AAA Pre-Screening

CLOSED: This discussion has concluded.

View a summary of the pre-screening that was completed to eliminate design options that do not meet AAA cycling facility design requirements.

The design options were pre-screened to evaluate their alignment with AAA design requirements. For all three study corridors, the “do nothing” option was screened out. Options 1 and 3 scored the highest in terms of meeting the goals of AAA facilities as they provide separate spaces for riders and pedestrians and riders travel in the same direction as vehicles, improving safety at intersections.

A summary of the AAA pre-screening is provided below. Letter grades of A, B, C, D, and F are provided to indicate the level of preference for each of the alternatives, with A being most preferred and F being least preferred.

AAA Pre-screening of options for all corridors

AAA Design Criterion	Option 0 Do Nothing	Option 1 Protected Cycling Lanes	Option 2.1 Multi-Use Pathway (One Side)	Option 2.2 Multi-Use Pathway (Two Sides)	Option 3 Cycle Track
Comfortable width and separation from vehicles	F	B	D	C	A
Cycling access to key destinations	D	B	D	C	B
Evenness of cycling facility	A	B	D	D	A
Impact of steep sections*	B	B	B	B	B
Rider safety (four sub-criteria)	D	B	C	C	A
Cohesion	C	C	C	C	A
Conclusion	Does not adequately meet AAA requirements. Not carried forward.	Meets majority of AAA requirements. Carried forward.	Meets approx. half of the AAA requirements. Carried forward.	Meets approx. half of the AAA requirements. Carried forward.	Meets majority of AAA requirements. Carried forward.

*Steep sections of Eramosa Road do not meet AAA cycling facility requirements

Following the AAA pre-screening, Design Options 1, 2.1, 2.2, and 3 were evaluated by comparing the level of preference for each option across all of the evaluation criteria. Details on the evaluation for each corridor are provided in separate posts at haveyoursay.guelph.ca/cycling-network-study.