A "Pinch-Point" design which slows cars without "pinching" bikes

On-road cycle-lane approaching a pinch-point. A potentially dangerous situation for cyclists. Note how from this view the driving lanes appears to narrow at the pinch-point.

Pinch points are often installed on roads to slow motor vehicles and to provide crossing places for pedestrians. They are often dangerous for cyclists. Road lanes which suddenly narrowed to encourage drivers to slow down can force them to come too close to cyclists resulting in close and dangerous overtaking or even a collision. However pinch-points do not have to be built in this way. In this blog post I illustrate a "pinch point" which doesn't really pinch at all. While the pinch-point appears from a distance to restrict the space for cars, resulting in drivers slowing down at the junction, the driving lane actually widens through the pinch point. The cycle-lane has constant width.

Thorbeckelaan from ground level
Thorbeckelaan has a 50 km/h speed limit. These photos were both taken while riding along the road from west to east.

Before the pinch-point. The driving lane is 2.8 metres wide, the cycle-lane 2.1 m wide. Note reasonably wide parking bays and a 0.5 m wide drain. The width of the drain helps to reduce dooring incidents (explained here), as does this being relatively infrequently moving residential parking and not business parking.

At the pinch-point, the cycle-lane remains the same width while the driving lane increases to 3.5 m in width. This still causes drivers to slow down. The narrowing of the driving lane back to 2.8 metres is visible after the central reservation. At this point there is of course no space for car parking.

From the air
Aerial photos (from Google Maps and Ongelukken Kaart) provide another view of the same cycle and driving lanes. The photos above were taken facing east (i.e. view is from left to right on the photos below):

On-road cycle-lanes - not really a good idea
This blog post highlights a good example of how a pinch-point can be built which successfully reserves space for pedestrians crossing the road and also slows drivers, without squeezing cyclists. It's certainly an improvement over other pinch-points I've seen where cyclists are squeezed by drivers as they pass through pinch-points. However I don't mean to suggest that this road layout, with an on-road cycle-lane, is actually particularly good. Such infrastructure shouldn't be an aspiration.

On-road cycle-lanes are well known to cause a myriad of problems for cyclists worldwide, but context is always important. This arrangement works fairly well on this road because cyclists travelling west-east along this particular road are protected from conflict by several other factors which are specific to the character of this road:

1. There are few destinations on this road so few clashes with drivers starting and stopping.
2. Residential side streets do not provide through routes by car and therefore few cars turn into or out of the side roads.
3. There are no bus-stops along this road.
4. The cycle-lane is of a good width, providing wiggle room.
5. The parking along the road is for residents, so those cars rarely move and the drain provides a gap where there are parked cars, reducing the risk of dooring.

Because of these factors, almost all motor traffic on this road travels all the way from one end to the other without stopping and there are few conflicts caused by drivers cutting across the cycle-lane. Note that both ends of this road have extremely safe junctions. At one end there is a very safe roundabout and the other has a very safe traffic light junction. Neither of those relatively large junctions have ever caused cyclist injury.

In other locations the problems would be greater. That is the reason why this layout is by no means a substitute for proper cycle-paths. Though it is overall quite well designed, this road (when riding west to east) is still one of the least pleasant along which to cycle within Assen. In particular, being overtaken by a bus or truck while riding side by side in the cycle-lane is not especially pleasant.

On the other side of the road there's a segregated cycle-path.
A video shows the popularity of the sports club on that side

The other side of the road
This road is unusual in that while there is an on-road lane for cyclists heading from west to east, cyclists heading in the east-west direction are provided with a kerb separated cycle-path on the other side of the road. The cycle-path not only feels far safer but due to being 2.5 metres wide and having a 0.5 metre buffer, it provides more space for cyclists further from motor vehicles.

On this side of the road, there is little or no discomfort due to being passed by a large vehicle.

Note that with a proper separate cycle-path, pinch-points have no effect whatsoever on cyclists so can be made quite narrow in order to reduce the speed of motor vehicles. However on this road the driving lane widens on both sides through the pinch-point.

Read about other examples of pinch points with cycle-paths and at village entrances.

This junction doesn't have a good safety record. Why ?
This road is a busy west-east route for both bicycles and motor vehicles. On its length there are three pinch points of a very similar design to that emphasized here. Two of these pinch points have a good safety record while this one has a relatively bad record by the standards of Assen. Why ? The reason is that this pinch point also happens to be a junction with a busy main cycle-route north-south which provides access from some suburban areas in the North to the city centre.

The red flag with "10" within it on the second aerial photograph tell us that this junction has seen ten incidents since 2007, four of which caused injuries to cyclists, one of which injured a moped rider and one of which caused the unfortunate death in 2009 of a 76 year old female moped rider, in collision with a large car.

A cropped version of the first photo in this blog post. Does
each participant in this scene know what the others are doing?

The most common recorded cause of crashes at this location is "no priority given". This suggests that people find it difficult to see each other well while maneuvering or find it difficult to judge whether they have time to complete a maneuvre. Turning across traffic from an on-road cycle-lane is always difficult because the cyclist's proximity to the driving lane results in having limited rear visibility. 180 degree head swiveling is required to see behind, which complicates control of the bicycle and makes correct decisions more difficult to make. The lack of gap between the cycle infrastructure and road also makes it more difficult for drivers to predict cyclist behaviour. Could you tell at a glance what everyone in the photo beside this paragraph was about to do ?

It has been known for many years that unsignalled crossings are far more dangerous than either well designed roundabouts or well designed traffic light junctions. Therefore it should not be surprising to us that the well designed junctions at both ends of this road (both of which are illustrated at the links in the previous sentence) have a far better safety record than this relatively minor junction half way along this road.

Due to the designed higher speed of this road (speed limit 50 km/h), the heavier traffic at this location and limited sight-lines compared with motor vehicle speed, this is not a suitable location for a cycle priority crossing like those which I looked at a few weeks ago.

How not to build a pinch-point
Pinch points which cause problems for cyclists are far more common than those which do not. Here are two examples which featured regularly on my commutes in Cambridge:

Don't copy this: Several narrow pinch points exist on the narrow but busy trunk road which passes through Harston in Cambridgeshire. Cyclists have no good alternative to using this road. Drivers habitually exceed the speed limit here, especially at the ends of the village where the speed limit drops sharply from 60 mph to 30 mph. I estimate the width of the road through this pinch point to be around 3 m. No additional space is provided for cycling. Note also dangerous steel railings which cyclists can be pushed against and that the paint pattern used in the middle of the road through almost the entire village also encourages drivers to give as little space as possible when overtaking cyclists.

Don't copy this: When the new development of Orchard Park was built in Cambridge, the re-design of roads near the development brought many new dangers for cyclists. Several crossings and other features were added to Kings Hedges Road and they were nearly all built with pinch points in widths known to encourage close passes by drivers. Orchard Park could have been built similarly to new Dutch developments. e.g. Kloosterveen

Both of the examples of pinch-points above increase danger to cyclists. They reserve no separate space for cyclists at all and they encourage bad overtaking behaviour by drivers, especially those who misjudge the speed of a cyclist and believe they have more time to overtake than in actually the case.

But it's not only in other countries that mistakes have been made. We don't have to look very far from home in the Netherlands to find bad examples from this country. For example, we also have these examples near the centre of Groningen and in a residential area in Assen:

Don't copy this: This very poor pinch-point in Groningen demonstrates nearly the opposite of what is shown in the good example above. The road lane decreases from 3.5 m to 2.8 m through the pinch point while the cycle-lane is an inadequate 1.2 m the whole time. This leaves a width which encourages close overtakes - e.g. by that bus. Just because something exists in the Netherlands, that doesn't mean it's a good example

Copy this only with caution: This is a residential street in Assen which has a relatively minor speeding and through traffic problem. These planters create a different type of pinch-point, potentially causing conflict between cyclists and drivers heading in both directions. Even when the same idea is used with a cycle bypass there is still potential for danger.

Just because something exists in the Netherlands, that doesn't mean it's a good example. Context is always important and ideas which may work well enough in one street in the Netherlands cannot necessarily be translated to a different place and work well there too. Older examples like this are perhaps more understandably sometimes of poor design, but there are also examples of less well thought through brand new infrastructure which work poorly.

Not enough space ?

One of many very narrow streets in
Assen which didn't have enough space
for a pinch-point or for motor vehicles
either. Assen moved the through
motor traffic elsewhere.

I predict that some peoples' response will be there is not enough space in a given location for a safe pinch point to be built. This may be true for some locations, but if it is true then I would contend that before considering building a dangerous design of pinch point you should think very carefully about whether any pinch point at all is appropriate in that location.

Other ways of removing conflict are possible. For instance, moving motor vehicles onto completely different routes. This has resulted in many minor streets and roads in the Netherlands working extremely well for cyclists and pedestrians without the need for pinch points or other obvious physical infrastructure.

Learn more by seeing the real thing

Book now

We offer the only independent study tours of Dutch cycling infrastructure with a native English speaking guide to minimise the chance of "lost in translation" errors. On our study tours we take care to demonstrate not only many good examples of good infrastructure but also explain why the less good examples should not be emulated.

Central reservations enable cyclists and pedestrians to cross safely

Where cyclists or pedestrians must cross a road which is used by an appreciable number of motor vehicles, central reservations make a huge difference to safety. They allow the cyclist to cross just one stream of traffic at once, which is moving in one direction, before making a second decision from the centre of the road before crossing again.

Of course, such a reservation needs to be adequate in size. The crossing shown above, in a residential area in Assen by the local shops, allows two cyclists travelling in each direction to pass each other, and is long enough for a bicycle with trailer to stop safely in the middle. it also has a completely separate crossing for pedestrians, and of course both the cycle and pedestrian paths on both sides of the street. The speed limit for cars is 50 km/h (30 mph).

Here is another view of the crossing:

Open in Google Maps - note that cyclists don't suffer from a "pinch" effect due to cars because there are separate cycle-paths either side of the crossing.

When we first moved to Assen, there
was no central reservation at this
crossing. Image from a leaflet
explaining the change

This is an example of a crossing which works extremely well for cyclists, but it is not in any way an unusual or unique design. It's actually strikingly normal - there are so many crossings like this in Assen that I couldn't possibly count them. You need look no more than a hundred metres to the South from this one to find three more which are similar (see them here on Google Maps).

However, that this is very common doesn't imply that such crossings have existed forever. Actually, this one was retrofitted quite recently.

Back of the same leaflet
explaining what was
being done to improve
safety. Particularly
aimed at school children

Note five features on and around this crossing which make motorists slow down. Firstly, the shape of the crossing requires that motorists must decelerate and change course to go around it. Secondly, the width of the lanes either side of the central reservation is narrow which makes maneuvering difficult at speed. Thirdly, the road is narrow and there is no central white line. This makes motorists less sure of their position on the road and further reduces speed. Fourthly, the speed limit is 50 km/h (30 mph) on this street, which provides access, and 30 km/h (18 mph) on surrounding streets. Fifthly, there is also a pedestrian zebra crossing here for which motorists must stop if a pedestrian is crossing. Cyclists don't have priority in this case, but often receive it anyway.

The requirement that motorists have to swerve could be dangerous to cyclists due to a pinching effect if cyclists were on the street but because there are parallel cycle-paths on both sides of the street there is no danger at all.

See also videos showing the same crossing in use by hundreds of school children.

This can be seen as something which is easily "lost in translation" when implemented elsewhere because while the same concept might appear elsewhere, the implementation is completely different. For example, here's the same concept as implemented in Cambridge, UK:

Crossing of Madingley Road in Cambridge, UK. This is one of several roads in Cambridge which are unpleasant to cycle along and which can be difficult to cross safely by bicycle. We used to do this with our children, but this made us very much the exception as most people would not see this as a safe thing to do with their children. It's important for campaigners to realise that they are part of a self-selected group. Conditions like this are a reason why keen cyclists stop when they have children.

The example shown at the top of this blog post from Assen is on a relatively minor street with a slow speed limit and a significant but not enormous flow of vehicles. Those are the conditions in which  a crossing, if built to a high enough standard, can work well. However this Cambridge example is on a major arterial road, one of the busiest in Cambridge. This central reservation is too small in both dimensions. It does not slow traffic because the lanes either side of the reservation are too wide and it doesn't cause motor vehicles to change course, but the central reservation is also too narrow. Only one person can use it at a time and it can't be used if towing a trailer. It also doesn't feel safe because there is not much separation from high speed traffic. There's also no separate provision for pedestrians and neither pedestrians nor cyclists are prioritised at this crossing.

What's more, the speed limit here is much higher than that of the Assen example, at 40 mph (64 km/h) and this is a major arterial road into Cambridge so there are usually far more cars driving here than you find at the equivalent looking crossing in Assen.

When we crossed at this point with our children it was difficult to accompany them and cross the road safely. What's more, when I pulled a child trailer across this junction it didn't fit, so I had to make the crossing in one step.

It's an example of something extremely inadequate being installed in completely the wrong situation. The closest equivalents we have in Assen would be this or this.

Another view of the crossing of Madingley Road. It's similar to Huntingdon Road a little further North and many other roads in and around Cambridge. These are part of the reason why Cambridge's cycling is limited to a demographic group. View Larger Map

If your only reference to good infrastructure design comes from books, websites and looking at Google Maps, then it is very easy to misinterpret what is seen on the ground in the Netherlands. This is why it is important that planners from English speaking countries should see for themselves what good infrastructure actually looks like, and see it in the country which has the best standards. Referring only to what is in, for example, the UK can only result in copying from bad examples. It is to try to help to prevent this problem that we organise study tours.

See other examples of ideas "lost in translation", enabling of crossing the road, and perhaps most important, examples of what works in the Netherlands.

Reducing speeds in villages. Britain vs. The Netherlands

View Larger Map

When we were in Britain last October we drove from one of our parents to the other. It was an interesting experience being back on Britain's roads and making a long journey by car. One of the things we especially noticed after our absence from Britain's roads was how attempts had been made to limit speeds on roads through villages, but that they were inadequate. Speeds remained too high, and conditions for cyclists and pedestrians remained unpleasant.

The example above is of the A153 entering the village of Coningsby in Lincolnshire, and that's the example I'll use in this blog post. There are hundreds of villages along similar roads in the UK. but this is the one by which I stopped and took some photos:

Dangerous British example: Cycle on the road through a pinch point with 40 mph (64 km/h) motor vehicles.

The national speed limit of 60 mph ( 100 km/h ) applies along most of the length of the A153. On entering the village this falls to 40 mph ( 64 km/h ). A reduction in speed is encouraged by signs and a central reservation which doubles as a space for pedestrians to cross the road, though there there is nothing other than grass verge to walk on if you reach the other side of the road.

The A153 has no parallel cycle or pedestrian path. Anyone who wants to travel the 4.5 miles between the next village, Mareham-le-Fen and this one has to use the road. Many journeys are made between villages separated by this sort of distance in order to shop, use sport facilities, go to school or to commute. Coningsby is a desirable destination from Mareham because there are more shops and other facilities in this larger village. However, because cycling along here means being overtaken by vehicles travelling at 100 km/h, very few people would consider it. We stopped for several minutes to take these photos and no cyclists or pedestrians were seen. Everyone who was making this journey made it by car, van or truck.

Where there are two vehicles heading in opposite directions, there is very little room for a motorist to overtake a cyclist.

A few metres past the 40 mph speed limit signs there is a central reservation. It is narrow and does not require drivers to divert much from a straight line. Many vehicles are still travelling in excess of the speed limit when they reach this point. Calls can be made that drivers should slow to well below the speed limit when passing a cyclist inside the pinch point, but they won't be heeded. The result is that anyone on a bicycle will be passed extremely close by a motor vehicle which arrives in the same place at the same time. This does not make for a pleasant or safe experience when cycling. Alternatively, the cyclist can "take the lane" and attempt to force motorists approaching from behind to brake sharply, but this also is doesn't make for pleasant or safe cycling and causes resentment amongst drivers.

This design of road, and this design of traffic calming, is lethal. What's more, given the high speeds that remain through the village, it doesn't even result in particularly pleasant conditions for those who live there.

The reason why this particular feature of the road grabbed my attention was that a few days previously I'd pointed out something very similar in concept to the study tour group from Vilnius when they visited us in Assen.

If you had heard only a description of these two roads and not seen the physical reality then they would probably sound like almost the same thing. However, they are not the same in practice. Here is the "equivalent" traffic calming design in Assen:


Grotere kaart weergweven

The Witterhoofdweg has a speed limit of 60 km/h ( 37 mph ) before the signs and 30 km/h ( 18 mph ) through the village. This is the speed limit through most villages in this area. A third of the Dutch road network now has a speed limit of 30 km/h or lower.

Safe Dutch example: Speed limit is 30 km/h (18 mph) and cyclists have a completely separate cycle-path rather than riding through the pinch point with motor vehicles

The central reservation is much larger than the British example and requires drivers to change course quite dramatically as they drive around it. You couldn't drive through here at the speeds at which drivers in Britain routinely enter Coningsby.

The reservation is 4.5 metres wide, meaning there is ample space in which to wait to cross the road even with a loaded bicycle. On the other side of the road there is a cycle-path which you may well want to reach. Now how on the left side of the photo you can see the three metre wide cycle-path which continues the entire length of the village, even though the speed limit on the road is 30 km/h. At junctions with side-roads in the village, the cycle-path has priority. This results in a continuous, convenient and stress free experience for cyclists.

Looking in the opposite direction we get a good view of the cycle-path as it enters the village. The complete separation of cyclists and drivers ensure that making cars swerve to slow them down doesn't in any way endanger cyclists passing this point at the same time.

For most of the distance from Assen the cycle-path is separated by too large a distance from the road for it to easily appear in photos taken from the road. This cycle-path is four metres wide.

At the opposite end of the village there is a similar traffic calming construction. Cyclists retain a very good degree of subjective and actual safety right through this village and out the other side.

Add caption

At the time when we took this photo it was a cold winter day in the Christmas holidays. However, there was a regular stream of cyclists, as there always is. When the schools are in session, this is part of a route taken by thousands of children each day who ride their bikes from villages to the South West of Assen into the city. Witten, where these photos were taken, is just 3.6 km from the centre of the city. However, this is merely the half way point to the next village, Bovensmilde, which is 6.6 km away - almost exactly the same distance as Mareham-le-Fen to Coningsby, and many people travel along here by bike from other villages considerably further away than that. Because the distance can be covered on cycle-paths, the experience will be pleasant and safe when doing so, and it's convenient to cycle, people cycle.

Written descriptions of these two traffic calming devices would sound the same. However, in reality they are different. Aerial views of both traffic calming features to the same scale:


Coningsby. The signs are above the top of this view, the central reservation is just behind the truck. No need to divert at all while driving through here. While there is space for a cycle-path, none has been built  - View Larger Map


Witten. The signs are very close to the central reservation (see shadows to the right), motorists have to divert from a straight line to cross this point. Cycle-paths lead in all directions, all separated from the road, some by a considerable distance - Grotere kaart weergeven

Now I expect some readers to point out that the A153 is a larger more strategic road than the Witterhoofdweg. They'd be right of course. But larger roads in the Netherlands have rather more care taken to preserve the rights of cyclists and pedestrians to go about their everyday business in peace, not less. A traffic calming feature like this simply has no place on a busy road like the A153.

In Britain, the same ideas have been used as in the Netherlands, but they are often applied in a much weaker way, and often in staggeringly inappropriate places. That is what the blog posts tagged "lost in translation" show.