Active travel road crossings

The developer should agree crossing requirements for sites that accord with Local Transport Note 1/20 "Cycle Infrastructure Design" (LTN 1/20) and LHDG with the council at the early phases of preparing development proposals. Early engagement with relevant interested parties is also important, including those representing disabled people, and pedestrians and cyclists. Points of conflict between highway users should be avoided through consideration of layout design.

All road crossings should be designed to LTN 1/20’s core design principles (Safety, Directness, Coherence, Comfort and Attractiveness) with consideration given to the aspects raised in Table 10-1 specifically relating to junctions and crossings. It is preferable to provide an active travel route that avoids the need to cross a difficult road altogether, and this should be considered at the initial design stages.

Crossings should be designed with consideration for safety, given anticipated motor vehicle flows and speeds assessed through traffic modelling (Refer to LHDG Highway Development Management Transport Modelling). 

At a local scale, typically the higher the speed and flows of expected motor vehicle traffic in new development the greater the control needed. LTN 1/20, Table 10-2 (Figure 21 below) provides guidance on the types of provision expected under different traffic flows and speeds. However, the council might also consider it necessary to install controlled crossings near to current or future amenity “destinations” that could attract high levels of active travel use and this should be considered at the early stages of the design process.

Image
diagram showing LTN Chapter 10 Table 10-2 Crossing Suitability

Figure 21: LTN Chapter 10 Table 10-2 Crossing Suitability

Crossing design considerations 

Acceptable crossing types 

Uncontrolled crossings (≤ 30mph speed and low flows) 

  • With or without refuges. 

Controlled crossings  

  • Cycle priority crossing using give-way markings (≤ 30mph and low flows); 
  • Parallel crossings (≤ 30mph speed and low to medium flows); 
  • Signal controlled – Toucan and Signal Crossings (≤50mph and high flows); 
  • Grade separated (≥ 60mph). 

Pedestrian visibility 

Pedestrian visibility at crossing points should accord with the guidance in LHDG “Swept Path” Section. 

Tactile paving 

Provision of blister surface paving should accord with the Department for Transport's ‘Guidance on the Use of Tactile Paving Surfaces’. Provision is usually buff at uncontrolled crossings and red at controlled crossings. 

Refuges 

Where particularly high usage is expected and motor traffic flows and speeds are high, a crossing may be considered; this could be with or without a central refuge.  

Where a refuge in the middle of the road is required, this should be designed to the council’s standard drawings and should be a minimum of 2m in width (in the direction of active travel use). Where significant cycle use is expected then 3m or above in width may be required, particularly where an independent cycle route is required to cross the carriageway. Avoid carriageway lane widths of between 3.1m and 3.9m to deter close overtaking, especially at pinch points.  

Where a refuge in the middle of the road is required, this should be designed to the council’s standard drawings and should be a minimum of 2m in width (in the direction of active travel use). Where significant cycle use is expected then 3m or above in width may be required, particularly where an independent cycle route is required to cross the carriageway. Avoid carriageway lane widths of between 3.1m and 3.9m to deter close overtaking, especially at pinch points.  

Refuges should be sufficient in length (in the direction of the carriageway) to accommodate the expected usage (number of cyclists). 

In all cases, guard rails should be high-visibility and must accord with the council’s standard drawings. Designers must consider and manage the risk of cyclists being pinched against guard railing by motor vehicles. 

Raised tables 

LTN 1/20 states that “Level changes on the main route such as raised tables and humps are not necessary if the guidance on reducing traffic volumes and/or creating separated space has been properly followed.". Raised tables should be used where assessment indicates it would improve safety. These may be required where the independent active travel network is required to cross the carriageway, or to improve safety for cyclists and pedestrians when crossing the mouth of side roads. 

 

Need further information?
Contact
Development Approvals