Kerb Your Enthusiasm

Kerbs are actually quite interesting things, even if you didn't realise it. They are multi-functional, can be used to send messages and come in a huge array of shapes and sizes. So, let's hear it for kerbs!

What is wrong with this pedestrian dropped kerb at Cardiff Bay?
Read on to find out, but this inspired this post!

Being an engineer, I cannot switch off from being interested in technical things and so while on holiday recently, I was inspired to write this post after seeing a poor set of pedestrian dropped kerbs on a road in Cardiff Bay while on holiday! Very sad, I know, but this blog is part of my therapy, so sit back and enjoy the wonders of kerbs.

For those interested in lots of detail, I can suggest the fantastic Paving Expert website which gives an amazing insight into all things kerb (and indeed lots of other things to do with highway detailing!). 

First, some basics. Kerb is a UK term (Americans use "curb") and it refers to a civil engineering element used in highway construction to:

• Retain the edge of the top layers of a pavement (I use this in the structural sense of a carriageway, footway, cycle track etc, rather than the often used substitution of footway),
• A demarcation between different areas or uses of a highway - the obvious here is a kerb between a carriageway and footway,
• To provide a check or channel for surface water management,
• To provide restraint to prevent vehicles leaving the carriageway

Kerbs are available in a variety of materials, shapes, colours, profiles and sizes; with many performing multiple jobs. So, let's look at some applications, starting with dropped kerbs.

Much better. This time a speed table at Cardiff Bay with flush kerbs
for the pedestrian crossing points. Very expensive paving with tactile
paving made from stainless steel studs drilled and fixed to the paving!

Dropped Kerbs

The photo above from Cardiff Bay looks fine on the face of it, but if you look carefully between the tactile (knobbly) paving and the carriageway surface, the kerb actually has a upstand of about 25mm. 

The purpose of a dropped kerb for pedestrians is so they can cross the road easily. If you happen to be using a wheelchair, mobility scooter or pushing a buggy, this upstand can be annoying at best or a stop you getting back up onto the footway (leaving you in live traffic). 

Kerbs in this situation should be flush - the tactile paving is to alert blind/ partially sighted-people to the threshold between the footway and carriageway - look at Inclusive Mobility and Guidance on the Use of Tactile Paving Surfaces for more information.

Dropped kerbs are and should be laid with an upstand in some situations such as where a vehicle crossing is provided between the carriageway and the footway - the upstand provides tactile information to blind and partially-sighted people that this is the edge of the footway and it gives information to drivers (a small bump) that they are leaving a carriageway area. The upstand in this situation should be around 25mm (although 15mm to 40mm is the often used range).

The problem with dropped kerbs used for pedestrians is that the kerb type used is "bull-nosed" - that is, a kerb with a round chamfer on one corner which is around 15mm in radius. Unless care is taken in specifying a flush kerb, contractors often end up laying to the "watermark" (the start of the bull-nose) so that an upstand of 15mm is created.

I always specify that when laid for pedestrian use, bull-nosed kerbs are turned upside down to force the contractor to lay them flush - to be fair the transition kerbs used to go between full-height and dropped kerbs also have a bull-nose, but unless the dropped kerb is laid flush, it is not usable by all.

Even a small upstand can grab a tyre and throw the rider.
This photo actually shows a kerb across a junction where cyclists do
turn left into the side road!

The other thing to mention is that dropped kerbs are often used where cyclists leave or join the carriageway from a cycle track. While it isn't terrible to leave a cycle track on a small upstand, it is when leaving the carriageway. Where the transition is perpendicular to the line of travel, an upstand can be bounced up with a mountain bike or hybrid, but on a road bike, it is uncomfortable or can even lead to loss of control (and it cannot do the wheels any good). Where the transition is in line with the direction of travel, the upstand can "grab" wheels and throw the rider off - very dangerous. Again, all cycle transitions should be flush.

Seagull Lane, East London.

Staggered Pedestrian Crossings

I am not on the whole a fan of staggered crossings as they are not convenient to pedestrians (or cyclists where Toucans are used). They are staggered as a result of maximising motorised traffic flow. However, where the road to be crossed is very wide (perhaps 16 metres and wider) or a high speed route (40mph and higher) they may need to be used.

Aside from needing flush kerbs at the crossing points, kerbs can be used to provide a visual and tactile cue (for visually impaired users) that they are in a staggered area where pedestrian guardrail is not being used (I am not debating guardrail here though!).

Bus Stops

Kassel Access Kerb used at a bus stop at Cardiff Bay

Modern buses are low floor and have step-free areas within the passenger area so that people using wheelchairs and pushing buggies have somewhere to stay within the bus. This is all well and good, but if the kerbs at the bus stop are not set up right, then the bus may as well not be step-free.

There are several arrangements of bus in the UK (and all over the world of course). In London, most buses are two-door operation, cities such as Bristol use bendy buses with three doors (remember those, Boris?) and there are single door buses. To be fully accessible, a bus needs to be step free between at least one loading door and the passenger area.

Same stop at Cardiff Bay being used by a single door bus. The driver
has overshot the stop (poor approach layout) and so effectiveness
has been diminished. Had the driver stopped in the right place, there
would have been a step less than 100mm between the footway and
vehicle.

In terms of kerbs, it is the height (kerb upstand from the carriageway) which matters. I could (and might) write a whole post on accessible bus stop design, but in terms of kerbs, there are a couple of options. First, a bus stop kerb could be used. These are made by several companies such as the Marshalls Bus Stop Kerb which is used with a channel block to vary its upstand or the Brett Paving Kassel Access Kerb which comes in 160mm and 180mm flavours.

Wheelchair ramp deployed
Image from TfL Accessible Design Guidance.

Second, a standard kerb can be used, set to an appropriate height. In London, low floor buses are used which have very low floors and so the proprietary kerbs can be clipped by the vehicle. Transport for London suggests a kerb height of between 125mm and 140mm as being acceptable (see p43 of the document linked).

The intention is that the main loading door threshold is no more the 200mm away or higher than the kerb - the higher kerb options with a properly designed bus stop can get down to 50mm. This makes access easy for most people, including those pushing buggies or who have trouble using steps. Additionally, high kerbs allow simple use of a wheelchair ramp which is built in to modern buses.

Castle Square, Caernarfon.

Demarcation

Kerbs can be used to provide a demarcation between the uses of different areas. There has been a bit of a fashion for single surface (all areas at the same level) shared space highway layouts (a free-for all the highway which is dominated by traffic unless the area is access only in my view). A famous example is Exhibition Road in London, but here is a photo of a scheme in Caernarfon, North Wales which is infinitely more successful in my opinion.

The main square in the town allows traffic to pass through, but there are easier routes and so from what I could see, operates as an access area for traffic (deliveries, taxis and the odd lost tourist who missed all of the signs). In many ways, this town is choked with traffic on the outside as it is not only a hugely popular tourist destination, but takes through traffic. However, the centre is relatively calm and when I visited, there was a market and so pedestrians (and quite a few cyclists) dominated the space. There is little reason for traffic to enter the area unless the drivers needed to be there and so worked as a single surface shared space.

In terms of kerbs, wide granite kerbs had been used to suggest the route traffic should take through the space and where waiting is allowed in a "layby" (although there were more taxis than waiting space). The kerbs were a good colour contrast with the paving and so would have been helpful for those with reduced vision. 

There were no upstands so helpful for people with reduced mobility, but blind people would have struggled. However, there was a network of guidance paving in the space which was designed to help blind people to navigate, so it seemed to have been design with all users in mind. There was also a route on one side of the area with a Puffin Crossing - I thought this was a little over the top, but would give complete priority to less confident or mobile users; the kerbs were nice and flush at the crossing!

Vehicle Containment Kerbs

As with bus stops, there are a range of manufactured vehicle containment kerbs which are designed to redirect errant vehicles hitting them back on the correct path. Marshalls make the Titan Kerb and Brett Paving make the Trief Kerb, to name two. 

Essentially containment kerbs have a much higher upstand than "normal" kerbs - up to around 400mm in some cases. They are also shaped in such a way as to redirect vehicle wheels when hit from a shallow angle (up to 15 degrees or so from the line of travel). The sloping section of the kerb will flex the vehicle tyre and suspension pushing it back into the carriageway.

For some reason, Cardiff has containment kerbs at lots of pedestrian
refuge sites.
Image from Google Streetview.

These kerbs are most often used to protect something from vehicle incursion such as weak footways over bridges, bridge parapet walls or street furniture (mast lighting in dockyards for example). They are sometimes used on pedestrian refuges and traffic islands, but in any situation above around 15/20mph, there is a risk of injury to vehicle occupants if the kerbs are hit head on and so I would recommend not this use.

Drainage Kerb, Great Notley, Essex.
Image from Google Streetview.

Drainage Kerbs

Kerbs with integral drainage ducts can be used where there are flat gradients or long distances between outfall points. They are also useful in getting surface water off the carriageway surface quickly and so reduce spray and the risk of aquaplaning. 

Generally available as large sizes or small (and the same shape as "normal" kerbs), these are being increasingly specified. Perhaps unintended, but a lack of gullies in the carriageway channel may make life slightly easier for cyclists!

Drainage kerbs are easily recognisable as they have holes in their faces at regular intervals. The kerbs within are hollow (and two-part with the large ones) with the water running within a semi-circular "pipe" section which sites below the road surface. Where the area being drained is very flat, the "pipe" section will run under the rise and fall of water within, but will need more regular cleaning (silt and debris) than if there was a good fall.

Cycle Tracks
Well, my post would not be complete without a cycling reference and so I want to cover how kerbs can be used with cycle tracks. Although this is perhaps should be under the demarcation category, I have separated it as there is some debate about suitable kerbs at the moment.

A demarcation block on CS3 near the A13/ A406 junction in East
London. The blue cycle track probably does most of the visual work,
but the block provides tactile information.

At the most simple, we have a demarcation block or kerb which is used to separate the pedestrian and cyclist parts of a segregated shared-use cycle track. 

This is generally made up of small elements 200mm square with a sloped ridge about 25mm high. Not only is it designed as a visual break between user areas, but it provides tactile information to blind and partially-sighted pedestrians that there is a cycle track.

This type of layout is reasonably simple to implement and I would suggest it works the best where the two areas are surfaced in a contrasting material. The trouble can be that being at the same level, some users don't stick to "their" area leading to frustration for people using the facility correctly.

A solution to this issue is to separate the two areas with a kerb upstand which helps send the message (to pedestrians mainly) that if they step down, it will be into the cycle track - it is kind of intuitive.

The photo to the left shows this arrangement going into an underpass on CS3 where it goes under Royal Docks Road. A "normal" kerb will nominally set with a kerb face of about 125mm. This is too high as it risks the cyclist catching a pedal on the kerb and being thrown off. A change in level of 25mm might be helpful to remove this risk, but catching a wheel on the kerb is an issue as above for transitions.

Many campaigners suggest the use of a splay kerb. These are set with a 45 degree slope back and so present much less of a risk from being clipped by pedals and if they are clipped by wheels, they should push the cyclist back into the track rather than catching them as with a bull-nosed kerb. They are most often used in the UK on high speed single carriageway A-roads and allow a broken down vehicle to mount the kerb (or be pushed) to keep the carriageway clear.

The splay part of the kerb is essentially the slope of a right-anglef triangle with two 75mm sides and so when laid with a 75mm upstand (at the "watermark"), this provides the pedal clearance needed for cyclists. Splay kerbs are not anything special - they are generally off the shelf and laid like any other kerb and about the same cost as a demarcation block.

They have been used in the UK to separate cycle tracks and footways (they have been used for a long time in The Netherlands), but don't seem to be used on new schemes. To bring this post full circle, I also spotted this arrangement on holiday on the outskirts of Port Talbot on the A48.

Here we have splay kerbs laid at the watermark with a 75mm upstand. The verge was a bit overgrown and there were a few weeds about, but this was a pretty good set up. 

For this to reach perfection, I think the footway should have been paved in a lighter material (such as grey block paving) and for two-way use, the track should have been a bit wider (it was about 2 metres - 3 would have been great). 

A close up shot showing the cycle track laid at the watermark level
to give a 75mm upstand.

This is part of a route between Port Talbot and Swansea and has the arrangement on some large bridges. The trouble with the route was that approaching Swansea, the design gave way to shared-use, unsegregated cycle tracks and no priority for cycling other than at Toucan crossings. So, good links, but poor junctions.

So, there is a lot more to kerbs than meets the eye, but they perform vital jobs in all sorts of schemes; plus I hope I have given you something to think about!

I Am Not A Cyclist, I Am A Voter

david cameron thought he could silence cyclists with a few quid for a few places (which is dwarfed by his road spending plans), so it is even more important to keep the pressure on him to take cycling seriously as a mode of transport.

Cameron, Johnson. The Voters are coming...

Actually, this post is not about the funding (or lack of it), many others have written about the subject over the last week or so. I and many others think that the the announcement has been made in advance of the cycling debate planned in Parliament for Monday 2nd September. 

Perhaps he has tried to pre-empt the debate and if he had announced £77 billion rather than million, then he would have done so. No this post will be short and I am asking you to do two things;

1) Write to your MP asking them to attend the debate

2) Sign the petition started by the Times' Kaya Burgess calling for the Government to implement the recommendations of the the All Party Parliamentary Cycling Group's "Get Britain Cycling" report.

For those living and working in London, I have a further request and this is to join the London Cycling Campaign's protest ride to Parliament on the night of the debate calling for Space for Cycling. While the protest was kind of aimed at the Mayor of London to start with, it is gaining momentum and so will be aimed at all politicians to show leadership and that starts at the top with Cameron.

I am not a cyclist, I am a voter who wants to get around quickly, safely, cheaply, quietly, healthily and cleanly.

If you go back to the woods today

well, back to the transport research laboratory this week for a new cycle safety trial: this time, bus stop bypasses (or floating bus stops)

A TfL impression of a cycle bypass/ floating bus stop for Stratford.

As with my post on cycle signals, this is another part of Transport for London 'Safer Cycling Innovations' trials which TRL is undertaking for the Mayor to see how different street arrangements could be installed on London's streets to make cycling easier and safer. You may have seen the floating bus stop idea elsewhere, it is certainly not unique in other parts of Europe and there are some in the UK. 

For TfL, they are building them on the extension to Cycle Superhighway 2 (CS2X) between Bow and Stratford, so why run a trial? TfL can be a strange beast. In many ways it is a typical old-school organisation which does things by the book and is probably a bit risk adverse, but they do innovate and they well know that non-standard layouts or features often have parts which need approval from the Department for Transport; so they run trials and from what I can see, bully DfT just a little bit.

A rough sketch of the layout. Red is the bus with yellow doors and
black wheels, the orange rectangle is a bus shelter, the white circle
is the bus stop "flag", the dark grey is tactile paving for a crossing
point, the blue is the cycle lane/ track/lane arrangement and the
light grey is the footway/ bus stop island.

So, the current trial essentially is set up with a straight section of road which has a short section of mandatory cycle lane and then this turns into cycle track which bends left into a footway area; at the same time, the floating bus stop island tapers out from nothing. You then straighten up, pass the actual bus stop area and then bend right to rejoin the road with another section of mandatory lane. As you are dropped back on the road, the floating bus stop island tapers back to nothing, but you (in the real world) are protected by it as you rejoin the road.

The relationship between the cycle track and the footway/ bus stop is in the vertical as they are separated by a kerb. To get onto the island, a pedestrian has to step down into the track and back up to the bus stop or use dropped kerbs; in short, pedestrians treat the cycle track as a little carriageway and cycles have priority.. The CS2X design seems to show a speed table to help pedestrians to cross and slow cyclists - kind of suggested pedestrian priority - this was not on the TRL test layout.

A bi-directional cycle bypass, but with a shared area of
footway behind the bus stop on Cycle Superhighway 3
on the A13, near Barking. Footway and cycle track are
at the same level.

The trial was set up to test interaction between cyclists and pedestrians and there were plenty of both! Many runs took place with different amounts and frequency of cyclists and different concentrations/ movements of pedestrians. I think movement was being filmed and cycle speeds were measured. Not always the most riveting session, but for me the interest was in the good range of both cyclists and pedestrians in terms of demographic. In talking to some of the cyclists, there were clearly those happy to be on the road and those less happy and so I think the results will be interesting.

A random Dutch layout of bus stop with cycle track running behind.
Pedestrians have to cross the cycle track to access the stop. In
London (and I hope in the rest of the UK) we would provide dropped
kerbs either side of the cycle track so wheelchair users, people using
pushchairs or with reduced vision/ mobility could access the bus
stop - we can do bus stops better than the Dutch perhaps?
Image from Google Streetview.

So, what are the positives and negatives of the layout? From the cyclists' point of view, one would not have to move out to overtake a stationary bus. In some parts of London, it can feel like playing a game of leapfrog with buses overtaking and then having to overtake them when they stop. Plus, one would not have to move out into traffic also trying to overtake a bus which is not a fun manoever.

Of course, this would mean a bus stop only treatment and one would get dumped back in live traffic afterwards, but still safer than overtaking a bus and where general traffic is slowed or stopped by buses, the bypass allows cyclists to carry on a make progress (which is kind of the reason for cycling in town!). I can also see the benefits for cyclists being magnified when going uphill and there is the protection from the bus stop island when one pops out the other end.

Despite Copenhagen being a pretty cycle friendly city, in very many
places, passengers wait behind the cycle track and then cross it to
get on the bus which is immediate conflict with cyclists, but locals
seem to be used to the layout - see the comments at the end of this
post, but cyclists are prohibited from "undertaking" the bus when it
unloading.
Image Google Streetview.

However, while the cyclists vs bus/ traffic conflicts are removed, it does create new conflicts with cycles vs pedestrians. 

Where the cycle track has priority, the risk to pedestrians will be where one steps onto the track on which cycles have priority. This could at best be an exchange of words, but at worst, it could injure or even kill a pedestrian. I got the impression that the trial would look at cycle speed/ pedestrian density - I certainly slowed down when the footway and bus stop was busy and despite being under controlled conditions, I felt that someone could step in my way. But, at least the kerb upstand sends out the same cue to a pedestrian as any "road" would. I imagine that for people with reduced vision, the kerb and the upstand will be vital for their safe navigation.

I also think the position of the bus shelter and/or flag is important as passengers will wait near it. I think it is better for people to be waiting on the island and not the footway as when the bus pulls up, people will stream across the cycle track. Of course, this means the island has to be large enough to accommodate people not only waiting for a bus, but those leaving it who need to pause to check it is safe to cross - a large area for footway, cycle track and island will often eat into space currently used by traffic and so there will be the argument over space as ever.

Ultimately, this is an off-street trial and is arranged to help people decide how a new cycle friendly city could work (and not work, which is just as important). This and the other trials allow things to be tried in a safe and controlled way. The bus stop bypass is one thing which could be built, but it still needs to be part of a consistent approach. 

My guess is, that this trial and all of the others will not only inform some of TfL's current work, but form part of the London Cycle Design Standards overhaul which is well overdue its release. People have criticised TfL on spending money on these trials, but they need to go to DfT on some aspects for authority. Compared to the £500,000 being blown in Scotland on the feeble "Nice Way Code", at least TfL is working towards something real - perhaps the Scottish Government and TfL should pool their resources?

Prudential RideLondon FreeCycle

Today was the start of a weekend of cycling in london starting with the Ridelondon freecycle taking in 8 miles of The City and Westminster on traffic-free routes, with all the famous sights.

Just a few words for this post and they are just to say it was a great experience with riders on all different types of bikes, of different abilities and different ages - just how mass cycling should be. So, here are some photos of what was a great day out!