17 6 Hyd. 22 9 19 35 9 7 Chennai 22 9 20 31 10 8 Bangalore 26 7 17 35 8 7 Delhi 21 12 5 43 14 6 Kolkata 19 11 4 54 8 4 Mumbai 27 6 7 45 8 7

Ahm–Ahmedabad, Hyd–Hyderabaad

262 ♦ National Conference & Workshop: RATE12, SVNIT, Surat (07–09 June 2012)

3. BICYCLE TRAVEL: STATUS As discussed earlier the share of bicycle trips

as a proportion of total trips has declined over the years. The cycle share and their variations in 25 years from 1980 observed for few cities in the country are as shown in Table 2. Significant reduction in cycle travel can be observed in all the cities except Bhopal and Jaipur. Other interesting trend is marginal increase in Bhuneshwar and Surat. Bhopal and Jaipur have shown significant increase in bicycle usage. However the bicycle travel level is below the desirable level shown in table except the case of Nagpur. The socioeconomic characteristics, urban sprawl and form are the important attributes for such variations.

Table 2: Cycle Share in Few Cities (%)

% Modal Share in Total City 1980 1990 2000 2007 Desirable Delhi 20 12 5 12 17.5 BWR 32 23 17 21 30 Indore 27 25 17 16 25 Bhopal NA 9 4 17 25 Ahm. 34 NA 17 14 17.5 Surat NA 20 14 16 20 Nagpur 45 40 35 28 20 Jaipur NA 11 7 19 20

*BWR- Bhuneshwar, Ahm. - Ahmedabad

The urban Auto Trip Rate (ATR) and Cycle Trip Rate (CTR) along with trip length reported in the literature is compiled in Table 3 for cities shown. The Auto Trip Rate (ATR) varied from 0.76 Bhuneshwar to maximum 1.55 (Delhi) and the cycle trips rates are nearly 20% of Auto Trip Rate (ATR). Maximum Cycle trip Rate has been observed in Nagpur (0.361) followed by Bhopal (0.285) and Jaipur (0.239).

Table 3: Per Capita Trip Rate for Few Cities

City ATR CTR ATL CTL Delhi 1.55 0.186 10.2 5.1 Bhuvanshwar 0.76 0.159 3.9 NA Bhopal 1.14 0.285 4.4 NA Ahmedabaad 1.41 0.159 6.2 2.3 Surat 1.28 0.205 6 3.6 Nagpur 1.29 0.361 5 NA Jaipur 1.26 0.239 6 NA

Trip Lengths TL, CTL in km

*NA–Not Available

The Average Trip length for the city is 5 km. The observation on average Cycle Trip Length (CTL) is 3.7 km including capital city of Delhi. It is 2.3 km in Ahmedabaad and 3.6 km in Surat. As such the desired Cycle Trip Length (CTL) is about 2.5 km.

4. STRENGTHENING BICYCLE TRAVEL In fact, cycling can be considered as a

sustainable transport mode for short trip within city zone or the plan modules of Neighbourhoods and TP Schemes. Following are the certain planning measures to enhance bicycle travel.

4.1 Bicycle Catchment Areas and Cycling To promote the bicycle transport at anywhere

in urban area, there is need to determine the potential catchment area for such travel. Most probable catchment areas of bicycle are residential areas belonging to urban plan modules such as Neighbourhood and T. P. Scheme. The bicycles trips are from residential areas to other functional areas to cover the trip length from 0.75 km to 2 km.

4.2 Urban Neighbourhood Module Importance of Neighbourhood and community

planning is realised long ago all world over. Compact Neighbourhood plan modules, covering 3000 to 6000 population with provision of amenities and public utility services to support the planned population. Often community planning comprises are framed cluster of 3-4 Neighbourhoods to cover 15 to 20 thousand populations. Focus here should be on walking and cycle trips to reach primary school, community shops and dispensary etc within 1-1.5km trip length. Walking is preferred up to 600 m distance and cycling can have upto 1-1.5 km.

4.3 TP Scheme Plan Modules Planning and implementations of T. P.

Schemes have become almost part of Urban Development programme in Gujarat and Maharashtra in last two decades, for their effective implementation and execution through Town Planning Act. Each TP Scheme can cover 100 hectare to 150 hectares of area to meet the

requiremewith grossscope foprovidingof hierach

4.4 FuncFunct

supermarkfunctionalgarden arein an effecbicycle tri

4.5 BicycKeepi

view appras part oSuitable can integraunder.

• N

• Cco

• C

• T

So, bnetwork, taken intofor implebicycle wparticularlStreet maof the low

5. INFRTo pr

consider tdevelopmdate in morientationmovemenelements markings need of hfacilities street” w

ents of 30 s density of 2or demarki better conne

hial road netw

ctional Areational areas ket, school l places, relieas can plan ctive way soips from the

cle Networking functionropriate cycl

of the streetcomprehensivated way on

Neighbourhoo

Cluster of Nommunity pl

Cluster of Com

P Scheme

before initicategories o

o account. Wementation way, it shouly on collec

ay not need wer traffic int

RASTRUCTromote bicycthe necessary

ment plans, asmost of our c

n towards ant. Therefore

like separatas missing

holistic approfor cyclists

here they are

to 40 thous250 pph. Heing functioectivity throuwork.

as such as fareas, disp

gious placesand located

o that they haresidential N

k Developmnal and resile network ct network ove tracks canhierarchical

ods level (NH

Neighbourhoolan

mmunity Pla

iating plannof road and pWhere ever tof separate

uld be part ctor and subseparate cyctensity.

TURE SUPcle trips the y support ofs these are aities. This is

auto vehicle e, it is notte bicycle trin the traffic

oach towardss are catege part of the

Promot

sand populaere, there is bonal areas ugh developm

family shopppensaries, ss recreationalin T. P. Sche

ave short distNeighbourho

ment idential areacan be develof plan modn be thought l plan modu

H)

ods level (C

an (CCP)

ning for cplan modulethere is no s

or indepenof the netw

b-arterials. Lcle track bec

PPORT planners hav

f infrastructualmost absens due to our rather the pet surprisingracks, signsc plans. Thes the issue.

gorized as road networ

ting Bicycle Tran

ations better

and ment

ping, ocial l and emes tance ods.

as in loped dules.

of in ule as

CNH)

cycle s are

scope ndent work, Local cause

ve to ure in nt to-

plan eople g the and

ere is Now “on-

rk, or

“offnetw

5.1

direcefficnetwoppoand The situa

be showspeeablefor p

Mlanesymintersideservfor b

nsport on Secon

f-street” whework.

On Street FOn-street bictly on rocient and efwork. Thesortunities, prminimize cooptions ar

ations call fo

Shared Rouconsidered wn in Fig eds are genere to safely shphysical imp

F

Marked Shes are adopte

mbols markervals (Fig 2of the lane

ves to alert thbicycles.

Figu

ndary Roads of

ere they are

Facilities icycle facilit

oadways andffective way se facilitiesrovide for diosts of provire as under or.

utes: Local as shared r1. Because

rally low, cychare the roadprovements to

igure 1: Share

ared Routesd, with the a

ed on the ). The symbas the area uhe motorists

re 2: Marked C

Urban Street N

separate from

ties are thod provide

to develop s maximizeirect travel biding bicycle

and decide

residential sroutes for b

traffic volclists and mod without spo the roadwa

ed Routes

s: Marked waddition of bi

pavement abols identifyused by cyclis to recognis

Cycle Lanes

Network ♦ 263

m the road

se located the most a bicycle

e cycling by bicycle, e facilities. ed as per

streets can bicycle as lumes and otorists are pecial need ay.

wide curb icycle lane at regular y the right ists, which se the path

264 ♦ Nation

Bicycare separexclusive for roadwhigher vethey have

5.2 Off SOff-st

roadwaysspace corlines. Oaccommocyclists, p

5.3 CrosThe c

pathway aroads. Crcyclists, proads, anmotor vehthe conflic

• M

• M

• Si

• B

• B

• G

5.4 CycleProvis

bicycle in

nal Conference

cle Lanes: Twrate travel use of bicyc

ways that hehicle speeds

special surfa

Figure 3: Se

Street Faciltreet facilit, and often a

rridors, utilityOff-street fa

date a widepedestrians, r

sings critical locatare where throssing treatmpedestrians and to minimhicles. Follocts and enhan

Marked crossi

Median island

ignalized cro

Bicycle loop d

Bike boxes

Grade-separat

e Parking Fsion of safen functional

& Workshop: R

wo metre wlanes desi

cles (Fig 3) aave higher s, no on-streface treatmen

eparate Bicycle

lities ties are

are located wy corridors acilities aree range of runners, whe

tions on a hese facilitiements can band others in

mize potentiaowing crossinnce the safet

ings

ds

ossings

detectors

ted crossings

Facilities e and secure

area as dis

RATE12, SVNIT,

ide bicycle lignated for and are prefetraffic volu

eet parking onts with kerbs

e Lane

separated within parks,

and adjacente designedusers, incluelchair users

bicycle routs intersect m

be used to an crossing mal conflicts ng aid can rety.

s

e parking forscussed earli

, Surat (07–09 J

lanes the

ferred umes, often s.

from open t rail

d to uding s etc.

te or major assist major

with educe

r the ier is

signvarioand

comlocasidevarieInve

typiclocklargeLonwho

metabicywhokey

June 2012)

nificant meaous parking long term pa

F

Short-Term mprises bicycation of the walks. Shorety of formserted ‘U’ Rac

Figu

Long-Term cal bicycle

kers, which er secure fag-term parki

o need to park

Bicycle Local or plasti

ycle locker io is assignedto the locker

ans of encofacilities canarking facilit

Figure 4(a): Ri

Parking:cle racks difunctional a

rt-term bicycs, such as a Pck (Fig (a), (b

ure 4(b): Inver

Parking: racks. It mcan be rent

acilities, suching is generak a bicycle fo

ckers: Whichc boxes. Tis restricted d use of ther (Fig. 4 (c))

ouraging cycn be form of ties.

ing Rack

: Which stributed at

and installedcle parking cPost-and-Rinb)).

rted U Rack

Is more semay compristed by indivh as bicycleally oriented for longer tim

h are essentypically, acto a specif

locker and

cling. The short term

typically important

d on wider can take a ng Rack or

ecure than se bicycle viduals, or e lock-ups.

to cyclists me.

tially large ccess to a fic person,

given the

Contrby lockedonly to cracks to pparking ch

6. PURPSTRAFollow

bicycle tra• D

ininopwm

• Prit trprth

• Lprnesc

• Tcyco

• Aimmaninar

• Bthtopaci

Figure 4(c

rolled Accessd rooms andcyclists, and provide extra harges.

POSED BICATEGIES wing are theavel in urban

Due weightncorporate bin traffic perations as

weaker sectionmajor segmen

romotion of is importan

ransportationrovide cost he urban pooocal Goverriority for thetwork and tcheme by JNhe necessarycle track wollector and s

All efforts tomportant mo

medium distand T. P. Scntegrated bicrrangement i

Bicycle as ahrough cycleo public trarking faciliity transit sys

c): Bicycle Loc

s Parking: Wd cages whic

which maysecurity aga

CYCLE TR

e major propn area. tage must icycle as an planning, it is the mo

n of society nt of urban pof bicycle travnt componenn to alleviate

effective trr. rnment shohe developmtracks under

NNURM to enry infrastrucwith signagsub-arterial r

o encourage ode of traveance within cheme are cycle netwoin functional a feeder me signage onransit systemity at majorstem.

Promot

cker

Which is typch are accesy contain bicainst theft ag

RAVEL

posals to prom

be givenimportant mdesigning

ode belonginwhich formopulation. vel is essentint of sustainair pollution

ransportation

ould give ment of the cr the operationhance safetture support

ge on integrroad are needbicycle shar

el for short Neighbourh

needed, thrork and pararea.

mode is posn approach rm with prr bus station

ting Bicycle Tran

pified ssible cycle

gainst

mote

n to mode

and ng to

ms the

ial as nable n and n for

due cycle on of ty. t for rated ded. re as

and hood ough rking

ssible roads roper ns of

7. C

on tenvitransinveis thto cusystewalkurbasystedue residScheand facilbicyclus

REF1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

7.

8.

9.

nsport on Secon

• It is deson sudemarca

• Bicycle (BTOD)transpor

CONLUSIOThe rapid u

travel demanironmental psportation h

estigate the she dire need ourb the ill efem sustainabking have noan planning em as a whoweightage fo

dential and feme is desireneeds nec

lity by the loycle travel ters

FERENCEJeroen Buis, Nonmotorised Cities”, FourthMukati Advanifor bus servicTown, South ARajat Rastogi,modes as a susplanning issuesTiwari Geetammotorised modsystem” Transpprogramme (TDelhi Tiwari GeetamTransport JournYazid M. R. eFor SustainablInternational B“Banglore MaKaranataka, Ba“Bicycle MasteLTD. (2010) Ministry of Urtraffic and TrUrban Areas i2008-2013”, (2

ndary Roads of

sired to segrub-arterial ation.

Transit O) should hart planning

ON urbanization nd, traffic grpollution. Suhence is inituation, encof the our an

ffects of urbable. This traot received tand has m

ole. Thereforfor short and functional ared to promotcessary supocal governm

in fast d

ES (2009), “TheTransport Pla

h Regional EST i et.al, (2006) “e” VELO MO

Africa , (2011), “Prostainable transps”, Current Sciem, “Planning fdes: The criticaportation Rese

TRIPP), Indian

m, (2008), “Bicynal et.al, (2011), “Tle Transportati

Building Controster Plan–2015anglore Developer Plan for Kam

rban Developmeransportation Pin India” “Sur2008), Surat Mu

Urban Street N

regate the cyroads wi

Oriented Deave priority

has significarowth, road ustainability

n question couragement nd it can playanization andansportation the due reco

marginalised re, necessarymedium tripreas in framte the bicyclepporting infrments to promdeveloping

e critical Imanning for MoForum in Asia

“Bicycle – As a ONDIAL Confe

omotion of noportation optionence, Vol. 100. for bicycles anal element in carch and Injury

n Institute of

ycle for Urban I

The Use of Noion in Malaysil Conference, 25”, (2007), Gopment Authoritmloops City” U

ent India, (200Policies and rat City Develouncipal Corport

Network ♦ 265

ycle tracks ith clear

velopment in urban

ant impact safety and of urban mark. To of cycling

y vital role d make the mode and

ognition in the NMV

y space for ps between

ming of TP e transport

frastructure mote safe residential

mportance of odern Asian Seoul feeder mode

erence, Cape

on-motorized n: policy and

nd other non city transport y Prevention Technology,

India”,Urban

on-Motorized ia” The 2nd 20, 125–134 overnment of ty.

Urban System

8) “Study on strategies in opment Plan tion (SMC)