SDA Movers

Ugandan bicycle taxi or bodaboda

Cargo-bicycle and Trike in Bremen

Mangoes loaded on a Bicycle for sale at Guntur, India

Utility cycling encompasses any cycling not done primarily for fitness, recreation such as cycle touring, or sport such as cycle racing, but simply as a means of transport. It is the most common type of cycling in the world. In the Chinese city of Beijing alone, there are an estimated four million bicycles in use (it has been estimated that in the early-1980s there were approximately 500 million cyclists in China).. Utility or “transportational” cycling generally involves travelling short and medium distances (several kilometres). It includes commuting, going to school, high school or college, running errands, and delivering goods or services. In cities, the bicycle courier is often a familiar feature, and freight bicycles are capable of competing with trucks and vans particularly where many small deliveries are required, especially in congested areas. Velotaxis can also provide a public transport service like buses and taxicabs.

Utility cycling is believed to have several social and economic benefits. Policies that encourage utility cycling have been proposed and implemented for reasons including: improved public health

Contents

• 1 The bicycle and the cyclist’s equipment
• 2 Factors that influence levels of utility cycling
  • 2.1 Town planning
  • 2.2 Cycling infrastructure
    • 2.2.1 Traffic reduction
    • 2.2.2 Traffic calming
    • 2.2.3 One-way streets
    • 2.2.4 Junction design
    • 2.2.5 Traffic signals/Traffic control systems
    • 2.2.6 Redistribution of the carriageway
    • 2.2.7 Cycle lanes and cycle tracks
  • 2.3 Trip-end facilities
    • 2.3.1 Bicycle parking/storage arrangements
    • 2.3.2 Other trip end facilities
  • 2.4 Active theft reduction measures
  • 2.5 Integration with other transport modes
  • 2.6 Marketing: The public image of cycling
    • 2.6.1 Positive marketing of cycling
    • 2.6.2 Negative marketing of utility cycling
  • 2.7 Retail policy
    • 2.7.1 Alternative retail policies
• 3 Cycle training
• 4 User associations
• 5 Free bicycle/Short term hire schemes
• 6 Influence of technology
• 7 See also
• 8 References
• 9 Notes

//

The bicycle and the cyclist’s equipment

a Dutch utility bicycle.

Urban cyclist in Guadalajara, Spain.

Utility bicycles have many standard features to enhance their usefulness and comfort. Chain-guards and mudguards, or fenders, protect clothes and moving parts from oil and spray. Kick stands help with parking. Front-mounted wicker or steel baskets for carrying goods are often used. Rear luggage carriers can be used to carry items such as school satchels. Panniers or special luggage carriers (including waterproof packing bags) enable the transport of goods and are useful for shopping. Parents sometimes add rear-mounted child seats and/or an auxiliary saddle fitted to the crossbar to transport children. Trailers of various types and load capacities may be towed to greatly increase cargo capacity. In many jurisdictions bicycles must be fitted with a bell; reflectors; and, after dark, front and rear lights.

The use by cyclists of vests or armbands fluorescent in daylight or reflective at night can increase a cyclist’s conspicuity, although these are not an alternative to a legally compliant lighting system. A report on the promotion of walking and cycling (Hydén, et al., 1999) discussed safety clothing and equipment and stated that “there is no doubt that both pedestrian reflectors and bicycle helmets are reducing the injury risk of their users quite considerably.” Protective rain gear is often an essential part of the utility cyclist’s wardrobe, especially in countries with high rainfall levels.

Factors that influence levels of utility cycling

Many different factors combine to influence levels of utility cycling. In developing economies, a large amount of utility cycling may be seen simply because the bicycle is the most affordable form of vehicular transport available to many people. In richer countries, where people can have the choice of a mixture of transport types, a complex interplay of other factors influences the level of bicycle use. Factors affecting cycling levels may include: town planning (including quality of infrastructure: cyclist “friendly” vs. cyclist “hostile”), trip-end facilities (particularly secure parking), retail policy, marketing the public image of cycling, integration with other transport modes, cycle training, terrain (hilly vs. flat), and climate. In developed countries cycling has to compete with, and work with, alternative transport modes such as private cars, public transport and walking. Thus cycling levels are not influenced just by the attractiveness of cycling alone, but also by what makes the competing modes more or less attractive.

In developed countries with high utility cycling levels, utility cyclists tend to undertake relatively short journeys. According to Irish 1996 Census data, over 55% of cycling workers travelled 3 miles (4.8 km) or less, 27% 5 miles (8 km) or less and only 17% travelled more than 5 miles in their daily commute. It can be argued that factors that directly influence trip length or journey time are among the most important in making cycling a competitive transport mode. Car ownership rates can also be influential. In New York City, more than half of all households do not own a car (the figure is even higher in Manhattan, over 75%), and walk/bicycle modes of travel account for 21% of all modes for trips in the city.

Decisions taken by various levels of government, as well as local groups, residents’ organisations and public- and private-sector employers, can all have an impact on the so-called “modal choice” or “modal split” in daily transport. In some cases various factors may be manipulated in a manner that deliberately seeks to encourage or discourage various transport modes, including cycling.

Last mile distribution using a bicycle in Vienna, Austria .

The League of American Bicyclists has designated a set of five criteria for evaluating the friendliness of a town or city to bicycles. These criteria are classified under the headings of:Engineering, Encouragement, Evaluation and Planning, Education, Enforcement.

Town planning

Trip length and journey times are key factors affecting cycle use.

US-style housing division.

Cycling infrastructure

The cycling infrastructure comprises all the public ways that are available to cyclists travelling from one destination to another. This includes the same network of public roads that is available for other road vehicle users, minus those roads from which cyclists have been banned (most freeways), plus additional routes that are not available to other types of vehicle, such as cycle tracks and (in some jurisdictions) sidewalks.

The manner in which the public roads network is designed, built and managed can have a significant effect on the utility and safety of cycling as a form of transport. The key issue is whether the cycling network provides the users with direct, convenient routes minimising unnecessary delay and effort in reaching key destinations. Settlements that provide a dense roads network consisting of interconnected streets will tend to be viable utility cycling environments.

In contrast, other communities may use a cul-de-sac based, housing estate/housing subdivision model where minor roads are disconnected and only feed into a street hierarchy of progressively more “arterial” type roads. Such communities may discourage cycling by imposing unnecessary detours and forcing all cyclists onto arterial roads, which may be perceived as busy and dangerous, for all trips regardless of destination or purpose.

Aspects of the cycling infrastructure may be viewed as either cyclist-hostile or as cyclist-friendly. In general, roads infrastructure based on prioritising certain routes in an attempt to create a state of constant “flow” for vehicles on that route, will tend to be hostile to those not on that route. In 1996, the British Cyclists Touring Club (CTC) and the Institute for Highways and Transportation jointly produced the document “Cycle-friendly infrastructure: Guidelines for planning and design” (CFI). This defined a hierarchy of measures for cycling promotion in which the goal is to convert a more or less cyclist-hostile roads infrastructure into one which encourages and facilitates cycling:

1. Traffic reduction. Can traffic levels, particularly of heavy vehicles, be reduced?
2. Traffic calming. Can speed be reduced and driver behaviour modified?
3. Junction treatment and traffic management. These measures include:
   • Urban traffic control systems designed to recognise cyclists and give them priority.
   • Exempt cyclists from banned turns and access restrictions.
   • Provide contra-flow cycle lanes on one-way streets.
   • Implement on-street parking restrictions.
   • Provide advanced stop lines/bypasses for cyclists at traffic signals.
   • Junction alterations, signalise roundabouts, cycle-friendly junction design.
4. Redistribution of the carriageway -such as by marking wide kerb lanes or shared bus/cycle lanes.
5. Cycle lanes and cycle tracks. Having considered and implemented all the above, what cycle tracks or cycle lanes are considered necessary?

Traffic reduction

Removing traffic can be achieved by straightforward diversion or alternatively reduction. Diversion involves routing through-traffic away from roads used by high numbers of cyclists and pedestrians. Examples of diversion include the construction of arterial bypasses and ring roads around urban centres.

New Road, Brighton - Shared Space scheme reduced motor traffic by 93%.

Traffic reduction can involve direct or indirect methods. A highly effective indirect method of reducing motor traffic, and facilitating cyclist and pedestrian use, is to adopt the shared space system. This system, by giving equal priority to all road users, and by removing conventional road markings, road signs and road conventions, capitalises on the tendency for all road users to respect and trust each-other when they are interacting on an equal basis. No explicit, or even implicit priority is given to traffic travelling along the road, so with no assumptions of priority being possible, all road users need to be aware of all other road users at all times. New Road in Brighton was remodelled using this philosophy, and the results were a 93% reduction in motor traffic and a 22% increase in cycling traffic. adopted similar parking reduction policies in the 80s and 90s.

Direct traffic reduction methods can involve straightforward bans or more subtle methods like road pricing schemes or road diets. The London congestion charge reportedly resulted in a significant increase in cycle use within the affected area.

Traffic calming

UK speed camera

Speed reduction has traditionally been attempted by the introduction of statutory speed limits. Traffic speeds of 30 km/h (20 mph) and lower are said to be more desirable on urban roads with mixed traffic.

Engineering measures involve physically altering the road layout or appearance to actively, or passively slow traffic down. Measures include speed humps, chicanes, curb extensions, and living street and shared space type schemes. The town of Hilden in Germany has achieved a rate of 24% of trips being on two wheels, mainly via traffic calming and the use of 30 km/h (20 mph) zones.

Recent implementations of shared space schemes have delivered significant traffic speed reductions. The reductions are sustainable, without the need for speed limits or speed limit enforcement.

One-way streets

Some campaigners view one-way street systems as a product of traffic management that focuses on trying to keep motorised vehicles moving regardless of the social and other impacts.

Junction design

In general, junction designs that favour higher-speed turning, weaving and merging movements by motorists will tend to be hostile for cyclists. CFI states that free-flowing arrangements are hazardous for cyclists and should be avoided.

Traffic signals/Traffic control systems

Cyclists use a segregated cut through of a busy interchange in London at rush hour.

How traffic signals are designed and implemented directly impacts cyclists.

Redistribution of the carriageway

One method for reducing potential friction between cyclists and motorised vehicles is to provide Wide Kerb (nearside) lanes (UK) or Wide outside through lanes (USA). These extra wide lanes increase the probability that motorists will be able to pass cyclists at a safe distance without having to change lanes. This is held to be particularly important on routes with a high proportion of wide vehicles such as buses or HGVs. They also provide more room for cyclists to filter past queues of cars in congested conditions.

Shared space schemes extend this principle further by removing the reliance on lane markings altogether, and also removing road signs and signals, allowing all road users to use any part of the road, and giving all road users equal priority and equal responsibility for each others safety. Experiences where these schemes are in use show that road users, particularly motorists, undirected by signs, kerbs or road markings, reduce their speed and establish eye contact with other users. Results from the thousands of such implementations worldwide all show casualty reductions and most also show reduced journey times.

A bus and cycle lane in Mannheim, Germany

CFI argues for a marked lane width of 4.25 m.

Shared Bus and Cycle lanes are also a widely endorsed method for providing for cyclists. Research carried out by the Transport Research Laboratory describes shared bus cycle lanes as “generally very popular” with cyclists

As of 2003, mixed bus/cycle lanes accounted for 118 km of the 260 km of cycling facilities in Paris.

Cycle lanes and cycle tracks

Main article: Segregated cycle facilities

The use of segregated cycle facilities such as cycle lanes and cycle tracks is often advocated as a means of promoting utility cycling. A pro-cycling paper, stated to have been accepted for publication in the Transport Reviews journal, states that “the provision of separate cycling facilities” appears to be one of the keys to the achieving of high levels of cycling in the Netherlands, Denmark and Germany. Roads or paths that are open to cyclists but not motorists can benefit cyclists where they provide links that are more convenient than the main road network, or help resolve obstacles. Examples include routes through pedestrian precincts etc. However, the use of such devices alongside, or within, existing roads is highly controversial both in terms of safety and cycling promotion. In terms of safety, separate cycle lanes or cycle tracks can seriously undermine safety if inappropriately designed or if used at inappropriate locations. Similarly, while it is possible to use separate facilities to promote cycling, it is also possible to use them for the opposite purpose: for removing priority from cyclists and giving it to motorists. Thus it is argued that the use and potential effects of segregated facilities for cyclists cannot be viewed in isolation from the underlying design, management and legal philosophies that govern the overall transportation infrastructure.

Trip-end facilities

Bicycle parking/storage arrangements

Bicycle parking at the Alewife subway station in Cambridge, Massachusetts, located at the intersection of three cycle paths.

Bicycle parking lot in Amsterdam.

Secure parking is argued to be a key factor influencing the decision to cycle.

Conversely, at particular destinations or in cultures where cycling is seen as an unwelcome or inappropriate activity, bicycle parking may simply not be provided or else deliberately placed at awkward, out-of-sight locations away from public view.

Other trip end facilities

Some people need to wear special clothes such as business suits or uniforms in their daily work. In some cases the nature of the cycling infrastructure and the prevailing weather conditions may make it very hard to both cycle and maintain the work clothes in a presentable condition. It is argued that such workers can be encouraged to cycle by providing lockers, changing rooms and shower facilities where they can change before starting work.

Active theft reduction measures

The theft of bicycles is one of the major problems that slow the development of urban cycling. Bicycle theft discourages regular cyclists from buying new bicycles, as well as putting off people who might want to invest in a bicycle.

Several measures can help reduce bicycle theft:

• making cyclists aware of antitheft devices and their effective use
• promoting devices to enable remote tracking of a bicycle’s location
• registration of bicycles to enable recovery if stolen
• targeting cycle thieves
• mounting sting operations to catch thieves
• using Folding bicycles which can be safely stored (for example) in cloakrooms or under desks

Certain European countries apply such measures with success, such as the Netherlands or certain German cities using registration and recovery. Since mid-2004, France has instituted a system of registration, in some places allowing stolen bicycles to be put on file in partnership with the urban cyclists’ associations. This approach has reputedly increased the stolen bicycle recovery rate to more than 40%. By comparison, before the commencement of registration, the recovery rate in France was about 2%.

In some areas of the United Kingdom, bicycles fitted with location tracking devices are left poorly secured in theft hot-spots. When the bike is stolen, the police can locate it and arrest the thieves. This sometimes leads to the dismantling of organised bicycle theft rings.

Integration with other transport modes

Bicycles in the Netherlands

Cycling can often be intregrated successfully with other transport modes. For example, in the Netherlands and Denmark a large number of train journeys may start by bicycle. In 1991, 44% of Dutch train travellers went to their local station by bicycle and 14% used a bicycle at their destinations. The key ingredients for this are claimed to be:

• an efficient, attractive and affordable train service
• secure bike parking at train stations
• a town planning policy that results in a sufficient proportion of the potential commuter population (eg 44%) living/working within a reasonable cycling distance of the train stations.

It has been argued in relation to this aspect of Dutch or Danish policy that ongoing investment in rail services is vital to maintaining their levels of cycle use.

An often forgotten major success story is the integration of cycling and public transport is Japan.

In January 2007, the European parliament adopted a motion decreeing that all international trains must carry bicycles. Where such services are not available, some cyclists get around this restriction by using folding bikes that can be brought onto the train or bus like a piece of luggage.

However, there are strong cultural variations in how cycling is treated in such situations. For instance in the Irish university city of Galway the secure parking of bikes is forbidden within the grounds of the central train station. However, cut-price car parking is available for motorists holding a valid train ticket.

Marketing: The public image of cycling

An individual’s perception of cycling and their expectations of how they might be perceived if they are seen cycling can affect their decision to cycle or not. Thus cycling might be marketed positively by interests that wish to promote it. Alternatively, other interests might seek to market cycling negatively for their own purposes. Thus interests from the car lobby may seek to belittle cyclists in an attempt to enhance their own status as motorists. As with other areas of competition a marketing or propaganda conflict takes place between both sides.

Positive marketing of cycling

Two themes predominate in cycling promotion 1) the benefits for the cyclist and 2) the benefits for society and the environment that may occur if more people choose to cycle. The benefits for the cyclist tend to focus issues like reduced journey times in congested urban conditions and the health benefits which the cyclist obtains through regular exercise. Societal benefits focus on general environmental and public health issues. Promotional messages and tactics may include:

• financial savings on transportation
• keeping travel times predictable; in peak traffic, cycling can be the fastest way of moving around town
• ensuring best use of the space available (during trips and also while parked), therefore reducing congestion on the roads
• lowering the risk of cardiovascular disease (when practised for more than a quarter of an hour a day at a moderate pace) and therefore improvement of individual and public health
• using cycling to tackle the obesity crisis facing more and more countries
• the financial savings for society if general health improves
• reminding people of the advantages in terms of health and of effectiveness of using the bicycle
• making maps of journeys that can be completed by bicycle
• potential reduction of harmful emissions by fewer people driving motor vehicles
• reducing demand for oil-based fuels
• the safety in numbers effect if more people cycle
• Fun!

Negative marketing of utility cycling

Various interests may wish to portray a negative image of utility cycling on public roads for various reasons. Some governments, wishing to promote private car use, have organized and funded publicity designed to discourage road cycling. Official road safety organisations have been accused of distributing literature that emphasizes the danger of cycling on roads while failing to address attitudinal issues among the drivers of motor vehicles who are the main source of road danger.

The car industry’s marketing efforts frequently try to associate car use with a perception of increased social status. The flip side of this tactic implies efforts to portray alternative transport modes, such as cycling, as indicators of reduced social status and/or poverty. Observers in some car-focused cultures have noted a tendency to perceive or portray people who use bicycles as members of a social “out-group” with attributed negative connotations.

Most controversially, negative images may also be promoted by people who claim to be representing the interests of cyclists. Promoters of bicycle helmets may seek to ridicule cyclists who choose not to use them, and are frequently accused of significantly overstating and exaggerating both the risks posed to cyclists and the protective benefits of helmets.

Similar accusations have been made against some proponents of segregated cycle facilities. Once again, the risks experienced by cyclists are alleged to have been overstated and deliberately exaggerated. Simultaneously it may be alleged that the safety impacts of cycle facilities have been overstated and/or misrepresented. The accusation has been made that the object is to impose on the public mind a perception that cycling by the public on public roads is too “dangerous” or “impossible” to do unless cycle facilities are provided first.

Retail policy

If significant use of bicycles for shopping trips is to be achieved, sufficient retail services must be maintained within reasonable cycling distances of residential areas. In countries like Denmark, the Netherlands and Germany the high levels of utility cycling also includes shopping trips e.g. 9% of all shopping trips in Germany are by bicycle. This supports smaller shops by preventing large multiples from engaging in predatory pricing practices by aggressively discounting key goods to use as so called loss leaders.

Alternative retail policies

From the 1980s to mid-1990s the UK operated a system of laissez-faire with regard to retail policy. The “great car economy” philosophy of the Thatcher government directly favoured the growth of out-of-town retail centres at the expense of established retail services in British towns and cities. The UK Town and Country Planning Association cites research by the New Economics Foundation that notes a continuing process of change in retail provision.

• General stores are closing at the rate of one per day.
• Between 1997–2002, specialised stores, including butchers, bakers, fishmongers, and newsagents, closed at the rate of 50 per week.
• Nearly 30,000 independent food, drink, and tobacco retailers, or over 40%, have been lost over the past decade.

It is arguable that in such a retail/planning policy environment use of bicycles ceases to be a viable option for many shoppers and access to a private motor-car or public transport becomes a necessary prerequisite for access to basic services.

Cycle training

Cycle training is another measure that is advocated as a means of maintaining or increasing levels of cycle use. The training involves teaching existing or potential cyclists bike handling, various roadcraft or “cyclecraft” skills and educating them on the safe, lawful use of the roads. Bicycle training schemes can be differentiated according to whether they are aimed at children or adults.

In the UK, the now superseded National Cycle Proficiency scheme was focused on primary schoolchildren aged 8 and above. In this, children would start by gaining an off-road certificate working up to their on-road certificate by the age of ten. Initial training and examination took place on simulated road layouts within school playgrounds. This approach has now been supplemented by the new National Standard for cycle training which is more focussed on practical on-road training.

In the United States, the League of American Bicyclists Road 1/2 courses, based on the Effective Cycling program, has modules aimed at all ages from children to adult beginners to more experienced adults. It is argued that such schemes do not just build confidence in the students but also make it more likely that parents will let their children cycle to school. Cycle training may also be offered in an attempt to overcome cultural unfamiliarity with cycling or perceived cultural obstacles to bicycle use. In the Netherlands, some cycle training courses are targeted at women from immigrant communities, as a means of overcoming such obstacles to cycling by women from developing countries.

User associations

As with other walks of life, utility cyclists may form associations in order to promote and develop cycling as an everyday form of transport. The European Cyclists’ Federation is the umbrella body for such groups in Europe. These associations may lobby various institutions to encourage political support or to oppose measures that they judge counter-productive, such as to oppose the introduction of compulsory bicycle helmet legislation.

Free bicycle/Short term hire schemes

Main article: Community bicycle program

It has been suggested that this article or section be merged into Community bicycle program. (Discuss)

Copenhagen has a free bike scheme called City Bikes. Riders pay a refundable deposit at one of 100 special bike stands and have unlimited use of a bike within a specified area. The scheme is funded by commercial sponsors. In return, the bikes carry advertisements, which appear on the bike frame and the solid-disk type wheels. Helsinki has a similar scheme, using bicycles available at over 26 stands for a €2 deposit, which is refundable at any other stand.

The advertising company JCDecaux has launched its “Cyclocity” programs in Paris, Lyon, Córdoba and Vienna. Here hundreds of bikes are made available for hire from special, widely-dispersed bicycle stands. Payment for using the bikes is done with special smart cards.

Competitor Clear Channel then operating as Adshel opened the first example of this in Rennes in 1997, and has several other sites including Oslo, Stockholm, Sandnes & Trondheim, most generally similar to that offered by their competitor. A different financial model called bicing is used in Barcelona, which is paid for by car owners parking on public streets and not by advertising - which rather ironically is contracted to JC Decaux in some places.

Cemusa, another street media company have a system running in Pamplona and are believed to be pursuing some US sites (they have the street media contract in New York City)

An early prototype for these systems was opened in Portsmouth (Bikeabout) in 1996 with a second system in Rotterdam. They were not greatly successful, as the number of hire points and operating times were seriously limited. The Belgian PLS system was also designed for parking and hire bikes, and Sekura-Byk is now installing and using these in the UK.

To have a major impact - such as in Paris and Copenhagen there has to be a high density of available bikes. Copenhagen has 2500 bikes which cannot be used outside the 9 km² zone of the city centre (a fine of DKr 1000 applies to any user taking bikes across the canal bridges around the periphery

In the UK OYBike is delivering small scale operations which may grow to this scale organically at 2 Universities, 3 Business Parks, and 3 London Boroughs (and a Hotel chain in London). Like Call-a-Bike, OYBike uses mobile phone technology to log use and charge for hires and can set up hire points in little as 10 minutes. Many of the business users can reclaim the cost of leasing bikes and hire points as part of a workplace cycling scheme or green travel plan. Research also reveals that for many major London rail stations an unknown number of the bikes parked are used only a couple of times per week, and the potential to replace these with hire bikes is widely ignored by UK rail operators.

Commuter specific schemes also exist with 100 OV Fiets hire stations in the Netherlands, and an interesting innovation in Inverness where staff already paid to be on site at a 24hour car park manage a scheme to provide bikes to link the rail & bus stations, with workplaces between 1 and 3 km away.

Influence of technology

Modern bicycle technology supports the shift towards utility cycling:

• easy-running thick tires or damped springs allow cycling over curbs
• dynamo, brakes and gears improved and increased the riding safety, allowing usage also for elderly
• electric support was further developed in motorized bicycle or electric power-assist system and eases the take up for untrained

See also

• Bicing
• Bicycle
• Bicycle trailer
• Bicycle transportation engineering‎
• Boda-boda
• Cycle rickshaw
• Freight bicycle
• Human-powered transport
• Icebiking
• Police bicycle
• Quadricycle
• Segregated cycle facilities
• Xtracycle
• Tricycle
• Workbike

References

1. ^ China ends ‘bicycle kingdom’ as embracing cars, China Daily, 2004-11-11 (Accessed 2007-01-26)
2. ^ Chinese look to bicycle to cure car headache, Irish Times 2006-06-17
3. ^ A Study on Measures to Promote Bicycle Usage in Japan, Hirotaka Koike, Akinori Morimoto, Kaoru Itoh, Department of Civil Engineering, Utsunomiya University Velomondial Conference Proceedings, Amsterdam 2000
4. ^ a b c d e “Cycling in the Netherlands” (PDF) (in English). Rijkswaterstaat (Dutch Ministry of Transport, Public Works and Water Management).
5. ^ Rietveld, Piet; Vanessa Daniel (August 2004). “Determinants of bicycle use: do municipal policies matter?”. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice 38 (7): 531–550. Elsevier. doi:10.1016/j.tra.2004.05.003. 
6. ^ a b c Ogilvie, David; Matt Egan, Val Hamilton, Mark Petticrew (2004-09-22). “Promoting walking and cycling as an alternative to using cars: systematic review”. British Medical Journal 329 (7469): 763. BMJ Publishing Group. doi:10.1136/bmj.38216.714560.55. PMID 15385407. 
7. ^ a b Hydén, C., Nilsson, A. & Risser, R. (1999-01-15). “WALCYNG:How to enhance WALking and CYcliNG instead of shorter car trips and to make these modes safer“. University of Lund, Sweden & FACTUM Chaloupka, Praschl & Risser OHG, Austria.
8. ^ Putative source according to the 1995 Nationwide Personal Transportation Survey
9. ^ LAB Bicycle-friendliness criteria
10. ^ Five E’s of Bicycle Friendliness
11. ^ a b c Legislative Tools for Preserving Town Centres and Halting the Spread of Hypermarkets and Malls Outside of Cities: Land Use Legislation and Controls of Conflicts of Interest in Land Use Decision Making, by Ken Baar, Ph.D. Institute for Transport and Development Policy, New York NY 10001, 2002
12. ^ Durning 1996 cited in Safe Travels, Evaluating Mobility Management Traffic Safety Impacts by Todd Litman & Steven Fitzroy Victoria Transport Policy Institute, 1250 Rudlin Street, Victoria, BC, V8V 3R7, CANADA
13. ^ Manual for Streets, ISBN 978-0-7277-3501-0 UK Department for Transport, 2007
14. ^ a b c d e f Cycle-Friendly Infrastructure: Guidelines for Planning and Design, Institution of Highways and Transportation, Cyclists Touring Club, 1996.
15. ^ “New Road City Centre Shared Space, Brighton (December 2007)”. Scheme of the Month: January 2008. Cycling England. Retrieved on 2008-03-18.
16. ^ Woonerf revisited Delft as an example, Steven Schepel, Childstreet2005 conference, Delft 2005 (Accessed 2007-02-21
17. ^ Transport Planning in Groningen, Holland Bicycle Fixation (Accessed 2007-01-27)
18. ^ The Impacts of Reallocating Roadspace on Accident Rates: Some Initial Evidence Sally Cairns Note from Road Danger Reduction Forum conference, Leicester, 16 February 1999. (Accessed 2007-02-02)
19. ^ DIVV Amsterdam
20. ^ Cycling in London Report, May 2008 section 4.6
21. ^ Speed reduction, traffic calming or cycling facilities: a question of what best achieves the goals?, Michael Yeates, Convenor, Cyclists Urban Speed limit Taskforce, Bicycle Federation of Australia, Velomondial Conference Proceedings, Amsterdam 2000
22. ^ The Graz traffic calming model and its consequences for cyclists, Manfred Hoenig, Department of transportation, City Council Graz, Velomondial Conference Proceedings, Amsterdam 2000
23. ^ Enabling and encouraging people to cycle, John Franklin, Paper presented to the Cambridge Cycling Campaign AGM, 5 October 1999
24. ^ Gary Cleland (2008-03-14). “\accessdate=2008-03-18 Speed cameras collect over £100m in fines”, The Daily Telegraph, Telegraph Media Group. 
25. ^ Learning from Hilden’s Successes, Rod King, Warrington Cycle Campaign, August 2004 (Accessed 2007-01-24)
26. ^ Home Zones briefing sheet, Robert Huxford, Proceedings, Institution of Civil Engineers, Transport, 135, 45-46, February 1999
27. ^ Road Narrowings and Pinch Points An Information Sheet, Galway Cycling Campaign, February 2001
28. ^ Cyclists at Road Narrowings, by Howard Peel, The Bike Zone. (Accessed 2007-01-27)
29. ^ “No accidents after road conversion in Norrköpping” (PDF), Newsletter, Shared Space. Retrieved on 2008-03-18. 
30. ^ Matt Hanka and John Gilderbloom (2008-02-01). “Opinion: Time to end one-way thinking”. Courier Journal. Retrieved on 2008-03-26.
31. ^ “way streets Traffic calming schemes: One way streets, banned turning movements and no entry restrictions”. Bury Metropolitan Borough Council. Retrieved on 2008-03-26.
32. ^ Verkehrssicherheit in Einbahnstraßen mit gegengerichtetem Radverkehr, Alrutz, D., Angenendt, W., Draeger, W., Gündel, D., Straßenverkehrstechnik, 6/2002
33. ^ Le SUL Cyclistes a contresens dans les sens uniques Groupe de Recherche et d’Action des Cyclistes Quotidiens, Brussels 2006, (Accessed 2007-01-27)
34. ^ Collection of Cycle Concepts, Danish Roads Directorate, Copenhagen, 2000
35. ^ a b Infrastructure position document, Dublin Cycling Campaign (Accessed 2007-01-27)
36. ^ a b Layout and Design Factors Affecting Cycle Safety at T-Junctions, Henson R. and Whelan N., Traffic Engineering and Control, October 1992
37. ^ a b Pedal cyclists at dual carriage-way slip roads, M.C. Williams and R.E. Layfield, Traffic Engineering and Control, pp. 597-600, November, 1987
38. ^ Accidents at Three Arm Priority Junctions on Urban Single Carriageway Roads Summersgill I., Kennedy J.V. and Baynes D. TRL Report 184, Transport Research Laboratory, 1996.
39. ^ Cyclists and Roundabouts-A review of literature, Allot and Lomax, 1991
40. ^ Multilane Roundabouts, An Information Sheet, Galway Cycling Campaign, February 2001
41. ^ a b c Priority for cycling in an urban traffic control system, Stephen D. Clark, Matthew W. Page, Institute for Transport Studies, University of Leeds, Velomondial Conference Proceedings, Amsterdam 2000
42. ^ Traffic Signal Actuators: Am I Paranoid? John S. Allen, 2003 (Accessed March 25 2008)
43. ^ Assessing the Impact of Local Transport Policy Instruments Susan Grant-Muller (Editor), ITS Working Paper 549, Institute of Transportat Studies, Leeds University, April 2000
44. ^ Green wave for cycles, Cycle Campaign Network News, No 85, November 2006
45. ^ Legally Speaking - with Bob Mionske: Law of the land
46. ^ a b Simon Jenkins (2008-02-29). “Rip out the traffic lights and railings. Our streets are better without them”, The Guardian, Guardian News and Media. Retrieved on 2008-03-18. 
47. ^ Cycling: the way ahead for towns and cities, European Commission, 1999
48. ^ a b Cycling in bus lanes, Reid S and Guthrie N TRL Report 610, Transport Research Laboratory 2004
49. ^ A.10 Bus Lanes and Bus Stops Cycling England design guidelines 2007
50. ^ a b Vélocité - la revue du cycliste urbain N° 79, janv. / fév. 2005
51. ^ The bicycle’s place in town Seminar organised by the Mayor’s Office of the 18th District, Paris, September 2004
52. ^ , Mairie de Bordeaux (Accessed 28 October 2007)
53. ^ UK Department for Transport March 2005
54. ^ Review of procedures associated with the development and delivery of measures designed to improve safety and convenience for cyclists Transport for London, January 2005
55. ^ Cycle Network and Route Planning Guide, Land Transport Safety Authority, New Zealand
56. ^ a b Mitbenutzung von Busspuren durch Radfahrer, Allgemeiner Deutscher Fahrrad-Club e.V./Bundesministeriums für Verkehr, January 2005. Translated here
57. ^ Cambridge Cycle Campaign, September 2003
58. ^ Cyclists In Dublin, Irish Times Letters, Tue, Oct 31, 2000
59. ^ Bus Drivers and Cyclists in Harmony, Warrington Cycle Campaign Leaflet, 2006
60. ^ Les couloirs bus + vélos VeloBuc (Accessed 22nd October 2007)
61. ^ Pucher and Buehler (2007-11-12). ““Making Cycling Irresistible: Lessons from the Netherlands, Denmark, and Germany”“.
62. ^ Lesson 17: Bicycle Parking and Storage, Federal Highway Administration University Course on Bicycle and Pedestrian Transportation Publication No. FHWA-HRT-05-133 July 2006
63. ^ a b Bicycle Access to Public Transportation: Learning from Abroad by Michael Replogle, Journal of the Institute for Transportation Engineers, December 1992
64. ^ Report: Ashcroft High School, Crawley Green Road. Discharge condition 3 (school travel plan), Report by: Development Control Manager, Luton Borough Council 14 July 2004
65. ^ CSO To Proceed With Impoundment of Bikes, by Benjamin Gottlieb Daily Nexus, University of California - Santa Barbara News, April 20, 2007 (Accessed 28 October 2007)
66. ^ Guide for Employers: Showers, lockers and drying room, London Cycling Campaign, 13 September 2006 (Accessed 16 August 2007)
67. ^ Ton Welleman: The autumn of the Bicycle Master Plan: after the plans, the products in: Proceedings of the 8th VELO-CITY Conference, Basel, 26-30 September 1995
68. ^ Cycling for Transportation: The Japanese Example By Paul Dorn (Accessed 2007-01-27)
69. ^ Article 4a European Parliament legislative resolution on the Council common position on international rail passengers’ rights and obligations (5892/1/2006 – C6-0311/2006 – 2004/0049(COD)) January 2007
70. ^ Taking bicycles on the VRR Rheinische Bahngesellschaft AG (Accessed 2007-02-23)
71. ^ First class to bike class Cycle Campaign Network News Archive 2006 (Accessed 2007-02-23)
72. ^ Bike and Ride
73. ^ New Ways to Explore Acadia
74. ^ http://www.yourcta.com/downloads/brochures/biketran.pdf
75. ^ Pace Bus - Bicycle Racks
76. ^
77. ^ Government helmet campaign could frighten cyclists off the road, Cheltenham cyclist, Summer 2003
78. ^ Two-headed ministry threatens future of cycling Cycle Campaign Network News, Issue No. 65 July 2003
79. ^ CTC submission to Choosing Health? A consultation on action to improve people’s health, CTC submission to the Wanless review, Cyclists Touring Club, 2004
80. ^ Travel: Bike ban for Shanghai, CNN.Com Tuesday, December 9, 2003 (Accessed 28 October 2007)
81. ^ The Becak: A Re(d)ordered Cycle Rebecca Lemaire, School of Oriental and African Studies, London, April 2000
82. ^ Drivers’ perceptions of cyclists, Basford, Reid, Lester, Thomson and Tolmie, TRL Report TRL549, Transport Research Laboratory, 2002
83. ^ Cyclism, by David Earl, Newsletter 53 Cambridge Cycling Campaign April/May 2004
84. ^ Animosity toward cyclists, Tadhg O’Higgins, 17 September 2007
85. ^ Anti-cyclist media bias Wheels of Justice (Accessed 2nd December 2007)
86. ^ Claims by BHIT (the Bicycle Helmet Initiative Trust), Bicycle Helmet Research Foundation (Accessed 28 October 2007)
87. ^ Shopping by bike, BUND Freunde der erde, Landesverband Berlin e.V (Accessed 28 October 2007)
88. ^ The Groceries Order - Essential for Competition, Consumer Choice and Value, The Retail Grocery, Dairy And Allied Trades’ Association, RGDATA, Dublin, Ireland, 2005
89. ^ Planning for Accessible and Sustainable Retail, The Town and Country Planning Association, July 2005
90. ^ Bikeability - The new National Standard for Cycle Training, Cycling England, 2006 (Accessed 2007-02-22)
91. ^ More people cycling, more safely, more often, Cycling England, 2006 (Accessed 2007-02-22)
92. ^ Get on your bike! Bicycle- and traffic lessons for foreigners in Tilburg, the Netherlands, Angela van der Kloof, Centre for Foreign Women, Velomondial Conference Proceedings, Amsterdam 2000
93. ^ Free City Bike Schemes, Søren B. Jensen, City of Copenhagen, Conference Proceedings, Amsterdam 2000
94. ^ Adshel

Notes

• Paul Niquette (1985). A Certain Bicyclist: An Offbeat Guide to the Post-Petroleum Age. Seven Palms Press. ISBN 0-912593-04-0. 

Cycling
v • d • e

Utility cycling | Recreational cycling | Bicycle racing

Utility cycling
v • d • e

Road cycling | Segregated cycle facilities | Vehicular cycling | Bicycle commuting
Utility bicycle | Bicycle trailer | Bike sharing

Retrieved from “http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Utility_cycling”
Categories: Utility cycling | Transportation planning | Sustainable transportHidden categories: All articles with unsourced statements | Articles with unsourced statements since March 2008 | Articles with specifically-marked weasel-worded phrases | Articles to be merged since October 2007

This entry was posted on Sunday, September 28th, 2008 at 1:01 am and is filed under Uncategorized. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.