PROMOTING BICYCLE TRANSPORT ON SECONDARY ROADS

PROMOTING BICYCLE TRANSPORT ON SECONDARY ROADS

• 1.
  PROMOTING BICYCLE TRANSPORTON SECONDARY ROADS OF URBAN STREET NETWORK Krishna Saw M. Tech Student in Trans. Engg., & Planning, SVNIT, Surat e-mail: [email protected] Balya Manjurali I. M. Tech Student in Trans. Engg., & Planning, SVNIT, Surat e-mail: [email protected] 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
• 2.
  262 ♦ NationalConference & 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
• 3.
  requireme with gross scope fo providing ofhierach 4.4 Func Funct supermark functional garden are in an effec bicycle tri 4.5 Bicyc Keepi view appr as part o Suitable c an integra under. • N • C co • C • T So, b network, taken into for imple bicycle w particularl Street ma of the low 5. INFR To pr consider t developm date in m orientation movemen elements markings need of h facilities street” w ents of 30 s density of 2 or demarki better conne hial road netw ctional Area tional areas ket, school l places, reli eas can plan ctive way so ips from the cle Network ing function ropriate cycl of the street comprehensiv ated way on Neighbourhoo Cluster of N ommunity pl Cluster of Com P Scheme before initi categories o o account. W ementation way, it shou ly on collec ay not need wer traffic int RASTRUCT romote bicyc the necessary ment plans, as most of our c n towards a nt. Therefore like separat as missing holistic appro for cyclists here they are to 40 thous 250 pph. He ing functio ectivity throu work. as such as f areas, disp gious places and located o that they ha residential N k Developm nal and resi le network c t network o ve tracks can hierarchical ods level (NH Neighbourhoo lan mmunity Pla iating plann of road and p Where ever t of separate uld be part ctor and sub separate cyc tensity. TURE SUP cle trips the y support of s these are a ities. This is auto vehicle e, it is not te bicycle tr in the traffic oach towards s are categ e part of the Promot sand popula ere, there is b onal areas ugh developm family shopp pensaries, s s recreational in T. P. Sche ave short dist Neighbourho ment idential area can be devel of plan mod n be thought l plan modu H) ods level (C an (CCP) ning for c plan module there is no s or indepen of the netw b-arterials. L cle track bec PPORT planners hav f infrastructu almost absen s due to our rather the pe t surprising racks, signs c plans. The s 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 “off netw 5.1 direc effic netw oppo and The situa be show spee able for p M lane sym inter side serv for b nsport on Secon f-street” whe work. On Street F On-street bi ctly on ro cient and ef work. Thes ortunities, pr minimize co options ar ations call fo Shared Rou considered wn in Fig eds are gener e to safely sh physical imp F Marked Sh es are adopte mbols marke rvals (Fig 2 of the lane ves to alert th bicycles. Figu ndary Roads of ere they are Facilities icycle facilit oadways and ffective way se facilities rovide for di osts of provi re as under or. utes: Local as shared r 1. Because rally low, cyc hare the road provements to igure 1: Share ared Routes d, with the a ed on the ). The symb as the area u he motorists re 2: Marked C Urban Street N separate from ties are tho d provide to develop s maximize irect travel b iding bicycle and decide residential s routes for b traffic vol clists and mo d without sp o the roadwa ed Routes s: Marked w addition of bi pavement a bols identify used by cycli s 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
• 4.
  264 ♦ Nation Bicyc aresepar exclusive for roadw higher ve they have 5.2 Off S Off-st roadways space cor lines. O accommo cyclists, p 5.3 Cros The c pathway a roads. Cr cyclists, p roads, an motor veh the conflic • M • M • Si • B • B • G 5.4 Cycle Provis bicycle in nal Conference cle Lanes: Tw rate travel use of bicyc ways that h ehicle speeds special surfa Figure 3: Se Street Facil treet facilit , and often a rridors, utility Off-street fa date a wide pedestrians, r sings critical locat are where th rossing treatm pedestrians a nd to minim hicles. Follo cts and enhan Marked crossi Median island ignalized cro Bicycle loop d Bike boxes Grade-separat e Parking F sion of safe n functional & Workshop: R wo metre w lanes desi cles (Fig 3) a ave higher s, no on-stre face treatmen eparate Bicycle lities ties are are located w y corridors acilities are e range of runners, whe tions on a hese facilitie ments can b and others in mize potentia owing crossin nce the safet ings ds ossings detectors ted crossings Facilities e and secure area as dis RATE12, SVNIT, ide bicycle l ignated for and are prefe traffic volu eet parking o nts with kerbs e Lane separated within parks, and adjacent e designed users, inclu elchair users bicycle rout s intersect m be used to a n crossing m al conflicts ng aid can re ty. s e parking for scussed 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 sign vario and com loca side varie Inve typic lock large Lon who meta bicy who key June 2012) nificant mea ous parking long term pa F Short-Term mprises bicyc ation of the walks. Shor ety of forms erted ‘U’ Rac Figu Long-Term cal bicycle kers, which er secure fa g-term parki o need to park Bicycle Loc al or plasti ycle locker i o is assigned to the locker ans of enco facilities can arking facilit Figure 4(a): Ri Parking: cle racks di functional a rt-term bicyc s, such as a P ck (Fig (a), (b ure 4(b): Inver Parking: racks. It m can be rent acilities, such ing is genera k a bicycle fo ckers: Which c boxes. T is restricted d use of the r (Fig. 4 (c)) ouraging cyc n be form of ties. ing Rack : Which stributed at and installed cle parking c Post-and-Rin b)). rted U Rack Is more se may compris ted by indiv h as bicycle ally oriented for longer tim h are essent ypically, ac to 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
• 5.
  Contr by locked only toc racks to p parking ch 6. PURP STRA Follow bicycle tra • D in in op w m • Pr it tr pr th • L pr ne sc • T cy co • A im m an in ar • B th to pa ci Figure 4(c rolled Access d rooms and cyclists, and provide extra harges. POSED BIC ATEGIES wing are the avel in urban Due weight ncorporate bi n traffic perations as weaker section major segmen romotion of is importan ransportation rovide cost he urban poo ocal Gover riority for th etwork and t cheme by JN he necessar ycle track w ollector and s All efforts to mportant mo medium dista nd T. P. Sc ntegrated bic rrangement i Bicycle as a hrough cycle o public tr arking facili ity transit sys c): Bicycle Loc s Parking: W d cages whic which may security aga CYCLE TR e major prop n area. tage must icycle as an planning, it is the mo n of society nt of urban po f bicycle trav nt componen n to alleviate effective tr r. rnment sho he developm tracks under NNURM to en ry infrastruc with signag sub-arterial r o encourage ode of trave ance within cheme are cycle netwo in functional a feeder m e signage on ransit system ity at major stem. Promot cker Which is typ ch are acces y contain bic ainst theft ag RAVEL posals to prom be given important m designing ode belongin which form opulation. vel is essenti nt of sustain air pollution ransportation ould give ment of the c r the operatio nhance safet ture support ge on integr road are need bicycle shar el for short Neighbourh needed, thr ork and par area. mode is pos n approach r m with pr r 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 t envi trans inve is th to cu syste walk urba syste due resid Sche and facil bicy clus REF 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. nsport on Secon • It is des on su demarca • Bicycle (BTOD) transpor CONLUSIO The rapid u travel deman ironmental p sportation h estigate the s he dire need o urb the ill ef em sustainab king have no an planning em as a who weightage fo dential and f eme is desire needs nec lity by the lo ycle travel ters FERENCE Jeroen Buis, Nonmotorised Cities”, Fourth Mukati Advani for bus servic Town, South A Rajat Rastogi, modes as a sus planning issues Tiwari Geetam motorised mod system” Transp programme (T Delhi Tiwari Geetam Transport Journ Yazid M. R. e For Sustainabl International B “Banglore Ma Karanataka, Ba “Bicycle Maste LTD. (2010) Ministry of Ur traffic and Tr Urban Areas i 2008-2013”, (2 ndary Roads of sired to segr ub-arterial ation. Transit O ) should ha rt planning ON urbanization nd, traffic gr pollution. Su hence is in ituation, enc of the our an ffects of urba ble. This tra ot received t and has m ole. Therefor for short and functional ar ed to promot cessary sup ocal governm in fast d ES (2009), “The Transport Pla h Regional EST i et.al, (2006) “ e” VELO MO Africa , (2011), “Pro stainable transp s”, Current Scie m, “Planning f des: The critica portation Rese TRIPP), Indian m, (2008), “Bicy nal et.al, (2011), “T le Transportati Building Contro ster Plan–2015 anglore Develop er Plan for Kam rban Developme ransportation P in India” “Sur 2008), Surat Mu Urban Street N regate the cy roads wi Oriented De ave priority has significa rowth, road ustainability n question couragement nd it can play anization and ansportation the due reco marginalised re, necessary medium trip reas in fram te the bicycle pporting infr ments to prom developing e critical Im anning for Mo Forum in Asia “Bicycle – As a ONDIAL Confe omotion of no portation option ence, Vol. 100. for bicycles an al element in c arch and Injury n Institute of ycle for Urban I The Use of No ion in Malaysi l Conference, 2 5”, (2007), Go pment Authorit mloops City” U ent India, (200 Policies and rat City Develo uncipal 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)