Data analysis to support temporary cycleways

Introduction

The goal of this project is to flag roads on which there is

in the context of increased demand for cycling to key worker workplaces.

See this pre-print paper for a generalised summary of the methods. This document describes the work in the context of UK planning priorities.

It is based on an analysis of data generated for Department for Transport funded projects the Propensity to Cycle Tool (PCT) and the Cycling Infrastructure Prioritisation Toolkit (CyIPT).

As an initial analysis, to elicit feedback on the methods and preliminary results, we have focused on a sample of major cities. We hope this can be further developed and expanded in due course to provide nationwide coverage.

We chose the top 5 cities in terms of absolute long-term cycling potential (London, Birmingham, Manchester, Leeds, Liverpool) plus an additional 5 cities that have active advocacy groups (Newcastle, Sheffield, Cambridge, Bristol, Leicester). Estimates of current and potential numbers of commuters who could cycle to work in these cities are presented in the table below.

name all bicycle dutch_slc
London 3634280 155694 759755
Birmingham 392517 6476 76169
Manchester 199011 8447 54419
Leeds 326680 6250 51046
Liverpool 185117 3978 48306
Bristol 192881 15797 37909
Leicester 128501 4999 35253
Sheffield 226477 4276 25973
Newcastle 111295 3229 24792
Cambridge 53295 17313 20056

Selection of 10 cities in England with high cycling potential or active adovcacy groups. ‘All’ represents all commuters in the 2011 Census, ‘bicycle’ represents the number who cycled to work and ‘dutch_slc’ the number who could cycle to work under a ‘Go Dutch’ scenario of cycling uptake.

The geographic distribution of these cities is shown in the map below:

These cities represent around 1/4 of the population of England. Welsh and Scottish cities with high cycling potential such as Cardiff and Edinburgh were not included in the analysis because the CyIPT does not currently have data outside of England, although we could extend the methods to cover all UK cities at some point.

Method

To identify streets that may be strong candidates for the provision of temporary or ‘pop-up’ cycleways, building on data from the CyIPT and PCT projects, three filtering methods were used:

From the resulting selections we then identified the ‘top 10’ routes in each city based on cycling potential. In most cities, only road sections longer than a threshold of 200-300m were considered for entry to this ‘top 10’ list.

More criteria such as road width and proximity to key services such as hospitals could be added at a later date. A final stage involved manually removing road sections such as roads on which there is already good quality dedicated infrastructure and roundabouts. This final stage could be automated in future work.

The cycling potential of the top 10 streets is calculated based on the ‘Government Target’ scenario in the Propensity to Cycle Tool, which represents a doubling in cycling compared with 2011 levels. London is close to meeting this target already.

Interpreting the results

The results are not a definitive list of places where pop-up cycleways should be prioritised but a ‘starter for 10’ highlighting roads that may be good candidates for ‘pop-up’ active transport infrastructure. There are many types of pop-up infrastructure, but focus of this project is through reallocation lanes of traffic, as planned for Park Lane and other wide roads in London.

The results highlight roads that have cycling potential and at least one spare lane, meaning a 2 lanes in one direction. There will be many road sections that would benefit from interventions not shown in the maps below: roads with only one lane in each direction could be made oneway temporarily, creating a spare lane for cycleways or extra pavement width. Preventing through-flow in residential areas, as is happening in Lewisham and Salford City Council is another option that can complement road reallocation.

Evidence supporting other types of interventions, for example where there is high demand for access to key workplaces but little space for walking and cycling, could be an aim of future work.

What the maps show

The results below show all roads with a ‘spare lane’ in light blue based on the three criteria listed above (lanes, potential and length). The top 10 roads in terms of cycling potential are shown in dark blue. Cycling potential refers to the number of commuters who would cycle along the road (either to or from work) under the Government Target based on data from the Department for Transport funded Propensity to Cycle Tool (see www.pct.bike).

London

name length cycling_potential km_cycled
Brixton Road 2396 1619 3879
Camberwell New Road 1190 2397 2854
Great West Road 4129 601 2481
Seven Sisters Road 3802 578 2198
Old Kent Road 1943 1119 2174
Aspen Way 3299 649 2141
Waterloo Bridge 661 3235 2139
Marylebone Road 3263 629 2052
York Road 1684 1136 1913
Battersea Park Road 2468 750 1851

The top 10 candidate roads for space reallocation for pop-up active transport infrastructure according to methods developed for the project.

See london.html for the interactive version of the map above.

Birmingham

name length cycling_potential km_cycled
Walsall Road 7338 135 991
Small Heath Highway 6047 162 980
Stratford Road 7080 130 920
Pershore Road 1040 784 815
Hagley Road West 5013 162 812
Kingstanding Road 5894 135 796
Coventry Road 4753 162 770
Queslett Road 5429 135 733
Hagley Road 4225 162 684
Wolverhampton Road 3795 162 615

The top 10 candidate roads for space reallocation for pop-up active transport infrastructure according to methods developed for the project.

See birmingham.html for the interactive version of the map above.

Manchester

name length cycling_potential km_cycled
Kingsway 11095 256 2840
Princess Road 7319 370 2708
Chester Road 5405 374 2021
Oldham Road 6853 249 1706
Manchester Road 2768 510 1412
Wellington Road North 3246 423 1373
Bury New Road 2592 510 1322
Broadway 5802 192 1114
Stockport Road 2048 496 1016
Trinity Way 4227 229 968

The top 10 candidate roads for space reallocation for pop-up active transport infrastructure according to methods developed for the project.

See manchester.html for the interactive version of the map above.

Leeds

name length cycling_potential km_cycled
Otley Road 1766 758 1339
Scott Hall Road 8723 123 1073
Ring Road Low Wortley 5177 151 782
Dewsbury Road 4073 178 725
Woodhouse Lane 2206 295 651
Kirkstall Road 1557 341 531
Ring Road Moortown 4152 123 511
York Road 1883 242 456
Harrogate Road 3254 123 400
Ingram Distributor 2771 137 380

The top 10 candidate roads for space reallocation for pop-up active transport infrastructure according to methods developed for the project.

See leeds.html for the interactive version of the map above.

Liverpool

name length cycling_potential km_cycled
Queens Drive 11755 149 1751
East Prescot Road 5519 237 1308
Liverpool Road 5306 237 1258
East Lancashire Road 7887 140 1104
Menlove Avenue 6332 149 943
Mather Avenue 5425 149 808
Aigburth Road 5315 149 792
Edge Lane 5268 149 785
Dunnings Bridge Road 4828 143 690
West Derby Road 4254 149 634

The top 10 candidate roads for space reallocation for pop-up active transport infrastructure according to methods developed for the project.

See liverpool.html for the interactive version of the map above.

Bristol

name length cycling_potential km_cycled
Gloucester Road 2269 340 771
Fishponds Road 1020 745 760
Gloucester Road North 1389 340 472
Keynsham By-Pass 2719 142 386
Wells Road 2019 163 329
Station Road 1724 164 283
Bath Road 1400 200 280
Bond Street South 722 359 259
Westbury Road 894 244 218
Temple Way 603 359 216

The top 10 candidate roads for space reallocation for pop-up active transport infrastructure according to methods developed for the project.

See bristol.html for the interactive version of the map above.

Leicester

name length cycling_potential km_cycled
Soar Valley Way 3590 109 391
London Road 1392 195 271
St Johns 1393 109 152
Hinckley Road 509 295 150
Abbey Lane 769 149 115
Stoughton Road 508 195 99
Groby Road 542 124 67

The top 10 candidate roads for space reallocation for pop-up active transport infrastructure according to methods developed for the project.

See leicester.html for the interactive version of the map above.

Sheffield

name length cycling_potential km_cycled
Bochum Parkway 4466 161 719
Penistone Road 2903 230 668
Chesterfield Road 2564 232 595
Ecclesall Road 1494 379 566
Norton Avenue 2709 161 436
Prince of Wales Road 2409 178 429
Greenland Road 2231 178 397
Meadowhead 1565 232 363
Chesterfield Road South 2179 161 351
Halifax Road 2426 137 332

The top 10 candidate roads for space reallocation for pop-up active transport infrastructure according to methods developed for the project.

See sheffield.html for the interactive version of the map above.

Newcastle

name length cycling_potential km_cycled
Coast Road 5691 691 3933
Felling Bypass 5111 314 1605
Newcastle Road 4489 296 1329
Park Road 1418 793 1124
Askew Road 2092 266 556
Jedburgh Road 2202 235 518
Jesmond Road 841 615 517
Beach Road 1000 460 460
Barrack Road 1062 349 371
St James’ Boulevard 709 268 190

The top 10 candidate roads for space reallocation for pop-up active transport infrastructure according to methods developed for the project.

See newcastle.html for the interactive version of the map above.

Cambridge

name length cycling_potential km_cycled
Elizabeth Way 435 1256 546
Milton Road 578 736 426
Hobson Street 215 1763 380
Saint Andrew’s Street 164 1763 289
Emmanuel Street 150 1763 265
Bridge Street 194 889 173
Chesterton Road 233 623 145
Longstanton Road 491 135 66
Newmarket Road 239 195 47
Cambridgeshire Guided Busway 273 155 42

The top 10 candidate roads for space reallocation for pop-up active transport infrastructure according to methods developed for the project.

See cambridge.html for the interactive version of the map above.