DPTI Bikeway Pavement Guidelines 2

Safety and Service Division
Guide to Bikeway
Pavement Design
Construction & Maintenance
for South Australia
Department of Planning, Transport and Infrastructure
Safety and Service Division
Guide to Bikeway Pavement Design, Construction & Maintenance for South Australia
Any material contained in the Guide may be reproduced without permission provided the
source is acknowledged. The State of South Australia and the Department of Planning,
Transport, and Infrastructure (DPTI) and its employees, contractors or agents involved in the
preparation and publication of the Guide do not accept any contractual, tortious or other form
of liability for its contents or for any consequences arising from its use. Those using the
information in the report should apply, and rely upon, their own skill and judgement.
FOREWORD
The purpose of this Guide is to present a basis for designing, constructing and maintaining
bikeway pavement configurations that should generally provide acceptable in-service
performance. The Guide is intended for a range of users that includes technical and
professional staff in local government, consultants, and experienced pavement specialists
within and external to DPTI.
An early version of this document was published by Transport SA in October 2001 as a draft
for comment. Feedback from many sources and various changes to the Austroads
pavement design procedures for light traffic have been incorporated within this update. The
economic analysis and Whole-of-Life Costing of bikeways is no longer a part of the Guide as
it has been the subject of a national development project under the direction of the
Australian Bicycle Council and the former Department of Transport and Regional Services
(DOTARS). The User guide to bicycle and shared path selection using whole-of-life costing
ARRB (2005a) is available online.
The development of this Guide has been limited by the scarcity of recorded performance
data for in-service bike paths within South Australia. Nevertheless the Guide summarises
the pavement engineering principles and practices that DPTI considers are applicable to
bikeway pavement structures.
KNet Doc No.: 9203112 Version No.: 1 UNCONTROLLED COPY WHEN PRINTED
Issue Date: January 2015 Doc. Owner: Pavement Engineering Unit ii
CONTENTS
PART A – GENERAL 1
1 INTRODUCTION .............................................................................................. 1
2. BIKEWAY CHARACTERISTICS ...................................................................... 2

2.1 Bikeway Types and Users ................................................................................ 2
2.2 Bikeway Widths ................................................................................................ 2
3. BIKEWAY SURFACES .................................................................................... 3

3.1 Function of Bikeway Surfaces........................................................................... 3
3.2 Types of Surfacing............................................................................................ 3
3.3 Performance Characteristics ............................................................................ 4
3.4 Investigation Levels .......................................................................................... 4
4. ECONOMIC CONSIDERATIONS ..................................................................... 5
PART B – PAVEMENT SELECTION 6

5. PAVEMENT TYPES ......................................................................................... 6
6. SELECTION OF PAVEMENT TYPE ................................................................ 6

6.1 Unsurfaced Granular ........................................................................................ 6
6.2 Granular with Sprayed Treatment ..................................................................... 7
6.3 Granular with Bituminous Slurry Surfacing ....................................................... 8
6.4 Granular with Asphalt ....................................................................................... 8
6.5 Concrete ........................................................................................................... 8
6.6 Concrete Block Pavers (CBPs) ....................................................................... 10
6.7 Coloured Pavements ...................................................................................... 10
6.8 Paving Fabrics ................................................................................................ 11
6.9 Bikeway Selection Based on Structural Criteria .............................................. 11
6.10 Bikeway Selection Based on Functional Criteria ............................................. 13
PART C – PAVEMENT DESIGN 14

7. DESIGN PROCESS ....................................................................................... 14
8. SUBGRADE EVALUATION ........................................................................... 15

8.1 General........................................................................................................... 15
8.2 Subgrade Strength ......................................................................................... 15
8.3 Presumptive Values ........................................................................................ 17
8.4 Soil Strength Assessment and Testing ........................................................... 17
8.5 Expansive Subgrades ..................................................................................... 19
8.6 Subgrade Stabilisation .................................................................................... 20
9. PAVEMENT MATERIALS .............................................................................. 20

9.1 Granular Material ............................................................................................ 20
9.2 Asphalt ........................................................................................................... 22
9.3 Concrete ......................................................................................................... 24
9.4 Concrete Block Pavers (CBPs) ....................................................................... 24
Issue Date: January 2015 Doc. Owner: Pavement Engineering Unit iii
10. DESIGN TRAFFIC LOADING ........................................................................ 24
10.1 Design periods and units of loading ............................................................ 25
10.2 Foot and Bicycle Traffic............................................................................... 25
10.3 Heavy Vehicle Loading................................................................................ 25
10.4 Summary .................................................................................................... 25
11. FLEXIBLE PAVEMENT DESIGN ................................................................... 27

11.1 General ....................................................................................................... 27
11.2 Unsurfaced Granular Bikeways ................................................................... 27
11.3 Sprayed Seal Granular Bikeways ................................................................ 28
11.4 Slurry Seal Granular Bikeways .................................................................... 29
11.5 Asphalt Surfaced Granular Bikeways .......................................................... 30
11.6 Concrete Block Paver Bikeways.................................................................. 30
12. RIGID PAVEMENT DESIGN .......................................................................... 31

12.1 General ....................................................................................................... 31
12.2 Minimum Pavement Configurations............................................................. 32
12.3 Detailing ...................................................................................................... 32
PART D - CONSTRUCTION 33
13. SURFACE TOLERANCE ............................................................................... 33
14. EDGE RESTRAINT AND SEPARATION ....................................................... 33

14.1 Restraint ..................................................................................................... 33
14.2 Separation................................................................................................... 34
14.3 Edge Restraint Systems .............................................................................. 34
15. GRANULAR MATERIAL CONSTRUCTION .................................................. 35
16. ASPHALT BIKEWAY CONSTRUCTION ....................................................... 36

16.1 Pre-treatment .............................................................................................. 36
16.2 Spreading and Compaction ......................................................................... 36
17. CONCRETE BIKEWAY CONSTRUCTION .................................................... 36

17.1 General ....................................................................................................... 36
17.2 Joints .......................................................................................................... 36
17.3 Anchor Blocks ............................................................................................. 38
17.4 Vehicle Crossovers ..................................................................................... 39
17.5 Reinforcement............................................................................................. 39
17.6 Surface Finish ............................................................................................. 39
17.7 Curing ......................................................................................................... 39
18. CONCRETE BLOCK PAVER CONSTRUCTION ........................................... 39
19. DRAINAGE ..................................................................................................... 40

19.1 Surface Drainage ........................................................................................ 40
19.2 Subsurface Drainage .................................................................................. 40
20. VEGETATION ................................................................................................ 40

20.1 Pavement Damage Considerations ............................................................. 40
21. CONSTRUCTION OF SERVICE CROSSINGS .............................................. 41

Issue Date: January 2015 Doc. Owner: Pavement Engineering Unit iv
PART E – MAINTENANCE 42
22. MAINTENANCE OF BIKEWAYS ................................................................... 42
22.1 General Requirements ................................................................................ 42
22.2 Pavement Surface Tolerances .................................................................... 42
22.3 Drainage ..................................................................................................... 42
22.4 Crack Filling ................................................................................................ 43
22.5 Resurfacing ................................................................................................. 43
23. MAINTENANCE CONSIDERATIONS ............................................................ 43

23.1 Flexible Pavements ..................................................................................... 43
23.2 Rigid Pavements ......................................................................................... 44
24. SAFETY DURING WORKS ............................................................................ 45
25. MONITORING ................................................................................................ 46

25.1 Surface Shape ............................................................................................ 46
25.2 Skid Resistance .......................................................................................... 47
25.3 Cracking and other Surface Irregularities .................................................... 48
25.4 Rating Systems for Paths............................................................................ 48
25.5 Intervention Treatments .............................................................................. 49
APPENDIX A: PROPOSED INTERVENTION TREATMENTS ................................ 50
APPENDIX B: TECHNICAL BASIS FOR BIKEWAY DESIGNS.............................. 52

B.1 Subgrade Strengths ........................................................................................... 52
B.2 Traffic Loading ................................................................................................... 52
B.3 Minimum Pavement Configurations ................................................................... 53
APPENDIX C: MATERIAL SPECIFICATIONS ........................................................ 54
APPENDIX D: CONCRETE BLOCK PAVER SAND GRADINGS ........................... 56
APPENDIX E: DESIGN CHART FOR GRANULAR PAVEMENTS WITH THIN

BITUMINOUS SURFACING (Austroads 2012)........................................................ 57
APPENDIX F: THICKNESS DESIGN OF CONCRETE BIKEWAYS ....................... 58
APPENDIX G: SIGNING AND DELINEATION OF WORKS..................................... 60
REFERENCES .......................................................................................................... 63
INDEX ....................................................................................................................... 65
Issue Date: January 2015 Doc. Owner: Pavement Engineering Unit v
PART A – GENERAL Bikeway Pavement Design, Construction & Maintenance
PART A – GENERAL
1 INTRODUCTION
Bikeway is a generic term for an off-road exclusive-use path for cyclists or a shared-use
path for pedestrians and cyclists. Bike lanes on road pavements are not included within this
definition.
The purpose of this Guide is to provide bikeway designers and asset managers with
practical guidelines for the design, construction and maintenance of bikeway pavements. A
structural design methodology and a range of example bikeway pavement configurations are
included, together with practical construction detailing and maintenance advice.
The procedures presented in this Guide have been developed from an expert pavement
engineering review and adaptation of Australian and overseas literature on bikeway and
lightly trafficked road pavements. References from which designers can obtain more
information are also identified.
The document is arranged in 5 principal parts, as follows:
A. General – Presents the scope and purpose of the Guide, typical bikeway types and
users, surfacing types and economic considerations.
B. Pavement Selection – Defines flexible and rigid pavement types, and the selection
criteria and attributes of the normal range of pavements and surfacings.
C. Design – Discusses the pavement design components of subgrades, pavement

materials, and design traffic, and provides typical minimum design configurations for
all common pavement types.
D. Construction – Considers many of the critical construction details and specification

requirements of bikeways.
E. Maintenance – Includes monitoring and maintenance activities and techniques, as

well as safety issues to be considered when undertaking works.
Consideration of geometric design and traffic engineering practices are excluded from this
document as these are comprehensively outlined in Austroads (2014a), Austroads (2009a),
Austroads (2009b), and Austroads (1999).
Issue Date: January 2015 Doc. Owner: Pavement Engineering Unit 1
2. BIKEWAY CHARACTERISTICS
2.1 Bikeway Types and Users
There are 3 main types of bikeways; shared use paths, separated paths with delineated
pedestrian and cyclist zones, and those reserved for the exclusive use of cyclists.
Shared use bikeways are the most common type in South Australia and are generally
constructed to service a wide range of users:
• Cyclists - including primary or secondary school children, recreational cyclists,
commuter cyclists, touring cyclists, and sports cyclists; and
• Pedestrians - comprising children, elderly people, people pushing prams and
strollers, various individuals and family groups, people walking dogs and joggers.
There are several other broad categories of bikeway users that may be less common than
those described above. These include:
• people with disabilities - pedestrians with walking aids, wheelchair or electric gopher
users;
• small-wheeled vehicles - children’s pedal/motorised/electric cars, in-line skaters,
skate boarders, roller skaters, and foot scooters; and
• maintenance vehicles - ranging from light mowing equipment to heavy trucks
associated with maintenance of public utilities and associated infrastructure, or the
emergency services (police, ambulance, fire etc.).
Bikeways are often located within linear reserves and service easements, or along
coastlines and watercourses. Their placement in these areas can involve harsh
environments, including weak subgrade conditions and the potential for periods of
inundation by floodwater.
Figure 2.1: Shared use path
2.2 Bikeway Widths
Bikeway widths generally vary between 2.5 m and 4.0 m according to the type and nature of
the bikeway as detailed in Austroads (2009a).
3. BIKEWAY SURFACES
3.1 Function of Bikeway Surfaces
The wearing surface is the uppermost layer of a pavement structure over which the users of
a bikeway are required to travel. Its overall function is to provide a safe, economical and
durable all-weather surfacing that is:
• smooth;
• skid resistant;
• dust-free;
• waterproof; and
• durable and protective of the underlying pavement.
In addition, bikeway surfacings are often required to perform aesthetic or social functions
that include the following:
• visually enhance the bikeway environment for users and adjacent residents; and
• to assist in separating user groups.
3.2 Types of Surfacing
The general types of surfacing typically used for new bicycle pavements (and as resurfacing
treatments) are briefly described as follows.
3.2.1 Unsealed Surface
Granular materials of up to about 20 mm in stone size are typically used as the principal load
bearing layer and can also provide the riding surface. The mechanical interlock developed
between the larger stones provides the shear strength while the plastic fines in the material
bind the surface of the layer.
3.2.2 Sprayed Treatment
Sprayed seals consist of a layer of stone chips spread and rolled onto a thin film of bitumen
to form a water-resistant surfacing over granular layer(s).
Figure 3.1 Spray sealed bikeway
3.2.3 Bituminous Slurry and Microsurfacings
A slurry is a mixture of sand, crushed rock, filler, cement, and bituminous emulsion applied
to form a thin surfacing layer. Slurry surfacings tend to be very thin (<12 mm), have a fine
surface texture, and are relatively brittle when compared to asphalt. They can also be used
to correct minor surface irregularities. Microsurfacings are a form of slurry surfacing in
which the conventional emulsion is replaced by a polymer-modified emulsion to provide
faster setting times and improved flexibility.
3.2.4 Asphalt Surface
Asphalt (or Hot Mix) consists of a mixture of well-graded, clean, non-plastic granular material
and 4.5% to 7% bitumen by mass, which is produced in a purpose built mixing plant. When
compacted and cooled it forms a smooth, stable and durable riding surface.
3.2.5 Concrete
A concrete surfacing is the finished top of the structural base layer rather than a separately
placed surfacing treatment.
3.2.6 Concrete Block Pavers
Concrete paving units about the same size as clay house bricks are placed over a thin sand
bedding layer and granular material.
3.3 Performance Characteristics
Monitoring of the performance of a bikeway surfacing requires the assessment of relevant

parameters in two principal categories-
• functional - surface shape and appearance, ageing effects, concrete slab faulting
(stepping), roughness, skid resistance and surface texture; and
• structural - cracking, deformation, potholes, and pavement strength deterioration.
In practice, many of these factors are inter-related. Increasing roughness may be an
indication of deteriorating structural strength. Loss of texture due to bleeding or stripping of
a sprayed seal will lead to non-uniform skid resistance.
Ageing of surfaces may lead to cracking or increased permeability, thereby allowing
moisture to enter and weaken the pavement structure. Ageing may also lead to ravelling
and the initiation of potholing. The potential for skidding may be influenced by poor
drainage, bikeway geometry, surface roughness, as well as surface cleanliness.
3.4 Investigation Levels
The levels at which investigation should take place are referred to as indicative investigation
levels (IILs). Investigation levels and intervention treatments based on broad experience are
provided for general guidance in Part E and Appendix A. However, there are likely to be
circumstances in which these are inappropriate for local operating environments, or for
technical or economic reasons.
The parameters most readily assigned numerical investigation levels are:
• surface shape;
• roughness;
• skid resistance; and
• cracking.
4. ECONOMIC CONSIDERATIONS
Cost effective designs for bikeway pavements should take into consideration not only the
initial construction costs, but also those associated with the maintenance and rehabilitation
of the pavement structures. These costs are directly or indirectly related to the following:
• pavement loads;
• environmental factors;
• material properties;
• construction practices;
• pavement performance; and
• maintenance treatments.
The cost of bikeway pavements can vary significantly depending upon a number of
parameters, particularly the surfacing and base type. If sufficient capital funds are provided
for a well designed and constructed facility, this will usually minimise on-going long-term
maintenance costs.
It is usual to adopt a structural design period of 20 to 40 years unless the bikeway is to be
developed in stages as outlined in Section 6.1. Unsealed, sprayed seal, and asphalt
surfaced pavements would normally require resurfacing at intervals of less than 20 years.
Typical life expectancies of the main surfacing types are indicated in Table 4.1.
Most bikeway designs prepared in this Guide are based on a design period of 20 years, but
concrete pavements have been designed for 40 years.
Table 4.1: Typical Surfacing Life Expectancies
Surfacing type Expected service life of surfacing (years)
Sprayed seal, 5mm / 7mm 5 to 10

Double application seals 8 to 15
Dense graded asphalt 10 to 20
Fine gap graded asphalt 15 to 20
Slurry & Microsurfacings 8 to 15
Concrete 20 to 40
Concrete Block pavers 15 to 25
In addition to periodic resurfacing, other maintenance activities are often required to ensure
that the pavement remains effectively waterproofed throughout its service life.
As with road pavements, the costs for various types of bikeway pavement construction, the
performance during the design life, and the on-going maintenance costs vary considerably.
To compare projects on an equitable basis, whole-of-life costing can be undertaken in the
same way as for road pavements.
Methods of economic comparison include the Net Present Value (NPV) Austroads (2012),
and Equivalent Annual Cost, (EAC) Bennett and Moffatt (1995).
ARRB (2005a) provides more recent information about the economic analysis of bikeways
and is available online. Associated with that work, ARRB also developed an Excel
worksheet analysis tool and user directions (ARRB 2005b).
PART B – PAVEMENT SELECTION Bikeway Pavement Design, Construction & Maintenance
PART B – PAVEMENT SELECTION

5. PAVEMENT TYPES
Bikeway pavement types fall into two broad categories, flexible and rigid.
Flexible pavements, as the name implies generally have a structure that deflects or flexes
under load. They include sprayed sealed pavements, asphalt pavements, and unsealed
pavements. Concrete block pavers and pavements incorporating cement stabilised
materials are also classified as flexible and use a similar design methodology.
Rigid pavements have a rigidity associated with their slab action and comprise cement
bound concrete pavements. The structural design procedure differs fundamentally from that
used for flexible pavements.
Given the large range of pavement types from which to select, it is important to adequately
consider the advantages and disadvantages of each.
6. SELECTION OF PAVEMENT TYPE
The performance of a bikeway pavement is strongly influenced by the pavement materials,

quality control during construction, and the amount and timeliness of maintenance.
Generally, the higher capital cost bikeways with concrete or asphalt surfaces have lower
ongoing maintenance requirements, and provide better cycling conditions.
Some authorities may have preferences for particular pavement types using local materials
and based on knowledge of regional soil conditions. Where possible, maximum use should
be made of local materials to gain experience in their performance, to minimise costs and to
better blend with the environment.
6.1 Unsurfaced Granular
An unsealed granular or gravel bikeway may be considered as the first stage of the
development of a route, especially where:
• the volume of cyclists initially expected to use the bikeway is low;
• gradients are relatively flat (i.e. <3%);
• the environmental amenity of the area may be reduced by a surfaced bikeway; and
• construction costs need to be minimised.
An asphalt, slurry, sprayed seal or concrete surfacing may then be provided at a later stage.
Gravel paths can vary significantly in terms of design and construction details, materials, and
hence performance and costs. Generally they have higher rolling resistance and are not as
easy or as safe for cyclists to traverse as asphalt or concrete paths, particularly in wet
periods. While construction costs are lower, weed control and regular surface grading and
replenishment with additional material would generally result in higher maintenance costs.
High velocity or high volume drainage flows that intersect an unsealed bikeway may result in
significant scour and erosion.
Materials such as crushed limestone and granitic sand that have significant cohesion and
texture have been found to provide good service. Stabilisation with a cementitious binder
may also be appropriate in some situations.
Suitability for traffic
Gravel is not a suitable surface for small-wheeled devices such as in-line skates,
skateboards, wheel chairs, or those with high tyre pressures and is more appropriate for
recreational routes or where bicycles with wider tyres are predominant.
6.2 Granular with Sprayed Treatment
One or more granular layers are placed and compacted prior to the application of a sprayed
seal surfacing.
• Sprayed seal (Prime and sprayed seal) - a prime (refer below) followed by a thin
layer of sprayed hot cutback or emulsion bituminous binder onto which a single size
aggregate is spread and rolled. Coarsely textured surfaces such as the single
application of a large size aggregate should be avoided because of the high rolling
resistance, and greater risk of rider injury and bicycle damage from a fall. Multiple
application seals utilising a smaller aggregate size in the top layer, are desirable to
improve surface texture.
• Primerseal - an application of a primer-binder applied to a prepared granular base to

provide penetration of the surface, but with sufficient retained on the surface to hold
a subsequent layer of small size aggregate.
A primerseal also provides an adequate surfacing for cyclists as long as a small size
aggregate is used. The primerseal is sprayed on a crushed rock or gravel base
similar to that thickness used for asphalt paths. For road pavements a primerseal is
regarded as a short term surfacing option (up to 12 months) but under bikeway traffic
up to 5 years may be achievable.
• Multiple application seal - a seal using multiple applications of binder and different
size aggregate, e.g. first coat 7 mm or 10 mm aggregate, second coat a 5 mm
aggregate. A 10/5 seal is usually the better option.
The following are treatments used in conjunction with sprayed surfaces:
• Prime - an application of a primer to a prepared base, without a subsequent

aggregate cover, to provide penetration of the surface for waterproofing purposes
and to obtain a bond between the pavement and the subsequent sprayed seal or
asphalt wearing course.
• Surface enrichment treatment - a light application of bituminous binder, without

aggregate, to increase the binder content and extend the life of an existing sprayed
seal surfacing.
Where wide cracks in the seal develop, weed and grass invasion can occur.
Sprayed seal surfacings may not be suitable for small wheeled devices such as in-line
skates, skateboards etc. Whilst considered to be a practical surfacing for cyclists, sprayed
seals are less preferred than either concrete or asphalt surfacing due to their inherent
coarser or more variable surface texture.
6.3 Granular with Bituminous Slurry Surfacing
One or more granular layers are placed and compacted prior to priming and surfacing with a
slurry or microsurfacing.
• A basic slurry surfacing comprises materials from sand to 5 mm aggregate, with filler,
cement and bitumen emulsion. Slurry seals tend to be <12 mm thickness.
• Microsurfacing is similar to a slurry seal but includes a polymer modified bitumen

emulsion to provide faster setting for earlier trafficking, greater durability and
improved flexibility. The nominal size of microsurfacing is usually in the range 4 mm
to 10 mm, placed in layers of up to 3 times the nominal size.
Slurry and microsurfacings are susceptible to surface cracking and loss of surface shape,
which can be initiated by soil movements or thermal and age effects.
Good rideability and serviceability for all wheeled and pedestrian traffic.
6.4 Granular with Asphalt
One or more granular layers are placed and compacted prior to priming and surfacing with
hot mixed asphalt layers.
• Dense graded asphalt, or asphaltic concrete (AC) - a dense, durable, continuously
graded mixture of coarse and fine graded aggregates, mineral filler and bituminous
binder which is produced, placed and compacted whilst hot.
• Fine gap graded asphalt (FGGA) - a dense, durable mixture containing some coarse
aggregates in a mastic of fine aggregate, filler and binder, for use in lightly trafficked
applications.
• Light duty asphalt (L) - typically another term for FGGA with additional binder that
reduces the initial air voids of the mix.
Asphalt paths are also subject to deterioration by surface cracking and loss of surface shape
resulting soil movements or thermal and age effects. The onset of cracking due to age
effects, which is a common distress mode in lightly trafficked asphalt pavements, can be
deferred by constructing a surfacing with low insitu air voids (≤ 4%). The pavement strength
and load capacity is improved by providing additional asphalt layer(s) below the wearing
course. The characteristics of asphalt bikeways are summarised in Table 6.1.
6.5 Concrete
These pavements normally consist of a low strength granular subbase layer supporting a
high strength cement bound base layer with textured surface:
• Hessian dragged - a medium surface texture for main roads and residential streets.
• Transversely broomed - a fine texture for low-speed applications such as bikeways.

Several types of concrete road pavements are constructed in Australia with the most
common being a jointed unreinforced (plain) concrete pavement (PCP). For bikeways, a
variant of this with continuous mesh reinforcement within the concrete base slab is common
within the eastern States. They are usually expected to provide better long-term
performance where the alignment is constructed on reactive soils and non-uniform support,
or is located near trees that can cause root damage.
The contrast between the colour of line marking and concrete surfaces may be poor in some
situations but the reflectivity of concrete tends to assist path definition in low light. The
characteristics of concrete bikeways are summarised in Table 6.1.
CRITERIA ASPHALT CONCRETE

Surface Flexible, smooth; no construction or expansion General surface is smooth but construction and
joints. expansion joints can introduce rider discomfort.
Allows a smoother surface where adjacent tree Tree roots can cause faulting or stepping.
roots cause deformations in the pavement.
Suitable in areas susceptible to ground
movement, but may still result in cracking and
deformation.
Construction Construction not difficult where equipment has Less and smaller equipment required to construct.
the room to manoeuvre. Single material, one-step construction process,
Detail work, e.g. ramps at kerb lines, may including details such as ramps and kerbs.
require a mixture of concrete and asphalt work.
Asphalt has to be hand-laid in confined areas.
Edge restraint preferred, especially in developed No edge restraint required.
areas.
Full depth asphalt recommended around service Concrete surface more easily matched to be flush
and inspection pits to prevent subsidence and with service holes and pits with little likelihood of
uneven surface. subsidence.
Trench and other reinstatements become Reinstatements can be made flush with adjacent
patchwork, affecting surface uniformity and paving with less likelihood of subsequent
aesthetics. subsidence. However, reinstatement can still be
Less costly to reinstate than concrete because patchwork in appearance unless complete slabs
repairs are restricted to the disturbed area. are reconstructed.
More costly to reinstate whole slabs in cases of
minor disturbance.
Construction Suitable edge restraint flush with surface is No edge restraint required.
Detail preferable for AC surfaced bikeways. Backfilling Contraction joints should be sawn rather than
Requirements to the edge restraint should be finished to the formed
level of the path surface.
Provide a non-slip surface, usually a broom finish.
Flush shoulders required if no other permanent
edge restraint is provided.
Maintenance Bitumen acts as a nutrient for grasses such as Expansion jointing material should be kept
couch and tends to attract and promote such marginally below the finished surface.
growth. Maintenance spraying to control weed Construction and expansion joints require regular
ingress is essential. weed control.
Table 6.1: Summary of Asphalt and Concrete Bikeway Characteristics

(based on Bikewest 1988)
6.6 Concrete Block Pavers (CBPs)
Interlocking concrete block pavers of various types are used for a range of road and path
pavements. They are often selected for their aesthetic appeal and placed in local
recreational areas with substantial foot traffic.
Pavers are normally placed over one or more granular layers and about 25 mm of bedding
sand. Jointing sand is required to assist the mechanics of interlock.
CBPs with chamfered edges are generally unsuitable for small wheeled devices such as in-
line skates, skateboards etc.
Figure 6.1: Concrete block paver shared bikeway
6.7 Coloured Pavements
6.7.1 Concrete
The colouring of concrete pavements can be achieved through the use of oxides and
pigments added to the topping mix, for a limited range of colours. Information about the
performance of these products should be sought from the supplier. Concrete block pavers
come in a range of colours.
6.7.2 Asphalt and Slurry
6.7.2.1 Mixes
Coloured asphalt became available in South Australia during the late 1980s using two
methods. In the first, clear synthetic binder and oxide colourings are added to the mix
through the batch plant, requiring thorough cleaning and preparation of the equipment. High
production costs result in unit rates about 3.5 to 4 times that of conventional asphalt.
Alternatively, standard black bitumen binder is coloured with very heavy dosages of oxide, to
produce a limited range of colours. This process is also expensive compared to the cost of
normal asphalt, and the large amount of additive may affect the asphalt properties.
Both methods of preparing coloured asphalt are assisted by the use of a compatible
aggregate colour.
6.7.2.2 Coatings
The following characteristics are critical to successful long-term performance of coloured

coatings for asphalt and slurry surfaced bikeways:
• ease of maintenance;
• high skid resistance for the life of the coating;
• no visible wear (% area intact) after 5 years; and
• colourfastness for a period exceeding 5 years.
The application of conventional coatings to dense or open graded asphalt pavements
generally results in localised reduction in skid resistance and a loss of texture depth, which
will compromise the performance of the bikeway for users. Coatings must therefore
incorporate particles that reinstate the micro-texture of the pavement. These characteristics
are achievable with a number of commercially available coating systems, but at a relatively
high cost ranging between $40/m2 and $55/m2 (2006). The cost is a function of the specialty
binders and aggregates used to provide colourfastness, durability and skid resistance.
The application of a coating system also introduces long-term maintenance obligations if the
appearance and performance of the pathway is to be effectively maintained. For this reason
the use of coatings to provide a coloured pavement surface would not normally be regarded
as a routine pavement treatment. It is more likely that they would be limited to special
conditions that warrant the high additional costs such as approaches to road pavements or
path intersections.
6.7.3 Spray seals
Where available, naturally occurring coloured aggregates can be used with conventional
binders to provide a coloured surface.
The use of any coating system with a sprayed seal is not recommended due to limitations in
the durability and the likelihood of significant maintenance costs. In addition, the coarse
surface texture requires high application rates of the coating that increases the initial and
subsequent treatment costs.
6.8 Paving Fabrics
Geotextile reinforced seals have been used successfully with marginal pavement materials
or can be applied directly to stabilised clay subgrades in low traffic situations. They are also
suitable for resealing cracked pavements and in situations where cracks are large but crack
movement is relatively slow.
Paving fabrics used with sprayed seals or as an interlayer treatment with slurry,
microsurfacing or asphaltic wearing courses are likely to provide better resistance to
reflective and environmental cracking of these surfacings. Their actual field performance on
bikeways in South Australia has not yet been studied to quantify the benefit versus cost of
their usage in different applications.
6.9 Bikeway Selection Based on Structural Criteria
In selecting the pavement and surfacing type for a particular bikeway design situation, there
are several parameters that require careful consideration. The common pavement and
surfacing types can be designed to provide acceptable service for a wide range of
environments and users. However, not all will be the most appropriate and/or cost effective
for the specific design situation.
Some of the key factors that require adequate consideration in the pavement and surfacing
selection include:
• presence of expansive soils;

• expected condition monitoring and future maintenance effort;
• drainage and moisture environment;
• user needs and traffic type;
• community expectations;
• material availability, preferences, costs;
• available construction expertise, equipment, access, supervision, timing;
• level of performance and service life required; and
• initial and ongoing funding.
Most of these issues are related to the structural performance of the bikeway pavement and
their relevance or importance to a particular project can usually be evaluated against
objective criteria. The design should then be completed within the appropriate design
assumptions and project constraints to ensure satisfactory performance.
General guidance relating to some key considerations in selecting pavement type is
provided in Figure 6.2.
Consider:
Granular bikeway with
Regular 1. Geotextile and sprayed
Yes maintenance/ Yes
Expansive seal
soil? rehabilitation 2. Asphalt on geotextile
acceptable? seal
No
No Consider:
1. Concrete (with mesh) or
2. Treat subgrade
Weak / wet Low Consider;

subgrade or maintenance or Yes 1. Concrete bikeway, or
heavy vehicle Yes long service life 2. Deep asphalt bikeway
traffic? required?
No
No
User needs or
Special Factors Yes Select required Bikeway
over-ride Pavement and Surface type
Economic
Analysis ?
Life-Cycle Costing &

No
Analysis of Practical Options to
Select most appropriate
Pavement and Surface Type
Figure 6.2: Bikeway Type Selection - Structural Factors
6.10 Bikeway Selection Based on Functional Criteria
The functional requirements and factors affecting the selection of the bikeway type are likely
to be much more difficult to categorise. Their assessment tends to be more subjective and
the importance assigned to them is likely to vary significantly between different sites, users,
and owners. Hence it is not practicable to ‘flowchart’ this selection process. However, while
not necessarily a complete list, the following items may assist the consideration of other
functional factors affecting the selection of the bikeway pavement type.
Delineation: - Surface type (and hence colour) to define a shared-use path or define the --
--------------------bikeway crossing another paved area?
- High use at night; thus a surfacing of a lighter colour?
Aesthetics: - Visual impact on adjoining residences/businesses?

- Compatibility with natural surroundings?
- Heritage issues for surface type?
Ride Quality: - No joints at all?

- A quiet surface required?
(e.g. roller-blades and skateboards).
Construction: - Access for mechanical pavers or large equipment?

- If hand-laid or small plant used, will surface finish quality be acceptable?
- Does industry have the equipment, materials, and skills available locally?
- Are there numerous vertical level constraints to be accommodated along ----
the bikeway?
- Does the time of year (climate or industry supply) have an effect on the ------
pavement type?
- Gradient and change of grade
Design: - Are bikeway pavement edge restraints to be avoided?
Trees: - Will roots grow beneath and distort the pavement?
Flooding: - Is inundation of pavement a concern? May also lead to loss of structural

integrity.
Maintenance: - Access for works, condition monitoring, timeliness, funding, work quality.
Widening: - Possibility of future improvements?
PART C – PAVEMENT DESIGN Bikeway Pavement Design, Construction & Maintenance
PART C – PAVEMENT DESIGN
7. DESIGN PROCESS
The general design process for the bikeway pavement is shown diagrammatically in Figure
7.1 with the relevant Section references.
Determine Design CBR

(characterise the Soil Strength)
eg. Poor, Moderate or High Strength
or known Design CBR
Refer to Section 8
Select
soil strength
Select Pavement / Materials Type

eg. Asphalt surface or Concrete
Refer to Sections 6 and 9
Select trial
pavement
configurations
Sections 11 & 12
Estimate traffic loading

eg. Heavy vehicles or
Foot and Bicycle only
Refer to Section 10
Select
traffic loading
Consider Economics, Materials

Availability and Aesthetics
Final bikeway
pavement design
Figure 7.1: Design Process
Appendix B provides a brief description of the technical basis and assumptions associated
with the selection of the subgrade and traffic loading design parameters used in this Guide.
8. SUBGRADE EVALUATION
8.1 General
The subgrade is the soil horizon (or rock deposit) upon which the bikeway pavement is
founded. It may also comprise imported soils or granular materials, placed many years prior
to, or as part of the works associated with the bikeway.
The support provided by the subgrade is one of the key factors affecting the long-term
performance of the bikeway. Pavement thickness requirements are highly dependent on the
amount of support provided by the subgrade, particularly for bikeways subjected to heavier
vehicle movements.
If there is uncertainty in the selection of an appropriate support value for use in structural
design, then conservative values should be used or expert advice sought from pavement
engineering specialists.
8.2 Subgrade Strength
For design purposes, this Guide characterises the subgrade into three broad categories
based on subgrade strength:
• Low Strength (Design CBR 2%)
• Moderate Strength (Design CBR 5%)
• High Strength (Design CBR 10%)
Where a more rigorous design approach is considered appropriate, the designer can adopt
a specific subgrade strength as occurs for normal road pavement designs.
Subgrade strength has traditionally been defined by determining the California Bearing Ratio
(CBR) and a typical range of values representing weak to very strong soils would be 2% to
15%.
The recent use of computer modelling for pavement design (mechanistic analysis) has
required subgrades to be characterised by an elastic or resilient modulus. Austroads has
adopted a simple empirical relationship between CBR and modulus: E (MPa) = 10 x CBR.
In selecting the soil strength category or a Design CBR, the aim is to assign a value that
best represents the weakest subgrade condition that the bikeway will need to endure during
its design life. This may not be the condition occurring during construction, and should
generally be a conservative determination for several reasons:
• It is difficult to accurately predict changes in soil strength for 20 or more years into
the future. The effectiveness of in-service pavement drainage and the large range of
environment influences often introduce significant uncertainties.
• The amount of test data on soil strengths for bikeway projects is likely to be limited.
• The bikeway designer usually has little direct control of construction variables or the
future maintenance effort.
• The additional construction costs of an adequate pavement design are invariably
relatively minor in comparison to the cost of the remedial works associated with
deficient designs.
A further consideration in selecting the design strength of the subgrade relates to the
preparation that occurs during construction. Except for loose granular soils, most subgrades
are likely to benefit from minimal disturbance, as the undisturbed insitu soil structure will
have an intrinsic strength that is usually worth preserving. This can only be achieved with
adequate site supervision, controlled plant and equipment movements, and compatible
pavement construction methods.
In addition to subgrade strength, the soil moisture content can have other effects. In SA,
increasing the insitu moisture content of clay subgrades by reworking them or from exposure
to wet weather, can also lead to in-service pavement cracking and deformation if the effects
of vegetation, low rainfall, and high evaporation rates later dry back these soils. Hence,
DPTI road construction practices usually aim to avoid altering the moisture conditions of the
subgrade when they are considered to be near equilibrium. Careful proof-rolling is used for
quality assurance of sound areas and to identify any soft spots for local improvement, and a
similar approach is recommended for bikeways.
8.2.1 Low Strength Subgrade
Low strength subgrades typically comprise soils that, if in their weakest condition at the time
of construction, would require pre-treatment to enable the pavement to be constructed. This
pre-treatment may comprise:
• removal and replacement with a stronger fill material to provide a better construction
platform;
• insitu stabilisation using lime, if soil conditions are compatible; or
• use of a geosynthetic as a support and separation layer.
Of these subgrade improvement options, DPTI commonly uses a geosynthetic for subgrade
support and separation for road pavements, and this practice is also recommended for
bikeways.
The requirement for subgrade improvement may not arise if poor soil strength is not evident
during construction, such as may occur with heavy clays during summer in South Australia.
For this reason, there are often cost savings or expediencies to be gained if the construction
timing is selected accordingly.
The design of bikeway pavements detailed in Sections 11 and 12 include ‘Low soil strength’
based on a design CBR of 2%.
Some situations where these soil conditions may exist are:
• along river valleys and flood plains where alluvial soils occur,
• zones subject to poor drainage and inundation; or
• areas with climatic conditions that maintain a moist environment.
8.2.2 Moderate Strength Subgrade
These soil conditions generally would not require special pre-treatment of the soil apart from
removal or compaction of any loose materials prior to the placement of the pavement.
Bikeway pavement designs detailed in Sections 11 and 12 include a ‘Moderate soil strength’
based on a design CBR of 5%.
Some situations where these soil conditions may exist are-
• zones which have good drainage, e.g. embankments;
• climatic conditions causing perennially low soil moisture content; or
• sands and low plasticity clays not subject to saturation.
It is expected that Low and Moderate strength soils would be the most common soil strength
categories used in bikeway designs.
8.2.3 High Strength Subgrade
High strength soils have been assigned a design CBR of 10%, which equates to the
maximum value generally used by DPTI for road pavements. Designs for high strength
subgrades are also included in Sections 11 and 12.
Assignment of high soil strength for a bikeway project should only follow expert advice and a
site inspection, and preferably be based on a detailed site investigation and laboratory
testing.
Some situations where these soil conditions may occur are where:
• the soil consists of weathered rock;
• the soil has or will be stabilised and laboratory testing has confirmed high strengths;
or
• the bikeway is constructed in a semi-arid and well drained locality.
It is expected that High Strength soils would occur rarely within significant lengths of a
bikeway project. Some exceptions might include a sandy coastal environment or through
hilly areas of rock or gravel deposits.
8.3 Presumptive Values
Austroads (2012) provides presumptive values of subgrade support for the common soil
groups. These should only be used indicatively when no testing data is available, and are
summarised in Table 8.1.
Table 8.1: Austroads Presumptive Design CBR Values
Description of Subgrade Typical CBR Values (%)
Material USC Classification Excellent to good drainage Fair to poor drainage
Highly Plastic Clay CH 5 2–3
Silt ML 4 2
Silty Clay CL
5-6 3-4
Sandy Clay SC
Sand SW, SP 10-15 5-10
8.4 Soil Strength Assessment and Testing
It is good engineering practice to test the subgrade in order to both assess the founding
conditions and to determine the appropriate Design CBR or strength category, rather than to
estimate or assign a soil strength classification. TRL (1996) recommends that where the
subgrade CBR design values have not been assessed, a value of 2% be adopted.
Determination of a representative Design CBR from which the appropriate soil strength
category (Section 8.2) is selected, may be based on some or all of the following steps.
8.4.1 Available Soil Strength Data
If an adjacent road pavement has been constructed within the last decade or so, soil
strength data may be available in the design investigation report for that project. This should
be used with caution, as the thicker road pavement is likely to be founded at a lower depth,
and the bikeway supporting soils and drainage conditions may differ.
8.4.2 Field Testing
Testing in the field (after locating underground services), can provide good insitu strength
information if undertaken during winter or spring. Seasonal effects usually limit the value of
testing conducted in summer and autumn in SA. Typically an investigation would include:
• Test pits or boreholes to inspect and sample the soil strata and moisture regime.
Pocket Penetrometer testing of the exposed soil profile; for cohesive soils a rough
correlation of CBR = 3 x PP (kg/cm2) has been used by DPTI.
• Dynamic cone penetrometer (DCP) testing adjacent to the pit so that the CBR
strength and soil profiles can be correlated. The DCP test can efficiently provide the
insitu strength profile at multiple test sites.
8.4.3 Laboratory Testing
Samples retrieved from the test pit would normally undergo:

• identification of the generic soil types;
• grading tests to determine the particle size distributions;
• Atterberg Limits testing to provide the Liquid and Plastic Limits (and hence the
Plasticity Index), and Linear Shrinkage of the soils;
• determination of field moisture content and calculation of Estimated CBR values
(DPTI 2010); and
• unsoaked and/or soaked laboratory CBR testing (particularly for larger projects).
Given the above data an experienced geotechnical or pavements engineer is better able to
assign an appropriate Design CBR for the bikeway subgrade. Estimated CBR values can be
useful for soils where ≥ 75% passes the 2.36 mm sieve, but these values need to be used
with caution and in consideration of the insitu moisture conditions. Using the ratio of the
Field Moisture Content to the Plastic Limit, DPTI have observed the following general trends
in Estimated CBR values for cohesive soils:
• if the FMC/PL ratio is < 1.0, the Estimated CBR value is usually a conservative
representation of the insitu CBR;
• when the FMC/PL ratio is within the range 1.0 to 1.3, the Estimated CBR value is
usually a reasonable representation of the insitu CBR and is often similar to a DCP
test result; and
• for a FMC/PL ratio > 1.3, the Estimated CBR value can overestimate the insitu CBR
and should not be used in designs.
8.4.4 Further Reading
The following references provide more detailed assessment methods of subgrade support:
• Austroads (2012) Guide to Pavement Technology Part 2 Pavement Structural
Design.
• ARRB (2005c) Sealed Local Roads Manual.
8.5 Expansive Subgrades
8.5.1 Effects and Treatments
Expansive subgrades comprise volumetrically unstable clay soils that shrink on drying and
swell on wetting, and are characterised by low, moderate, high, or very high reactivity.
Moisture changes occurring in clay subgrades with even low to moderate reactivity can
cause surface damage in light duty pavement structures such as bikeways. Severe
subgrade movements often lead to the development of numerous wide surface cracks and
long wavelength undulations (typically > 0.5 m to 10 m long), which may result in poor
rideability for cyclists. If the pavement surfacing cracks are very wide and longitudinal or a
step fault develops due to the volume change, this may also present a safety issue.
Undulations can cause surface water to pond, affecting users and often resulting in further
localised damage to the pavement.
Some methods of minimising the effects of expansive soils include:
• removal and replacement of localised expansive soil deposits;
• capping with a substantial thickness of non-expansive fill;
• installation of moisture barriers horizontally under the bikeway and vertically at the
edge of the seal to a depth of 2 to 2.5 m;
• lime stabilisation of the expansive subgrade.
In general, it can be difficult to provide successful solutions for highly or extremely reactive
subgrades. This particularly applies to situations where the transpiration of nearby trees and
shrubs has a large influence on the moisture levels of soils underlying the bikeway. As the
problems associated with expansive soils are directly related to their moisture variations,
treatments that minimise the moisture changes are usually the most effective.
In South Australia, where low rainfalls and high evaporation rates are common, the depth
from the surface to soils that maintain a year round equilibrium moisture content is about
4m. This means that stabilisation of subgrades located within the uppermost 0.2 m to 0.4 m
of the soil profile may not be an effective reactive soil treatment for deep deposits.
The selection of pavement and surfacing types for bikeways constructed on reactive
subgrades is a critical issue in managing the performance risk and the future maintenance
requirements of the facility. Geotextile seals or interlayers should be considered for highly
or very highly expansive soils to minimise surface cracking and moisture ingress.
8.5.2 Assessment of Soil Reactivity
The presence of expansive soils can often be determined from a site inspection. Indicators
of the presence of expansive soils include:
• severe cracking of dried-out soils;
• longitudinal and meandering cracks in existing pavements;
• tilting signposts and other minor structures which are founded near the ground
surface;
• evidence of differential movement in nearby buildings; typically, severe cracking in
masonry walls; and
• undulating kerb and channel, often with ponding occurring in the channel.
Table 8.2 provides a guide to classification of expansive soils.
Table 8.2: Guide to Classification of Expansive Soils (Austroads 2012)

1.
Expansive Liquid Limit PI x Potential
Plasticity Index
Nature (%) % < 0.425 mm Swell %
Very high >70 >45 >3200 >5.0
High >70 >45 2200-3200 2.5-5.0
Moderate 50-70 25-45 1200-2200 0.5-2.5
Low <50 <25 <1200 <0.5
Note: 1. Swell at OMC and 98% MDD using Standard compactive effort; 4-day soak, 4.5kg surcharge.
8.6 Subgrade Stabilisation
Stabilisation is the process of modifying the non-desirable properties of the soil. For weak
clay subgrades, this usually involves adding a binder by insitu mixing equipment and
compacting this material to develop a stronger pavement support layer. Further information
is available in Austroads (2006).
9. PAVEMENT MATERIALS
9.1 Granular Material
Some granular materials can provide an adequate riding surface for bikeway pavements but
more commonly they are used to construct the base and subbase layers.
Granular material comprises a range of stone particle sizes compacted to a dense matrix to
spread traffic loads to the underlying weaker materials. The component particles range from
clay size (< 2 µm) to silt and sand, to aggregate size. The diameter of the largest size
aggregate (mm) is typically used to name the granular material; e.g. a nominal 20 mm
material may be called a fine crushed or a 20 mm dense-graded aggregate. DPTI uses the
terminology of PM1/20 to denote a 20 mm Class 1 material.
Granular material may comprise either naturally occurring soils such as gravel and coarse
sands or be processed by crushing and screening a larger size source rock or recyclable
material such as waste concrete.
9.1.1 Unsurfaced Granular Materials
When required to act as a surfacing layer, it is generally advisable to ensure that the
Plasticity Index (PI) is in the range of 6 to 10 or that the material has natural cementing
properties, as occurs with many calcareous derivatives. The cohesive fines bind the
material to resist the abrasive traffic loadings and environmental erosion.
For unsealed surfaces, the maximum aggregate size in the granular material should not
exceed 20 mm and there should be adequate finer material to ensure good rideability. DPTI
Master Specification for Roadworks Part 215 include crushed rocks of 20 mm size that are
designed to meet the stability and stiffness requirements of moderate to heavy traffic
loadings. Other quarry materials may also be suitable for unsealed bikeways, such as well-
graded crusher sands (Type C Sand in Appendix C.3) or fine gravels. The minimum soaked
CBR of these materials should be 60%.
9.1.2 Base and Subbase Granular Material
Base and subbase material quality is defined by several engineering properties, such as-
• a particle size distribution (grading), to produce mechanical strength;
• a limited range of plasticity, so when moist it retains good strength; and
• values of hardness or durability that resist long term deterioration within the
pavement.
Table 9.1 summarises the DPTI granular materials used in the bikeway designs presented in
Sections 11 and 12. Details of these specifications are given in Appendix C.
Table 9.1: Granular Material Descriptions
Base quality PM1/20Q or 20 mm Class 1 crushed rock, Used as base for high traffic
PM1/20R Q designates quarry sourced, roads, not for bikeways.
R for Recycled material
Base and PM2/20Q 20 mm Class 2 crushed rock Used as pavement layers on
Subbase quality PM2/20R medium traffic roads,
subbase on high traffic roads.
PM3/20Q 20 mm Class 3 crushed rock Used as pavement layers on

PM3/20R low traffic roads, subbase on
medium traffic roads.
9.1.3 Bedding Sand
A well-graded coarse sand/fine gravel material of low to nil plasticity is recommended to bed
Concrete Block Pavers. Washed sand is often selected so that plastic fines and any salts
that may cause efflorescence are removed. Similarly, jointing sand is required between
blocks to ensure that the pavers lock-up and spread the heavier loads. Typical bedding and
jointing sand specifications are provided by CMAA (1997b).
9.1.4 Select Fill
Select fill serves as a capping layer over weak subgrades to provide an immediate and long-
term increase in bearing capacity, which facilitates placement and compaction of the
pavement layers.
Type A Material (DPTI Master Specification for Roadworks Part 210) is a select fill with
good shear strength and workability due to its granular nature and controlled plasticity.
Two other properties required for select fill comprise:
• a weighted PI (% passing the 0.425 sieve x the PI) of less than 1000, to eliminate
expansive material; and
• a maximum particle size of less than 40% of the constructed layer thickness, to
provide some mechanical interlock, minimise segregation, and reduce permeability.
Table 9.2 provides the specification for Type A Material. The material may be a sand, sandy
clay, natural rubble, quarry or pit overburden or by-product. Mica, shale and similar
laminated materials, adherent coatings or other foreign material shall not be present in form
or sufficient quantity to produce adverse effect upon the usage and performance of the
material.
Table 9.2: Specification for Type A Material
Property Limit
% passing 75 mm 100
% passing 37.5 mm 80 – 100
% Passing 0.075 mm 0 - 25
Plasticity Index Maximum 12
Linear Shrinkage Maximum 6
Weighted Plasticity Index Maximum 1000
9.2 Asphalt
Asphalt or asphaltic concrete is used primarily as a surfacing material for bikeways and to a
lesser extent as both surfacing and base layers if constructed as a thick asphalt pavement.
Asphalt comprises a range of sizes of mineral aggregates, bitumen binder and air, that is
mixed, placed and compacted whilst hot. As with granular material, the largest size
aggregate in millimetre diameter is used to define the particular mix. DPTI asphalt mix
designations are based on ensuring there is a minimum of 10% of the nominal size material
within the mix. (Asphalt containing a mixture of aggregate of maximum 7 mm size produces
size 7 asphalt, usually referred to as AC7).
Typical sizes of asphalt used for bikeways include 5 mm, 7 mm, 10 mm and 14 mm. The
finer the size the more closed the asphalt surface is in terms of texture. Smaller size mixes
are used for surfacing layers, as these may be laid thinner than larger size mixes and are
generally easier to hand-place to obtain a good finish. However, the smaller mixes have
lower stability and shear strength than larger mixes. If very heavy axle loadings are
expected, or the surfacing/base layer is reasonably thick, a larger size mix may be more
appropriate.
9.2.1 Asphalt for Thin Surfacing
Asphalt placed in thin surfacing layers can be relatively porous compared to a sprayed seal,
and the underlying granular base needs to be treated using a prime or primerseal (refer to
Section 6.2).
The prime comprises bitumen either dissolved in kerosene (hot cutback) or emulsified in
water (emulsion) such that when applied it is able to penetrate the top few millimetres of the
granular material. This deposits a dispersed matrix of bitumen particles within the surface of
the granular material and thereby assists in moisture proofing and bonding to overlaid
bituminous surfacings. If the underlying pavement material or subgrade is particularly
sensitive to moisture ingress (expansive soils etc), a cutback or emulsion primerseal will
provide a much better moisture barrier than a prime.
A tack coat is placed over the primed surface just prior to placing the thin asphalt surfacing
to bond the surfacing to the granular base layer. Tacking between clean fresh layers of
asphalt is generally not required as the heat within the overlaying mix assists adhesion.
9.2.2 Low Air Voids Asphalt
Most asphalt is specified and produced for use on relatively heavily trafficked pavements
where tyre pressures, axle loads, and the number of repetitions of these loads are high. The
design of these asphalt mixes allows for the reduction of air voids caused by traffic during
the initial few years of service.
If similar asphalt is used on bikeways where it would not be sufficiently worked by traffic to
reduce the air voids content, it remains susceptible to oxidisation and degradation by
contaminants. This may result in the asphalt surfacing becoming prematurely brittle and
more susceptible to ravelling, cracking and fretting.
Special asphalt mixes have been designed for light traffic applications. To reduce the initial
air void content, the mix may be gap-graded and/or more bitumen binder added. Table 9.3
shows some of the available mixes used for light traffic.
Table 9.3: Asphalt Types for Light Traffic.
Source Name Properties Reference

DPTI FineAC7L, Dense graded mix with DPTI Master Specification
FineAC10L additional 0.5% binder Division 2: Roadworks
(7 mm and 10 mm)
ARRB Group ARRB Gap- 10 mm size with 6.8% Oliver (1986) & Mulholland
graded mix Class 170 bitumen by total (1989)
mass
Austroads Dense and Fine Sizes 7 mm and 10 mm; Austroads (2014b)
Gap Graded and (Part 4B)
Stone Mastic
Asphalt
Australian Dense and Fine Sizes 7 mm and 10 mm; AS 2150 – 2005
Standard Gap Graded and 5% to 7% bitumen by mass Hot mix asphalt
Stone Mastic
Asphalt
9.2.3 Bitumen Binder
Bitumen binder should preferably comprise Class 170 complying with AS 2008 - 1997.
However local climatic conditions in conjunction with very light or significantly heavier
loadings may warrant the use of either Class 50 or Class 320 bitumen respectively.
For example, a bikeway in a very cold climate region may utilise the lower (viscosity) grade
bitumen, whereas a bikeway likely to sustain heavy axle loads in a very hot areas should
utilise a stiffer (more viscous) binder such as the Class 320.
The use of the softer Class 50 binder may also have some advantages in resisting
environmental cracking where this is likely to be more prevalent. However, in South
Australia there is little local experience with C50 binder and the supply of small amounts for
bikeway projects is unlikely to be practical or economically viable.
9.2.4 Modified Binders
The bitumen binder may be modified by the addition of a range of elastomeric and
plastomeric polymers or crumbed scrap rubber, to enhance the asphalt mix properties for
specialised applications. These include better fatigue and deformation resistance, reduced
reflection cracking, and increased durability. The development of modified asphalt has
mainly targeted heavily trafficked situations and it is difficult to extrapolate this performance
experience to bikeway facilities.
The higher costs associated with modified asphalt may be warranted if an extended service
life or better resistance to environmental cracking has been observed in comparative trials or
local studies of lightly trafficked pavements.
9.3 Concrete
9.3.1 General
Concrete comprises a homogenous mixture of cement binder, fine and coarse aggregate,
sand and water. Chemical admixtures can be included to retard set, reduce water, or for air
entrainment. The concrete aggregate suitable for bikeways would generally be limited to a
maximum size of 20 mm. Unconfined compressive strength requirements range from f’c =
20 MPa for footpath construction to 32 MPa for bikeways that are likely to have heavy
vehicle loads.
Higher concrete strengths generally provide greater durability and better resistance to
structural fatigue cracking. Thickness design for light duty pavement slabs mainly involves
consideration of the magnitude and number of stress repetitions imposed by the expected
loadings.
Durability is important for concrete pavements and is indicated by the longevity of the
surface texture, and the resistance to spalling, minor edge breaks, and stepping or faulting
between adjacent slabs.
Minimum strengths of concrete are provided in Table 9.4.
Table 9.4: Recommended Minimum Concrete Compressive Strengths
Loading Minimum Compressive Strength

(f’c)
Foot and bicycle traffic 20 MPa
Heavy vehicles 32 MPa
9.3.2 Recycled Concrete
Crushed recycled concrete can be used as unbound or bound subbase and base layers of
road pavements in accordance with DPTI Master Specification for Roadworks Part 215.
9.4 Concrete Block Pavers (CBPs)
Concrete Block (or Segmental) Pavers are individual high strength paving units of 60 mm
and 80 mm standard thickness. Pavements should be designed and laid with interlock in
both directions.
Pavers are small in size and are not bonded to adjoining units. Hence, they also require
additional sub-layers to provide adequate pavement strength over weak subgrades.
10. DESIGN TRAFFIC LOADING
Two loading regimes of traffic have been adopted as follows:

• foot and bicycle traffic only;
• heavy vehicle traffic.
The pavement design procedure for most situations can be completed by selecting the
appropriate loading from one of these two categories. However, if better information is
available for a particular bikeway project, it should be used to calculate the design traffic.
10.1 Design periods and units of loading
For flexible and concrete block pavements the recommended design period is 20 years and
the design traffic loading is expressed in terms of the cumulative number of Equivalent
Standard Axles (ESA) over the 20 year design period.
For rigid pavements a 40 year design period is used. In this case the design traffic loading
is expressed in terms of cumulative number of Heavy Vehicle Axle Groups (HVAG)
occurring within the 40 year period.
Table 10.2 provides design traffic loadings based on these periods, but other cumulative
traffic loadings could be determined for different design periods.
10.2 Foot and Bicycle Traffic
The foot and bicycle traffic category assumes that these and similar loadings are all that will
occur on the bikeway pavement during its life. However, if the bikeway can be accessed by
motor vehicles it is prudent to assume that it will be. In general, there will also be a need for
access by emergency services such as police, ambulance, fire control etc, as well as for
normal maintenance of the path or environs.
In practice, selection of this very light loading regime for design is rarely appropriate and
should only be made if it is not physically possible for a heavy motor vehicle to access the
bikeway. If no access is available to emergency and maintenance trucks, and very few if
any 2WD vehicles will traffic the facility, then this loading category may be appropriate.
10.3 Heavy Vehicle Loading
In developing minimum pavement configurations in this Guide it was assumed that all the
loading is due to 2-axle rigid trucks commonly used as road maintenance vehicles.
These minimum designs for flexible pavements provide in Section 11 were based on 4,000
ESA of loading. As detailed in Appendix B, such a loading would be caused by one pass of
a 2-axle rigid truck per week over 20 years with the following axle loads:
 5 tonne (49.0 kN) on a single axle single tyres (SAST)
 7 tonne (68.6 kN) on single axle dual tyres (SADT)
These loads represent a partly-laden truck with a gross mass (12 tonne) that is about 80%
of the maximum prescriptive gross mass. If the bikeway is likely to sustain more frequent or
heavier axle loadings, it is recommended that the design be undertaken in accordance with
Austroads (2012) with the design traffic loading being increased by a factor of 3 to allow for
channelisation (refer Appendix B).
A design traffic loading in terms of Heavy Vehicle Axle Groups (HVAG) is required for the
design of rigid pavements. The minimum designs for concrete are based on 12,000 HVAG
over the 40 year period, or 6000 2-axle rigid truck load repetitions of the 12t gross mass axle
loadings. If the bikeway is likely to sustain more frequent or heavier axle loadings, it is
recommended that the design be undertaken in accordance with Appendix F.
10.4 Summary
Table 10.1 summarises the loading characteristics used in selection of designs in this Guide.
Table 10.1: Indicative Loadings for Bikeway Traffic Categories
User or Vehicle Type
Design
Traffic
Category motor car light utility Trucks with Trucks with
Light truck gross mass
(2WD) (2WD) <3tonne gross mass
less than 12 greater than
tonnes 12 tonnes
Foot and
bicycle
? ?
Heavy
vehicles
? indicates a few repetitions per year of this load type may be acceptable.
Table 10.2 provides the actual design traffic loadings used to generate the pavement
designs.
Table 10.2: Recommended Design Traffic Loadings for Bikeway Structural Designs
Loading Characterised by Flexible and Rigid pavement

concrete block 40 year
pavements design period
20 year
design period
Foot and bicycle Foot and bicycle loading only NA NA
Heavy vehicles 1 pass of two-axle rigid truck per week, 4,000 ESA 12,000 HVAG
12t gross mass per veh or
6000 truck
repetitions
11. FLEXIBLE PAVEMENT DESIGN
11.1 General
There are five different types of flexible pavement configurations (described in Section 6)
that are considered most likely to provide the practical range of design options for South
Australian bikeways:
 Unsurfaced granular.
 Sprayed seal granular (with or without paving fabric).
 Slurry seal granular.
 Asphalt surfaced granular.
 Concrete block paver granular.
The structural methods used to design these flexible bikeway pavements are based on the
performance of lightly trafficked road pavements. However, the performance of bikeways
may differ from lightly trafficked roads due to many factors, including differences in cross-
section, drainage, edge loading and maintenance. Validation of the flexible bikeway design
procedures in this Guide requires completion of a number of reasonably detailed case study
reviews, none of which are available or proposed at this stage. Hence, although due
diligence and sound engineering judgement have been used to develop the configurations
within this Guide, the lack of bikeway performance data means there is a higher
performance risk associated with these designs than occurs with road pavements.
Detailed designs indicating minimum layer and total thicknesses are tabulated for all five
pavement configurations, at three subgrade strengths and two traffic loadings. However,
the Foot/bike configurations would be unsuitable for most facilities as they are not designed
to cater for maintenance vehicle loadings.
Alternative pavement configurations and designs can be prepared for these and other
subgrade and traffic conditions by applying Austroads (2012), usually requiring some
pavement design expertise.
11.2 Unsurfaced Granular Bikeways
Table 11.1 provides the recommended configurations for bikeways comprising unsurfaced
(or unsealed) granular material for the standard loading and soil strength categories. These
pavements may not provide satisfactory performance in wet environments.
Table 11.1: Minimum Designs for Unsurfaced Granular Bikeways
Soil Strength Foot/bike traffic Heavy Vehicles (eg maintenance)

(no vehicle access) NDT = 4000 ESA
Low Strength 80 mm PM3/20 or Sa-C 100 mm PM3/20
(CBR ≥ 2%) 100 mm Type A Material 130 mm PM3/20
180 mm Total Thickness 130 mm Type A Material
360 mm Total Thickness
Moderate Strength 100 mm PM3/20 or Sa-C 100 mm PM3/20
(CBR ≥ 5%) 100 mm Total Thickness 130 mm PM3/20
High Strength 100 mm PM3/20 or Sa-C 150 mm PM3/20
(CBR ≥ 10%) 100 mm Total Thickness 150 mm Total Thickness
Notes: Soaked CBR of Type A Material to exceed 15%.
Sa-C is crusher sand. Refer Appendix C.3.
The designs for Foot/bike traffic are based on engineering judgement. The pavement
thicknesses for Heavy Vehicle loadings have been determined from an empirically derived
relationship (Fig. 12.2 Austroads 2012). The design chart is reproduced in Appendix E.
This permits the designer to interpolate where the design CBR of the soil is known and
differs from 2%, 5% or 10%.
11.3 Sprayed Seal Granular Bikeways
Table 11.2 provides the recommended configurations for bikeways comprising granular
material surfaced with a sprayed seal, for the standard loading and soil strength categories.
Table 11.2: Minimum Designs for Sprayed Seal Granular Bikeways

Low Strength 10/5 double seal 10/5 double seal
(CBR ≥ 2%) 80 mm PM3/20 or Sa-C 100 mm PM2/20
100 mm Type A Material 130 mm PM2/20 or PM3/20
180mm Total Thickness 130 mm Type A Material
Moderate Strength 10/5 double seal 10/5 double seal
100mm Total Thickness 130 mm PM2/20 or PM3/20
High Strength 10/5 double seal 10/5 double seal
100mm Total Thickness 150 mm Total Thickness
Note: Soaked CBR of Type A Material to exceed 15%.
thicknesses for Heavy Vehicle loadings have been determined from empirically derived
relationships (Fig. 12.2 Austroads 2012). The design chart is reproduced in Appendix F.
Table 11.3 and Table 11.5 provide guidance for bitumen and aggregate application rates for
a 10/5 double seal with and without geotextile. The geotextile option is a more robust and
durable treatment usually reserved for subgrades with moderate to very high reactivity
and/or facilities requiring better surfacing performance. Sprayed seals must be swept clean
of loose stone chips before use by cyclists.
Table 11.3: Sprayed Seal Bikeways 10/5 mm double seal
Treatment Nominal application rate
2
Prime (medium) (l/m ) 1.0
2
Bottom coat C170 (l/m ) 1.0-1.2
3 2
10 mm agg. (m /m ) 130
2
Top coat C170 (l/m ) 1.0
3 2
5 mm agg. (m /m ) 250
Table 11.4: Sprayed Seal Bikeways with Geotextile
Treatment Nominal application rate

2
Prime (AMC 0) (l/m ) 1.0
2
Bond coat (C170) (l/m ) 0.7
Geotextile Type (Refer Table 11.5) Grade 1
2
Bottom coat (C170) (l/m ) 1.2-1.4
3 2
10 mm agg. (m /m ) 130
2
Top coat (C170) (l/m ) 1.0
3 2
5 mm agg. (m /m ) 250
Note: during hot weather a reduced bond coat application rate may be required to avoid fabric pickup.
Table 11.5: Key Properties of Paving Geotextile
Properties Units Grade 1

> 135
2
Mass per unit area g/m
Wide-strip Tensile Strength (AS 3706.2) KN/m > 7.0
Maximum Elongation Range (AS 3706.2) % 40 - 60
> 195
o
Minimum Melt Temperature C
11.4 Slurry Seal Granular Bikeways
Where a slurry surfacing is considered to be an appropriate treatment, the underlying

granular pavement structure is effectively the same as for a sprayed surfacing. Table 11.6
provides the recommended configurations for bikeways constructed of granular material with
slurry surfacing for the standard loading and soil strength categories.
Table 11.6: Minimum Designs for Slurry Seal Granular Bikeways

Low Strength 10 mm of 5mm Microsurfacing 10 mm of 5mm Microsurfacing
180mm Total Thickness 130 mm Type A Material
Moderate Strength 10 mm of 5mm Microsurfacing 10 mm of 5mm Microsurfacing
(CBR ≥ 5%) 100 mm PM3/20 100 mm PM2/20
High Strength 10 mm of 5 mm Slurry 10 mm of 5mm Microsurfacing
(CBR ≥ 10%) 100 mm PM3/20 150 mm PM2/20
2 2
Note: Nominal application rate for primes – 1.0l/m and tack coats – 0.3 l/m (residual).
relationships (Fig. 12.2 Austroads 2012). The design chart is reproduced in Appendix E.
11.5 Asphalt Surfaced Granular Bikeways
Table 11.7 provides the recommended configurations for bikeways comprising granular
material with asphalt surfacing for the standard loading and soil strength categories.
Table 11.7: Minimum Designs for Asphalt-Surfaced Granular Bikeway

Low Strength 25 mm FineAC7L 35 mm FineAC10L
(CBR ≥ 2%) 100 mm PM3/20 100 mm PM2/20
225 mm Total Thickness 125 mm Type A material
Moderate Strength 25 mm FineAC7L 35 mm FineAC10L
(CBR ≥ 5%) 125 mm PM3/20 100 mm PM2/20
150 mm Total Thickness 100 mm PM2/20 or PM3/20
High Strength 25 mm FineAC7L 35 mm FineAC10L
(CBR ≥ 10%) 100 mm PM3/20 120 mm PM2/20
125 mm Total Thickness 155 mm Total Thickness
Notes: Soaked CBR of Type A Material to exceed 15%.
2 2
Nominal application rate for primes – 1.0l/m and tack coats – 0.3 l/m (residual).
L; Light grade asphalt with C170 asphalt binder.
If required, a geotextile interlayer could be placed prior to the asphalt wearing course on a
C170 bond coat applied at 0.7l/m2. (Some 5mm aggregate may need to be spread in the
paver wheelpaths to prevent wrinkling of the geofabric during asphalt laying.)
relationships (Fig. 12.2 Austroads 2012). The design chart is reproduced in Appendix E.
11.6 Concrete Block Paver Bikeways
Table 11.9 provides the recommended configurations for bikeways comprising concrete
block pavers over granular material for the standard loading and soil strength categories.
relationships (Fig. 12.2 Austroads 2012). For each subgrade design CBR, the total
thickness of granular material under the blocks and bedding sand was determined by
subtracting the total thickness of blocks and sand (105 mm) from the total granular
thickness in Figure 12.2. This design chart is reproduced in Appendix E. This permits the
designer to interpolate where the design CBR of the soil is known and differs from 2%, 5%
or 10%.
Table 11.8: Minimum Designs for Concrete Block Paver Bikeways

Low Strength 60 mm CBP 80 mm CBP
(CBR ≥ 2%) 25 mm bedding sand* 25 mm bedding sand*
150 mm Type A Material 125 mm PM2/20
Moderate Strength 60 mm CBP 80 mm CBP
(CBR ≥ 5%) 25 mm bedding sand* 25 mm bedding sand*
50 mm PM3/20 125 mm PM2/20
High Strength 60 mm CBP 80 mm CBP
(CBR ≥ 10%) 25 mm bedding sand* 25 mm bedding sand *
50 mm PM3/20 100 mm PM2/20
Note: * Refer to Appendix D for bedding and jointing sand properties.
Soaked CBR of Type A Material to exceed 15%.
11.6.1 Vehicle Crossover Design for CBPs
Vehicular crossovers and other areas subject to heavy vehicle loading should use the thicker
80 mm CBPs due to their better performance under heavy wheel loads.
12. RIGID PAVEMENT DESIGN
12.1 General
The principal types of cementitious concrete pavements for roads are (Austroads 2012):
 jointed plain (unreinforced) concrete pavements (PCP), generally undowelled skewed

joints at 4.2 m spacings
 jointed reinforced concrete pavements (JRCP), typically mesh reinforced with square
dowelled joints at spacings of 8 to 12 m
 continuously reinforced concrete pavements (CRCP), continuous steel reinforcement
to induce transverse cracking at random spacings of about 0.5 to 2 m and no
contraction joints are required. Transverse reinforcement is provided to support the
longitudinal steel.
For bikeways the preferred pavement type is continuous lapped SL72 mesh, with contraction
joints sawcut transversely at no greater than 1.2 times the path width apart. A bound
subbase is not needed as pumping and erosion of subbase/subgrade is unlikely for the
expected low-speed and low repetitions of loading. However, a minimum 150 mm thick
unbound subbase is required to obtain uniform support over variable material.
Alternative pavement configurations and designs can be prepared for these and other
subgrade and traffic conditions by applying Austroads (2012) or Appendix F if loading is
limited to two-axle rigid trucks. Generation of alternative designs will usually require some
pavement design expertise but are unlikely to be necessary for most projects.
The structural method used to design the following rigid bikeway pavements is based on the
performance of lightly trafficked road pavements. However, the performance of bikeways
may differ from lightly trafficked roads due to many factors, including differences in cross-
section, drainage, edge loading and maintenance. Validation of the concrete bikeway
design procedures in this Guide requires completion of a number of reasonably detailed
case study reviews, none of which are available or proposed at this stage. Hence, although
due diligence and sound engineering judgement have been used to develop the concrete
configurations within this Guide, the lack of bikeway performance data means there is a
higher performance risk associated with these designs than occurs with road pavements.
12.2 Minimum Pavement Configurations
Table 12.1 shows the minimum composition for bikeways comprising a continuous lapped
mesh concrete base and unbound granular subbase, for the range of standard loading and
soil strength categories. A SL62 and SL72 mesh is used for Foot/bike and Heavy vehicle
configurations respectively. The Foot/bike configurations would be unsuitable for most
facilities as they are not designed to cater for maintenance vehicle loadings.
Sand must not be used as the subbase layer for concrete, as the fine particles will eventually
enter the joint spaces and restrict the cyclic slab expansion/contraction cycle.
Table 12.1: : Minimum Designs for Concrete Bikeways

1 2,3
Soil Strength Foot/bike traffic Heavy vehicle (eg maintenance)
(no vehicle access) NDT = 12,000 HVAG
Low Strength 100 mm concrete (25MPa) 185 mm concrete (32MPa)
(CBR ≥ 2%) 50 mm PM3/20 150 mm PM2/20
Moderate Strength 100 mm concrete (25MPa) 175 mm concrete (32MPa)
(CBR ≥ 5%) 50 mm PM3/20 150 mm PM2/20
High Strength 100 mm concrete (25MPa) 170 mm concrete (32MPa)
(CBR ≥ 10%) 50 mm PM3/20 100 mm PM2/20
Note: 1. For Foot/bike crossovers, use Heavy vehicle base thicknesses with 25MPa concrete.
2. 10 mm construction tolerance has been added assuming pavement constructed in accordance with
DPTI Master Specification for Roadworks. Additional tolerance may need to be added where other
specifications apply.
3. Designs assume maximum load on the SADT drive axle is 7 tonnes. If higher loads are expected
calculate required base thickness in accordance with Appendix F.
Designs given in Table 12.1 are derived from the procedure given in Austroads (2012).
Interpolation of these designs based on different bearing capacity is not necessary due to
the general insensitivity of thickness to this parameter. Where different traffic loadings to
those given in Table 12.1 are expected, it is recommended that the design procedure in
Appendix F be followed.
12.3 Detailing
Concrete pavement designs require careful detailing of all the design elements, particularly
the joints (refer to Section 17.2), to ensure that good long-term performance is achieved.
The adequacy of the detailing has often proven to be as critical as the general thickness and
reinforcement design determinations.
PART D – CONSTRUCTION Bikeway Pavement Design, Construction & Maintenance
PART D - CONSTRUCTION
The sound performance of the bikeway design configuration is highly dependent on the
quality of the construction works and there are a range of critical details that affect the long-
term serviceability.
Bikeway pavements are constructed using many of the practices associated with
conventional road pavements. Austroads (2009e) provides further information on road
pavement construction which supplements the discussion of bikeway construction issues
within this Guide. Austroads (2009f) also includes links to a number of useful technical
notes, pavement work tips and other publications provided by Austroads, Austroads member
organisations and industry associations.
13. SURFACE TOLERANCE
The new surface of a bikeway pavement should be placed to match existing features such
as pit covers, edgings or driveways, to within 5 mm. It is also desirable (Austroads1999)
that the finished surface of a new bicycle lane or path complies with the following:
• does not deviate from a 3 m straight edge by more than 5 mm at any point; and
• has no sharp vertical curves, or the rate of change in vertical deviation is less than
1 mm in 240 mm as shown in Figure 13.1.
<1
240
Figure 13.1: Recommended Limit for Vertical Curves.
14. EDGE RESTRAINT AND SEPARATION
14.1 Restraint
Materials such as gravel and concrete block pavers require lateral restraint at the pavement
edges to preserve their structural integrity. Thin asphalt surfacing also often requires edge
restraint to ensure proper compaction and poured concrete base similarly utilises a
formwork system.
Construction against a kerb section, wall, or concrete path provides good lateral support.
Trafficking of the full width of the bikeway can then occur without a tendency to develop
edge cracking and breakages.
Figure 14.1 shows the cross-section of typically used edge restraint systems.
Figure 14.1: Bikeway Edge Restraint
14.2 Separation
Installation of an edging system also separates the bikeway materials from the adjacent
vegetation, and may reduce moisture ingress from the adjacent soil to the pavement
structure. Edge treatments comprising unbound granular materials or concrete block pavers
will often eventually become contaminated with topsoil or vegetation, leading to spreading
and deterioration at these locations.
14.3 Edge Restraint Systems
The edge restraint/separation treatments described in Table 14.1 are recommended.

Alternatives such as cast-in-place concrete plinths, kerbs and drainage channels, fences
and walls would also serve the same purpose.
Table 14.1: Edge Restraint Systems
Restraint type Dimension Source Pavement type
Concrete kerbing TRL (1996)

(usually chamfered) 125mm x 255 mm all flexible
refer Figure 14.1 p8-1
Timber (bull-nosed TRL (1996)

where standing proud) 50mm x 150mm all flexible
refer Figure 14.1 p8-1
Additional width of 150mm minimum Austroads (1993) p99

granular base; refer Not for CBPs
Figure 14.2 300mm desirable DPTI
The location and type of edge restraint may have implications for the maintenance and
aesthetics of the bikeway. An exposed concrete edge of 100 to 150 mm width may assist
the definition of the bikeway path (which may be important at night), and provide an edge
that is more easily maintained. The additional support provided by a wider granular base
allows better edge compaction of the asphalt surfacing.
300mm desirable
Asphalt surfacing
Granular base
Figure 14.2: Restraint by additional width of granular base material
15. GRANULAR MATERIAL CONSTRUCTION
For unsurfaced bikeways, aggregate sizes of 20 mm or less are preferred to ensure a

satisfactory ride. With a 20 mm product, the material needs to have sufficient fine fraction
and not be too hard, with an LA Abrasion 1 value greater than 35, e.g. PM3/20.
The surface should be tightly bound and loose material should not be allowed to accumulate
on the surface. Granular layers need to be adequately compacted through the full pavement
depth to ensure good strength and stability. Minimum compaction requirements are
indicated in Table 15.1.
Table 15.1: Recommended Modified Compaction levels for Granular Layers
Layer Materials Foot/bike traffic Heavy vehicle

NDT = 4000 ESA
Base PM2/20 Not Applicable 96%
PM3/20 95% 96%
Sa-C 95% Not Applicable
Subbase PM2/20 Not Applicable 95%
PM3/20 Not Applicable 95%
Type A 95% Not Applicable
Where granular pavements are to be surfaced, it is desirable to dry the compacted materials
back to below the Optimum Moisture Content before priming or sealing. This improves the
stiffness of the unbound granular materials significantly to maximise the load spreading
properties and provide the hard surface required prior to spraying. Sprayed seals must be
swept clean of loose stone chips before use by cyclists.
1
Mechanical test of the source rock to determine its per cent breakdown when tumbled for a standard
period; the lower the LA Abrasion value the better the toughness and abrasion resistance.
16. ASPHALT BIKEWAY CONSTRUCTION
16.1 Pre-treatment
As indicated in Section 6.2 a prime or primerseal is essential to aid adhesion both within the
surface structure of the granular base, and between the granular base and a thin asphalt
surface. The prime or primerseal also acts as a waterproofing membrane.
16.2 Spreading and Compaction
The thin layers used on bikeway pavements cool more quickly than the thicker layers typical
of those used on heavily trafficked roads. Hence to achieve adequate compaction while the
mix remains hot, placement should not be undertaken in cold or wet weather. Typical rates
of cooling are indicated in Austroads/AAPA (2006).
The performance of the asphalt is highly dependent upon achieving good compaction to
reduce permeability and improve the resistance to both load induced and environmental
cracking.
17. CONCRETE BIKEWAY CONSTRUCTION
17.1 General
The construction of concrete bikeway pavements requires good placement practices and
design detailing. In addition to this Guide, further information is provided in C&CAA (1997,
1999a) and RTA (2009).
Either double-beam vibrating screeds or slip-form pavers should be used to compact the
concrete.
A high standard surface finish can be achieved by:
•
2
The use of extended bullfloats (up to 4 m wide) to reduce the frequency and height
of transverse corrugations that are undesirable on bikeways where cyclists travel at
high speed.
• Saw-cut contraction joints completed after bullfloating; trowelling and broom
finishing, but minimising surface discontinuities and hence roughness. Wet-formed
contraction joints made using a grooving tool should be avoided as discussed in
Section 17.2.1.2.
17.2 Joints
Joints in bikeway concrete pavements mainly include contraction joints, expansion and
isolation joints.
17.2.1 Contraction Joints
Contraction joints are required in the concrete base to control the location of cracks resulting
from the shrinkage that occurs as concrete sets. These joints are sawn within 24 hours of
casting as soon as the surface is capable of accepting the operation without damage to the
base surface (refer 17.2.1.1).
2
The bullfloat is a large float on a long handle, which is worked back and forth on the concrete in a direction parallel to
the ridges formed by screeding. Bullfloating is useful as an initial floating operation to smooth the concrete surface
immediately after screeding, and should be completed before bleed water appears on the surface. A second use of the
bullfloat may be required but care must be taken not to overwork the surface. (C&CAA 1999a)
Contraction joints should be no more than 3 mm wide and extend into the slab by about a
quarter to a third of the slab thickness (refer to Figure 17.1) but not to the depth of
reinforcing mesh. These transverse saw cuts are usually required at 3.5 to 4 m spacing (but
< 1.2 x path width) and should be sealed with silicone to about 10mm depth over a suitable
backer rod.
Figure 17.1: Contraction joint detail
17.2.1.1 Saw Cutting
The purpose of shallow saw cutting is to induce shrinkage cracking only below the sawn
joints where the pavement thickness (and hence strength) has been reduced. Determining
the timing of the saw-cutting operation is critical, as sawing too early causes tearing or
ravelling and too late results in unplanned cracking away from these joint locations.
Prior to commencement of a concrete bikeway project, an offsite trial section of about 12 -
20 m length should be constructed to establish and refine the proposed construction
methodology. The time period between concrete placement and optimum sawing is
dependent on the type and slump of the concrete and the prevailing weather conditions.
Adequate sawing equipment (including spare plant) and skilled operators are required onsite
during the limited time available for this critical work component.
17.2.1.2 Hand-formed transverse contraction joints
The traditional grooving tool should be avoided as it usually forms a very wide joint at the
surface (greater than 3mm) and the flat pan edges of this tool tend to create an additional
surface discontinuity. Any wet-formed joints must be made without disturbing the concrete
within 50mm of the joint to avoid unnecessary constructed roughness. Transverse brooming
up to the joint opening to provide fine surface texture may reduce the magnitude of very
small surface irregularities.
17.2.1.3 Areas comprising odd shaped or re-entrant slabs
Odd shaped slabs or slabs containing re-entrant corners require very careful attention to
joint design and location; refer RTA (2009) Concrete Pavement Manual for further advice.
17.2.2 Expansion Joints
Expansion joints accommodate thermally induced extensions of the concrete during hot
weather. These joints are often omitted on concrete roads but the RTA and Austroads
(2012) current best practice favours their inclusion for bikeways to ensure good long term
performance. Expansion joints are generally placed at every 5th transverse joint location
(e.g. 17.5m spacing when contraction joints are sawn at 3.5m intervals), but are also used at
nd
the 2 joint away from junctions with existing flexible pavements or other structures. The
reinforcing mesh is terminated 50 mm either side of the joint.
Expansion joints (refer Figure 17.2 ) must be 10-15 mm wide, sawn or formed to extend the
full depth of the slab, filled with compressible filler, and provided at a minimum of 12 m to
40 m intervals (Aguero 1996).
10 mm
Sealant
. 50mm
. .
Compressible Filler
Figure 17.2: Expansion joint detail
17.2.3 Isolation Joints
An isolation joint is an expansion joint abutting a non-moveable object placed transverse to

the direction of the bikeway. For example, an isolation joint would be placed at a bridge
abutment or driveway crossover. These joints may also be required parallel to the bikeway
direction where there are lateral restraints such as kerb and channel.
17.3 Anchor Blocks
Where the slope of the path exceeds 5%, the use of anchor blocks should be considered to
prevent slippage of the slab. The blocks comprise a beam of concrete typically measuring
200 mm high by 300 mm wide cast integrally and transverse to the path. For longer slopes,
a spacing of about 40 m between blocks is recommended. When the anchor block is cast at
the end of the path it is often referred to as a terminal block as shown in Figure 17.3.
1000 mm 1000 mm min
SL72 mesh in slab
16 mm deformed bar
200 mm
300 mm
Figure 17.3: Terminal Block Detail
Additional reinforcement (deformed bars) to the slab mesh is placed in the slab and anchor
block to prevent transverse cracking at the leading edge of the anchor block.
17.4 Vehicle Crossovers
Where pavements designed for Foot/bike are subject to vehicular crossings, it is

recommended that the design in this zone be changed to the base thickness required for the
Heavy vehicle category (Table 12.1).
17.5 Reinforcement
Continuous steel mesh reinforcement is required for the concrete bikeway designs in Table
12.1. The recommended mesh size is SL72 with 200 mm overlaps (one mesh row) on
adjoining sheets.
Reinforcement should be placed on bar chairs at the mid point or within the upper half of the
pavement slab for effective crack control. A minimum top cover of 40 mm is required for
pavements less than 150 mm thick, and 50 mm cover for slabs greater than or equal to 150
mm. The use of broken bricks etc. to support reinforcing steel is unacceptable.
Reinforcing is also used for anchor blocks and vehicle crossovers as previously discussed.
17.6 Surface Finish
Surface finishes produced from a hessian drag, wooden float or light broom should provide
sufficient skid resistance for bicycles. On shared paths, other finishes such as a stamped or
coloured surfacing can be used for delineation.
17.7 Curing
Curing of the concrete involves ensuring that adequate moisture is available for hydration of
the cement, which is essential for the development of concrete strength and durability.
Methods of curing include sealing the surface or continual dampening with a fine water
spray. Plastic sheeting or a sprayed water or wax based curing compound are generally
likely to be the most practical and effective curing options.
18. CONCRETE BLOCK PAVER CONSTRUCTION
The performance of CBPs is very dependent upon the specification of the paving units and
the manner of their construction. The Concrete Masonry Association of Australia (CMAA
1997c) has produced a Detailing Guide, which provides comprehensive specification and
construction information. Consideration of the following apects should ensure good long-
term performance of CBP bikeway:
• CBP thickness: 60 mm or 80 mm;
• Selection of shape types: fully, partial or non-interlocking units;
• Laying pattern;
• Selection and detailing of the edge restraint system;
• Edge pattern/treatment of CBPs;
• Detailing of the transitions between paving types;
• Bedding course drainage; and
• Detailing around utility pits.
19. DRAINAGE
19.1 Surface Drainage
Good drainage is critical in the design of roadways, paths and tracks. In addition to the
safety and convenience of bikeway users, the drainage design will contribute significantly to
the structural performance of the pavement.
Uncontrolled flow of surface water can cause severe erosion of unsurfaced pavements and
side channels, and undermine the unprotected edges of sealed bikeways. It is essential to
prevent the ponding of surface water that may infiltrate the base of the path and weaken the
pavement structure. Water should be drained by adequate surface crossfalls (refer
Austroads 1999) and side channels into the storm water system.
The subgrade should also be constructed with these crossfalls to allow free drainage of
pavement layers, without depressions that may hold water and weaken the substrate.
19.2 Subsurface Drainage
In localised areas subject to springs, seepage flows, or excessive irrigation, the construction
of a subsurface drain may be required to preserve the soil strength of the bikeway subgrade.
The cost and complexity of installing good subsurface drainage systems means that they
need to be both warranted and well engineered. In South Australia, situations requiring this
treatment tend to be relatively uncommon.
Design of subsurface drainage for road pavements is detailed in Austroads (2009c).

Manufacturers and suppliers of prefabricated geo-composite drainage products also provide
technical design and installation information in their promotional literature.
20. VEGETATION
20.1 Pavement Damage Considerations
Landscaping issues for bikeways are usually associated with the geometric design and
aesthetics of the facility. However the damaging effect of vegetation can be substantial.
Spraying the path and a strip to either side with a suitable weedkiller prior to construction,
and the use of permanent edge restraints and grass trimming, are usually necessary to
adequately control weed and grass invasion.
In pavements constructed on heavy clay soils (PI greater than 30), the most pronounced
movement occurs near trees and shrubs as a result of soil moisture losses during dry
periods. Both small and large tree species can cause surface shape loss and cracking. The
following factors may influence the extent of such damage:
• mature height of the tree;
• mature canopy width;
• species type;
• plantation density,
• soil characteristics; and
• planting techniques.
Species that grow rapidly and are vigorous in their search for moisture can cause large
deformations in expansive soils.
Wherever possible trees and shrubs should be set back a distance equating to the greater
of 1½ times the mature height or twice the mature canopy width of the tree.
If it is impractical to provide adequate clearance between trees and the bikeway, then
construction of root barriers or inclusion of reinforcement in concrete bikeway slabs adjacent
to trees should be considered to reduce the extent of cracking.
Planting techniques that encourage deep root growth, rather than lateral growth towards the
bikeway, may also minimise pavement damage. Common techniques include-
• deep ripping prior to planting to break up heavy soil; and
• regular and thorough watering during the establishment period (first 1 to 2 years).
Barry (1986) provides a limited list of potentially suitable trees and shrubs for plantations on
expansive clay soils.
21. CONSTRUCTION OF SERVICE CROSSINGS
Installation of services should be undertaken prior to bikeway construction.

Services installed after bikeway construction should be installed through a jacked sheathing
culvert.
If narrow and/or deep trenches are excavated across the bikeway, it may be necessary to
reinstate with a flowable-fill material to avoid long-term settlement. These materials are
available from ready mixed concrete suppliers as Controlled Low Strength Materials (CLSM)
and comprise a sand, cement, flyash and water mixture that is flowable, self-levelling and
does not require compaction. Various strength mixes are available, and 0.7 MPa mixes are
typical for subgrade reinstatements (Transport SA 1997).
Open trenching across a bikeway requires the following:
• sawing of the surfacing;
• replacement and thorough compaction of all back-fill from the service asset to the top
of subbase level using a subbase quality material;
• reinstatement of the base and surfacing layers in materials equivalent to the original;
• replacement and dowelling of concrete slabs to preserve shear load transfer; and
• for thin asphalt surfacings an additional 50 mm thickness of asphalt.
PART E – MAINTENANCE Bikeway Pavement Design, Construction & Maintenance
PART E – MAINTENANCE
22. MAINTENANCE OF BIKEWAYS
22.1 General Requirements
Bikeway pavements can be maintained using many of the practices associated with
conventional road pavement types. Austroads (2009g) provides further information on road
pavement maintenance which supplements the discussion of bikeway maintenance issues
within this Guide. Austroads (2009f) also includes links to a number of useful technical
notes, pavement work tips and other publications provided by Austroads, Austroads member
organisations and industry associations.
Smooth, debris free surfaces are a fundamental requirement for cycling safety. Most
bicycles have no suspension or shock absorbers and many have relatively thin tyres inflated
to high pressures. As some bikeway cyclists travel at speeds of around 30 km/h on flat
grades and up to about 50 km/hr on downhill grades, a rough surface or pothole can be
particularly hazardous. Regular maintenance activities on bikeways should include
(Austroads 1999):
• filling of cracks;
• patching of potholes
• trimming or removal of grass so that it does not intrude into the path;
• sweeping of paths to remove debris such as broken glass and fine gravel (including
that arising from construction and maintenance activities such as crack sealing);
• repainting of pavement markings,
• cleaning of signs; and
• trimming of trees and shrubs to maintain safe clearances and sight distances.
22.2 Pavement Surface Tolerances
Austroads (1999) advises that bikeway surfaces should be within the tolerances given in
Table 22.1.
Table 22.1: Existing Surface Tolerances
Not to exceed (mm)

Width of groove Height of step
Parallel to direction of travel 12 10
Perpendicular to direction of travel - 20
Source: Caltrans (1995)
22.3 Drainage
The gradual deterioration of the drainage system often manifests itself in other faults and
distress patterns on the bikeway, which in turn can become the focus of a more
comprehensive and expensive maintenance effort.
Drainage maintenance mainly requires the provision of:
• Adequate bikeway surface crossfall, either one way or two way with crown.
• Maintenance of verges and immediate surrounds of the bikeway to clear grass and
other debris from culverts and drainage paths and ensure good surface runoff.
Due to its importance in the prevention of more severe distress, drainage systems warrant
regular monitoring and timely intervention.
22.4 Crack Filling
Crack-filling is undertaken to seal the underlying pavement layers from moisture ingress and
prevent strength loss or swell in these materials. Cracks appearing as fractures in the
surfacing are difficult to fill without forming a profile extending proud of the surface.
Crack sealants are normally bituminous compounds, and are modified with polymers or
ground rubber for active cracks, and finished with 2mm grit to provide skid resistance.
Excess grit should be removed to minimise the hazard to cyclists.
Crack filling using epoxy or urethane is sometimes undertaken on concrete pavements; refer
to RTA (2000).
22.5 Resurfacing
Resurfacing restores the function of the original surfacing and could be undertaken to
waterproof the base layers, upgrade skid resistance, or improve the shape and riding quality
of the bikeway.
The treatment options generally comprise thin flexible bituminous treatments, but over
concrete and block pavers these are likely to reflect the jointing pattern. The most
appropriate resurfacing treatments for bikeways generally include:
• Sprayed reseal. A modified binder may be used to improve the resistance to crack
reflection. Paving fabric may also be placed for crack interception and additional
waterproofing.
• Microsurfacing. This can be used to correct minor surface irregularities.
• Asphalt overlay. Can be used for shape correction. Modified binder may improve
resistance to crack reflection, but little performance data is available for bikeways.
Other restorative treatments are available for sealed surfaces that are structurally sound, but
have an excess or lack of bituminous binder. These comprise the softening and addition of
additional aggregate to the surface (for binder excess) and enrichment treatments for binder
deficit.
Some asphalt types, such as stone-mastic asphalt and open-graded asphalt (Foley 2001)
appear to be able to resist the reflection cracking occurring in road pavement surfacings
better than others.
Further detailed information regarding sealing and restorative treatments may be obtained
from Austroads (2009d).
23. MAINTENANCE CONSIDERATIONS
23.1 Flexible Pavements
23.1.1 Unsealed Surface
Unsealed or gravel surfaces rely on the cohesion and grading of the soil particles to
maintain a hard and durable surface. The critical maintenance activities for these surfaces
are usually related to drainage and include:
• maintaining an adequate surface crossfall, either one way or two way with crown;
• ensuring that grass and other debris does not build up along the pavement margin;
thereby preventing surface runoff;
• checking and clearing culverts and drainage paths;
• reshaping to eliminate any low points, potholes etc.; and
• periodic resheeting to preserve base thickness and shape.
23.1.2 Spray Sealed and Thin Asphalt Surfaces
The waterproofing of the base material by the surfacing treatment minimises or eliminates
some of the maintenance tasks associated with an unsurfaced pavement. To preserve the
integrity of this surfacing it is important to-
• repair any discontinuities that allow water to pond and/or penetrate into the base
course;
• maintain the margin of the surfacing edge support and waterproof or crackseal any
gap that occurs;
• prevent the verge vegetation from encroaching onto and penetrating the asphalt or
seal; and
• maintain the general drainage efficiency of the bikeway and environs as described
for unsealed surfaces.
The condition or amount of binder at the riding surface may sometimes require an
intervention treatment.
Too much bitumen on the surface usually results in bleeding or slickness when the
aggregate particles become deeply embedded or at times enveloped in a bitumen film. The
loss of aggregate and skid resistance can become a safety issue for bikeway users.
Loss of bitumen binder from the surface (or hardening) can lead to stripping of the seal and
ravelling of asphalt, reducing the ability of the surfacing to act as an effective moisture
barrier for the underlying granular base. Variable skid resistance and eventually potholing
often results. Binder loss may primarily be due to the age of the bitumen, oxidation, and
exposure to sunlight. The lighter fraction of the bitumen tends to evaporate leaving the
heavier and more brittle bitumen components that have a less tenacious grip of aggregate
particles.
Methods of repair of bleeding, flushing, binder embrittlement, stripping and ravelling are
contained in Austroads (1991) and ARRB (2005c).
23.1.3 Asphalt Surfaced Pavements
If specific edge restraint to the top of the asphalt layer is not provided, some lateral support
to reduce the occurrence of edge breaks may be achieved by topping up and maintaining
the adjoining surfaces or shoulders of the bikeway.
Treatment of ravelling and bleeding of the surface may also be required.
23.2 Rigid Pavements
Most maintenance activities associated with concrete pavements relate to the joints, where
spalling of the concrete arris, step-faulting or other vertical discontinuities may occur.
23.2.1 Spalling
Spalling occurs when joints become blocked with incompressible particles and are unable to
relieve the high thermal expansion stresses by slab movement. Low concrete strength (and
durability) also tends to result in concrete spalling where edges or joints are trafficked by
vehicles.
Repair of spalling at slab joints is difficult, as any cementitious repair should not extend
across the joint. As this can be a labour intensive task, spalls are often treated with flexible
filler such as fine 5 mm size asphalt. However, this type of treatment would impact
adversely on the aesthetics of the bikeway.
23.2.2 Faulting
Step-faulting and other vertical misalignment across joints occurs when tree roots or
swelling soils cause localised heave or subsidence of a slab. This can require milling of the
step or replacement of slabs in severe cases.
Heavy commercial vehicle loadings may also fracture individual slabs requiring an
appropriately designed repair.
23.2.3 Slab Jacking

This technique is used on concrete roads where the relative movement between adjacent
slabs is substantial. A fine cementitious grout or ‘mud’ (‘mud jacking’) is injected to level
adjoining slabs. For bikeway pavements, slab replacement is likely to be a better option
where this type of distress occurs.
As for all other pavement types, attention to drainage is important. Settlement of slabs in a
poorly drained section of concrete bikeway also requires correction of the drainage problem.
Slab jacking will only be effective while the underlying subbase or subgrade is protected
from further erosion and subsequent settlement.
23.2.4 Cracked Slabs

Slabs that have cracked and appear stable (no spalling or pumping etc.) should be
monitored, as the bikeway traffic loading may not require slab replacement. For
unreinforced concrete and/or wide cracks, crack-sealing using a flexible bituminous sealant
should be considered, with the performance risks of not waterproofing the crack weighed
against the loss in ride quality.
24. SAFETY DURING WORKS
Maintenance and construction operations should be undertaken so that the safety of

workers, cyclists, and other users remains at an acceptable standard. Austroads (1999)
provides comprehensive recommendations on the signing and delineation of works, and
these are attached as Appendix G of this document.
25. MONITORING
25.1 Surface Shape
Pavement surface shape is generally assessed in two ways:

• roughness; the cumulative variations in longitudinal profile are measured to assess
the ride quality, for determining network performance and prioritising maintenance
activities; and
• local shape variations; these are primarily measured by manual means for the
quality control of construction and rehabilitation treatments.
25.1.1 Roughness
Roughness is a measure of the ride quality or smoothness of a pavement surface and is

primarily reported in:
• NAASRA Roughness Meter counts (nrm, c/km); or
• International Roughness Index (IRI, m/km)).
IRI units are common overseas and for comparison with nrm, a reasonable correlation has
been determined by Prem (1989) as:
nrm (c/km) = 26.5 x IRI – 1.27
Roughness is measured by-
• Laser profilers are the most common for Australian road pavements, operating at
speeds above 30 km/h and providing test results in both IRI and NAASRA counts;
• NAASRA Roughness Meter, which comprises a sensor, mounted on the rear axle of
a standard vehicle. This has been virtually superseded by laser profilometry. The
slowest calibrated test speed is normally 50 km/hr; and
• ARRB walking profiler, which measures pavement surface roughness as it is pushed
along at walking speed. While it can access very narrow paths, it is relatively slow
and is more suited to high precision small area applications.
Roughness values of less than 40 NAASRA counts/km on the road network are considered
very smooth and typical of good quality new pavement. Motorists tend to find roughness
levels up to 110 nrm acceptable, particularly for speeds of less than 80km/hr. Roughness
measurements greater than 150 nrm usually require some intervention treatment to reduce
the roughness. The 110 and 150 nrm levels typically define the broadly accepted terminal
roughness values for rural main roads or highways and the main urban arterial road
alignments.
There appears to have been little if any development work to determine an appropriate
terminal condition or intervention level for bikeway roughness. However, roughness
measurements on existing facilities could be used in conjunction with user feedback to
initially develop these values. Alternative interim limits could be based on those associated
with road pavements, as these roughness standards are imposed on cyclists using the
normal road network.
Typical DPTI requirements for the mean maximum NAASRA lane roughness for each 100 m
section of new road pavement construction are:
• 50 c/km for speed zones of less than or equal to 70 km/h; and
• 40 c/km for speed zones greater than 70 km/h.
This standard of construction is unlikely to be achievable for most bikeway constructions and
there is some user survey data to indicate that higher roughness is acceptable. Interim
initial roughness values for bikeways are suggested in Table 25.1, with Recreational and
Commuter facilities providing convenient category definitions.
Table 25.1: Suggested Maximum Average Initial Roughness per 100m length
Recreational Bikeways Commuter Bikeways,

(and high standard applications)
100 counts/km 75 counts/km
25.1.2 Local Pavement Shape Variability
Local shape variations can be related to:

• rutting, wheelpath deformation from vehicle loads;
• pavement edge drop-off;
• surface irregularities associated with tree roots or soil movements; and
• step faulting of concrete slabs.
Shape is usually measured as a deviation in millimetres from a 1.2 m or a 3.0 m length

straight edge, and is often part of rating systems commonly in use. Refer also to Table
22.1, Table 25.3 and Table 25.4.
25.2 Skid Resistance
The skid resistance of Australian pavements is generally measured as a friction number or

coefficient:
• Grip Number determined from the GripTester: continually measured by a towed
device, which can also be pushed by hand in narrow areas.
• British Pendulum Number (BPN): measured by the British Pendulum (BP), a portable
device which tests a small and discrete area of surface; and
• Sideways Force Coefficient (SFC): continually measured with a device known as
SCRIM (mounted on a heavy commercial vehicle) but test speeds of 50 km/hr and
significant clearance requirements generally exclude the use of this equipment on
bikeways;
All three devices measure the skid resistance of the wet surface.
Testing of bikeway skid resistance at a network level is uncommon and is more likely to be
required for the assessment of local problems. These may be due to surface polishing,
contamination or where the texture is substandard. The most appropriate testing device
would be the British Pendulum or GripTester. A minimum Grip Number of 0.40 is
recommended for Bikeways.
Investigatory levels for road pavement surfaces recommended by DPTI are indicated in
Table 25.2.
Table 25.2: Recommended Investigatory Levels for Skid Resistance

Road Situation Minimum Grip No. Maximum Vehicle
Speed km/h
Difficult sites - steep grades, tight bends, traffic 0.50-0.55 60-80
signal approaches, roundabouts.
Urban Arterial Roads 0.45 60
Rural Arterial Roads 0.45 110
Urban/Lightly Trafficked/ Bikeways 0.40 60

Note: The approximate conversion from British Pendulum No. to the Grip No. is Grip No.= 0.01x BP
25.3 Cracking and other Surface Irregularities
Cracking and other pavement defects may be assessed for bikeways. Austroads (2011)
and ARRB (2005c) provide examples of these distress types for flexible and rigid
pavements.
25.4 Rating Systems for Paths
Pavement asset management systems usually rate condition indicators such as roughness,
rutting, and skid resistance, by collecting data automatically at normal motor vehicle speeds.
Estimates or measurements of cracking, potholing, texture and strength, may also be
undertaken.
Only a few of these parameters would normally be measured or assessed for bikeways,
generally by means of a pavement inspection.
The Department of Urban Services, Canberra (Robinson et al. 2001) has developed rating
categories for concrete and asphalt ‘community paths’ as summarised in Table 25.3 and
Table 25.4.
Table 25.3: Concrete Paths Rating System (DSS 1998)
Rating Description
Poor Extensive cracking of the pavement; concrete is loose, spalling, broken or subsided.
Large (> 10 mm) wide cracks with vertical displacement (i.e. step > 25 mm).
Severe ramping of the pavement (typically two bays of path uplifted to form a peak at the joint line).
Fair Large (> 10 mm) cracks with horizontal displacement of concrete producing a step of < 25 mm.
Ramping < 30 mm.
Generic comment: A fair to poor pavement is reached where maintenance intervention is required
to preserve the asset and/or ensure public safety.
Good Fine to medium cracks < 10 mm in width in width and single longitudinal cracking with little or no
vertical displacement.
Ramping < 30 mm.
Generic comment: A good condition is where the pavement has not deteriorated to extent that
maintenance work is deemed to be essential, for reasons of public safety and/or asset preservation.
Excellent New paths and hairline cracks.
Table 25.4: Asphalt Paths Rating System (DSS 1998)
Rating Description
Poor Longitudinal and transverse cracking width > 10 mm.
Extensive, concentrated crocodile-like pavement cracking.
Continuous lengths of weed infested pavement generally located along the path edge in combination
with pavement failure.
Rippling (height > 20 mm) typically due to tree root damage of the pavement resulting in poor riding
conditions.
Eruptions (height > 20 mm) typically due to tree root intrusion or base course chemical reaction.
Fair Longitudinal or transverse cracking of the wearing surface (< 10 mm)
Rippling of wearing surface or eruptions < 20 mm.
Patches as distinct from continuous lengths of weed infested pavement, generally located along the
path edge, in combination with pavement failure.
Isolated patches, as distinct from continuous areas of crocodile like surface cracking.
Generic comment: A fair to good pavement condition is reached where maintenance intervention is
required to preserve the asset and/or ensure public safety.
Good Paths with a satisfactory ride quality (deviation from a 3 m straight-edge not exceeding 5 mm at any
point).
Minor surface deterioration not requiring maintenance intervention.
Generic comment: A good condition is where the pavement has not deteriorated to the extent that
maintenance work is deemed to be essential, for reasons of public safety and/or asset preservation.
Excellent New Paths.
25.5 Intervention Treatments
Tables A1 to A4 (from Robinson et al. 2001) in Appendix A suggest treatments for a range
of distress modes for gravel paths, asphalt paths, paver-surfaced paths and concrete paths.
Table A2 has been modified from the original reference to include spray sealed and slurry
surfaced bikeways. The recommended treatments provide some additional detail for repair
strategies for bikeway pavements.
APPENDIX A Bikeway Pavement Design, Construction & Maintenance
APPENDIX A: PROPOSED INTERVENTION TREATMENTS

(from Robinson et al. 2001)
Table A1: Proposed Intervention Treatments for Gravel Paths1
Defect Comments and Treatment

Erosion of the path Redirect the water flow where possible. There is a requirement to fill any
areas of erosion with additional gravel. Stabilising the gravel with lime
may also be required.
Loose surface This may require the gravel to be stabilised with lime at 2% by volume.
Water ponding Place additional gravel to ensure water runs off the path.
Grass on the path Spray the path with weed killer and chip weeds where required.
1. Paths used for pedestrians, cyclists and other users.
Table A2: Proposed Intervention Treatments for Asphalt Paths

Crack width less than 3 mm No action
Crack width between 3 mm and 10 These cracks do not present a problem to the user unless the pavement
mm lifts, causing pedestrians to trip.
These can be filled with a crack filling material, but care must be taken to
ensure that the product does not leave a slippery surface (longitudinal
cracking only).
Extensive cracking may require the surface to be replaced.
Cracks wider than 10 mm These cracks can cause pedestrians to trip, and cycles, wheelchairs and
strollers to be thrown off course.
These cracks must be filled to remove the hazard. Coldmix may be able
to be used, a modified crack filling material may be appropriate or the
surface may need replacing.
Cracking from vehicles (no No action.
displacement)
Substantial cracking, shoving and Remove surface, recompact base material and replace asphalt, sprayed
surface breaking up seal or slurry surfacing.
Trench subsidence below 8 mm No action unless ponding is a problem.
Trench subsidence over 8 mm Remove surfacing in the affected area, re-level the base and replace
asphalt, sprayed seal or slurry surfacing.
Sharp subsidence/uplift and Remove surfacing in the affected area and replace, removing the
dangerous bumps subsidence/uplift. Where this is resulting from tree root intrusion, remove
root.
Sulphate attack Remove surfacing and base and relay a new base and asphalt, sprayed
seal or slurry surfacing.. The alternative to this is to mix lime with the
base material and then place the new surfacing.
Potholes Fill pothole with coldmix.
Water ponding Drain the bikeway where possible by removing soil from the side of the
path to allow water to escape. Where this is not practical, a section of
the bikeway may need to be replaced or overlayed.
Deterioration of surface with age Replace the surface or overlay the bikeway with asphalt, slurry or
sprayed reseal.
APPENDIX A Bikeway Pavement Design, Construction & Maintenance
Table A3: Proposed Intervention Treatments for [Concrete] Paver Paths

Displacement below 8 mm No action.
Displacement greater than 8 mm Remove pavers, level and compact the base and relay the pavers.
Where the pavers are stuck to the base, it may require grinding of the
pavers to provide a level surface.
Subsidence/Uplift below 8 mm No action.
Subsidence/Uplift of individual Remove pavers, fix base and relay the paver.
pavers greater than 8 mm
Constant slope below 25 mm in 1m No action.
Constant slope towards centre of Remove the pavers, install additional base material, compact and relay
subsidence/uplift greater than 25 the pavers in the subsided area. Where tree roots cause the problem,
mm in 1 m either remove the root or reduce the slope of the ramp.
Cracked pavers Where the paver is cracked and not moving - no action.
Missing pavers As a temporary repair fill with sand or gravel, install a new paver.
Gaps between pavers Narrow gaps between pavers may be filled with sand.
Larger gaps may require additional sections of pavers to be placed in the
gaps.
Slippery surface of pavers Slippery paver surfaces may be ground to remove the slippery surface.
Glazed tiles are normally slippery when wet and should be avoided as
much as possible. Removal is the best solution.
Table A4: Proposed Intervention Treatments for Concrete Paths

Vertical displacement below 8 mm No action.
Vertical displacement between 8 The step should be removed by grinding or ramped with coldmix asphalt.
mm and 25 mm
Vertical displacement greater than Localised displacements on sections in good condition should have a
25 mm coldmix asphalt ramp installed
Extensive areas of displacement, in areas of trees, cut roots, install root
barrier and replace concrete or regulate with asphalt.
If severe damage caused by vehicles that are unable to be kept off the
path, replace concrete to comply with Section 12 including steel mesh.
Joint/crack widths below 8 mm No action.
Joint/crack widths between 8 and Individual cracks can be filled with grout.
20 mm Extensive cracking of the bikeway requires replacement, refer Section
12, and include steel mesh.
Joint/crack widths greater than 20 Fill cracks with coldmix if the path is still serviceable.
mm If the bikeway is extensively cracked or unserviceable, refer Section 12
include steel mesh.
Skid resistance problem This may be as a result of frost or incorrect finish of the concrete.
Replacement of the section of path or overlay with bituminous wearing
course if reflection of joints and cracks is acceptable.
Ponding of water This may be in association with subsidence. Altering the landscaping or
replacement of the section of path may be required.
APPENDIX B Bikeway Pavement Design, Construction & Maintenance
APPENDIX B: TECHNICAL BASIS FOR BIKEWAY DESIGNS.

This Appendix contains a summary of the technical basis for the development of data in
Table 10.2, Table 11.1, Table 11.2, Table 11.6, Table 11.7, Table 11.8, and Table 12.1.
B.1 Subgrade Strengths
Subgrade strengths have been selected at CBR values of 2%, 5% and 10% to represent
Low Strength, Moderate Strength and High Strength founding conditions respectively.
B.1.1 Low Strength (Design CBR of 2%)
Given the likely location of bikeways in zones of low-bearing soils (e.g. paths meandering
around river flats/plains, amongst seasonally watered vegetation/gardens, and the relatively
narrow structural width of the bikeways themselves, which expose them to a relatively
greater moisture ingress than road pavements), this low (2%) value is considered suitable.
In addition it would be less likely for these facilities to have a stabilised foundation
(subgrade) as compared to road pavements. Thus, while most design charts for roads
commence at a design CBR of 3%, this lower value of 2% is considered prudent.
B.1.2 Moderate Strength (Design CBR of 5%)
This represents an often-used design value for reasonably sound bearing soils.
B.1.3 High Strength (Design CBR of 10%)
Austroads presumptive CBR design values for the range of common soil types have an
upper limit of 15% for well graded sands with excellent drainage. Wherever possible DPTI
undertakes a thorough investigation of support conditions and generally adopts an upper
limit of CBR 10% to characterise road and bikeway pavement subgrades.
B.2 Traffic Loading
B.2.1 Foot Traffic/Bicycles
This loading represents the uncommon case of nil maintenance (or other) vehicles that are
substantially heavier than pedestrian or bicycle loadings (typically a maximum unit mass of
about 100 kg), and cannot be equated to any units of ESA (flexible pavement) or HVAG
(rigid pavement).
B.2.2 Heavy vehicles
The minimum pavement design listed in Sections 11 and 12 are appropriate for heavy
vehicle loading of an (average) weekly one-way passage of a two-axle rigid truck with the
following loads:
 5 tonne (49.0 kN) single axle single tyre (SAST)
 7 tonne (68.6 kN) single axle dual tyres (SADT)
These loads would are considered typical of a road-patrol truck with gross mass (12 tonne),
which is about 80% of the maximum prescriptive gross mass.
For the design of flexible pavements using the empirical design chart (Figure 12.2 Austroads
2012), the cumulative number of Equivalent Standard Axle (ESA) over the design period is
required. This design number of ESA is abbreviated to DESA in Austroads (2012).
The cumulative number of truck repetition over the 20 year design period is about 1040 (20
years x 52 weeks x 1 vehicle/week). However because of the restricted width of bikeways
compared to roads, the loading is more channelised and hence the number of load
APPENDIX B Bikeway Pavement Design, Construction & Maintenance
repetitions is multiplied by a factor of 3 (TRL 1996). Hence the minimum pavement designs
have been based on 3 x 1040 = 3120 truck repetitions.
Using equation 7.3 of Austroads (2012), the ESA of damage due to 5 tonne single steer axle
(SAST) is 0.73 ESA and for the 7 tonne single drive axle (SADT) is 0.54. Thus each pass of
the 12 tonne rigid truck causes a total of 1.27 ESA of damage. Figure B.1 allows the ESA of
loading to be calculated for other axle group loads.
3.0 ESA/HV
2.0 ESA/HV 2.5 ESA/HV
9.0
1.5 ESA/HV
8.5
8.0
1.0 ESA/HV
7.5
1.27 ESA/HV
7.0
6.5
SADT
(tonnes)
6.0
0.5 ESA/HV
5.5
5.0
4.5
0.3 ESA/HV
4.0
3.5
3 3.2 3.4 3.6 3.8 4 4.2 4.4 4.6 4.8 5 5.2 5.4 5.6 5.8 6
SAST (tonnes)
Figure B.1: ESA of loading due to a single pass of two-axle rigid truck
Hence the minimum flexible pavements designs are appropriate for a design traffic loading
of
DESA = 3120 x 1.27 = 3960, this figure has been rounded to 4000 ESA in the Guide.
Design traffic in terms of Heavy Vehicle Axle Groups (HVAG) is required for the design of
4
rigid pavements. Over the 40 year period there are 1.2 x 10 HVAG (40 years x 52 weeks x
1 vehicle/week x 2 axles/ vehicle). For simplicity this, is expressed as 6000 truck repetitions
in the Guide.
B.3 Minimum Pavement Configurations
Minimum pavement configurations are given in Guide for the above-mentioned design traffic
loading. If the bikeway is likely to sustain more frequent or heavier axle loadings, it is
recommended that the bikeway pavements be design using Austroads (2012). However
because of the restricted width of bikeways compared to roads, the loading is more
channelised. Hence the DESA calculated using Austroads needs to be multiplied by a factor
of 3 (TRL 1996).
For concrete bikeways on which the loading is limited to 2-axle rigid trucks, a simplified
design procedure is provided in Appendix F.
APPENDIX C Bikeway Pavement Design, Construction & Maintenance
APPENDIX C: MATERIAL SPECIFICATIONS

Table C1: CLASS 3 QUARRIED PAVEMENT MATERIAL [GRADING BASED]
TEST
MANUFACTURING TOLERANCE
PROCEDURE
QUALITY CONTROL TESTS

20 mm 40 mm 55 mm 75 mm
Product Class 3 Class 3 Class 3 Class 3
PM3/20QG PM3/40QG PM3/55QG PM3/75QG
Sieve Size (mm) Percent Passing
Particle Size 75 100
Distribution 53 100 100 75 – 95
TP134 37.5 90 – 100 75 – 95
26.5 100 50 – 75
19 90 – 100 60 – 85 50 – 75
13.2
4.75 40 - 65 25 - 50 20 – 45 20 – 40
0.075 5 - 15 3 - 11 3 - 11 3 - 11
AS1289.3.1.2 Liquid Limit Maximum 35%
AS1289.3.3.1 Plasticity Index Maximum 15%
AS1289.3.4.1 Linear Shrinkage Maximum 8%
LA Abrasion
AS1141.23 N/A Maximum 45%
Grading ‘A’
LA Abrasion
AS1141.23 Max 45% N/A
Grading ‘B’
Table C2: CLASS 2 QUARRIED PAVEMENT MATERIAL [GRADING BASED]
TEST PROCEDURE MANUFACTURING TOLERANCE [Grading Based]

20 mm Class 2 30 mm Class 2 40 mm Class 2
Product
PM2/20QG PM2/30QG PM2/40QG
53 100
37.5 100 90 – 100
Particle Size 26.5 100 90 – 100 74 – 96
Distribution 19 90 – 100 77 – 95 62 – 86
TP134 13.2 74 – 96
9.5 61 – 85 51 – 75 42 – 66
4.75 42 – 66 35 – 57 28 – 50
2.36 28 – 50 24 – 44 20 – 39
0.425 11 – 27 9 – 22 8 – 21
0.075 4 – 14 4 - 12 3 – 11
AS1289.3.1.2 Liquid Limit Maximum 28%
AS1289.3.3.1 Plasticity Index Minimum 1% - Maximum 8%
AS1289.3.4.1 Linear Shrinkage Maximum 4%
LA Abrasion
AS1141.23 N.A. N.A. Maximum 45%
Grading ‘A’
LA Abrasion
AS1141.23 Maximum 45 Maximum 45% N.A.
Grading ‘B’
APPENDIX C Bikeway Pavement Design, Construction & Maintenance
C.3 SOURCE MATERIALS: SAND Type C
Shall be a crushed quarry product only.
Table C3: SAND TYPE C PRODUCT QUALITY CONTROL
TEST MANUFACTURING TOLERANCE

PROCEDURE

Product Sa - C
9.5
6.7 100
Particle Size 4.75 70 – 100
Distribution 2.36 35 – 100
TP134 1.18
0.600
0.425 25 – 70
0.300
0.150
0.075 8 – 23
AS1289.3.1.2 Liquid Limit Max 25%
AS1289.3.3.1 Plasticity Index Max 6%
AS1289.3.4.1 Linear Shrinkage Max 3%
AS1141.34 Organic Impurities Satisfactory
APPENDIX D Bikeway Pavement Design, Construction & Maintenance
APPENDIX D: CONCRETE BLOCK PAVER SAND GRADINGS
Table D1: Grading Envelope for Bedding Material (CMAA 1997b)
Sieve Size (mm) % Passing

9.52 100
4.75 95-100
2.36 80-100
1.18 50-85
0.6 25-60
0.3 10-30
0.15 5-15
0.075 0-10
Table D2: Grading Envelope for Joint-filling Material (CMAA 1997b)
Sieve Size (mm) % Passing

2.36 100
1.18 90-100
0.6 60-90
0.3 30-60
0.15 15-30
0.075 5-10
APPENDIX E Bikeway Pavement Design, Construction & Maintenance
APPENDIX E: DESIGN CHART FOR GRANULAR PAVEMENTS WITH THIN BITUMINOUS SURFACING (AUSTROADS 2012)
CBR
MINIMUM THICKNESS OF BASE MATERIAL
100 30
20
15
Thickness 200 10
of
granular 7
material
(mm) 5
300
4
3
400
2
t = max{100, 0.475[219 - 211(logCBR) + 58(logCBR) ]log(14DESA)}
2
500 3
2 4 6 8 4 2 4 6 8 5
10 10 10
Design traffic (ESA)
Note:
1. Appropriate local conditions, environmental and drainage issues must be considered in using these design curves.
2. Thin asphalt surfacings may be included in total granular thickness. However, the minimum thickness of the granular
base is 100 mm.
APPENDIX F Bikeway Pavement Design, Construction & Maintenance
APPENDIX F: THICKNESS DESIGN OF CONCRETE BIKEWAYS

The minimum concrete designs given in Table 12.1 are applicable for 6000 load repetitions
of a 2-axle rigid truck with a maximum load of 7 tonnes on the single axle dual tyre (SADT)
Note that the truck steer axle (SAST) does not cause fatigue damage to the concrete
provided the axle load does not exceed the legal limit of 6 tonnes.
Where a higher number of load repetitions or SADT load exceeding 7 tonne is expected,
the following procedures may be used to determine the required thickness of concrete
base.
Using the procedures in Section 9.3.2 of Austroads (2012), calculate the equivalent
subgrade CBR. Where 100 -150 mm of granular subbase (min CBR = 15%) is provided
under the concrete base, Table F.1 lists the equivalent subgrade CBR values for a range
of subgrade CBRs.
Table F.1 Effective Subgrade CBR values
Subgrade Design Granular subbase Equivalent

CBR thickness Subgrade
(%) (mm) CBR
(%)
2 150 3
3 150 4
5 150 6
7 150 8
10 100 10
15 100 15
The expected number of 2-axle rigid truck load repetitions over the design period is then
calculated. For example, if one truck pass per month is expected over a 40 year design
period the number of repetitions is:
Ntrucks = 12 (months) x 40 (yrs) x 1.0 (truck/month) x 3.0 = 1440 load repetitions

The maximum expected load on the SADT axle group needs to be estimated. This is the
design SADT axle load.
Using the equivalent subgrade CBR, the expected load repetitions of the design SADT
axle load, the required thickness of base is calculated using Figure F.1. Note that the
thicknesses in Figure F.1 includes a 10 mm construction tolerance. This tolerance is
appropriate when bikeways are constructed in accordance with DPTI roadworks
specifications. Where other specifications are used, consideration needs to be given to
adjusting Figure F.1 thicknesses.
As discussed above, the minimum concrete designs given in Table 12.1 are applicable for
6000 load repetitions of a 2-axle rigid truck with a maximum load of 7 tonnes on the single
axle dual tyre (SADT). Figure F.1 indicates that the required base thickness for this
loading is 175 mm, assuming that the 10 mm construction tolerance is appropriate.
APPENDIX F Bikeway Pavement Design, Construction & Maintenance
Base
9.0
thickness
8.5 220 mm
8.0 210 mm
7.5
200 mm
7.0
190 mm
SADT 6.5
axle load 180 mm
(tonnes)
6.0
170 mm
5.5
160 mm
5.0
Adjustment for Equivalent Subgrade CBR 150 mm

4.5 CBR=3 add 10 mm
CBR=5 0 mm
CBR=10 subtract 5 mm 140 mm
4.0
3.5
6000
1.0E+02 1.0E+03 1.0E+04 1.0E+05
Two-axle rigid truck load repetitions
Figure F.1: Concrete base thickness (includes 10 mm construction tolerance)
The recommended pavement type for bikeways is a continuous lapped SL72 mesh, with
transverse contraction joints saw cut at 4.0 m centres to 40 mm depth.
APPENDIX G Bikeway Pavement Design, Construction & Maintenance
APPENDIX G: SIGNING AND DELINEATION OF WORKS

(Austroads 1999)
The signing and delineation of construction and Safety Barriers should be provided where required by AS
maintenance works on roads and footpaths should be 1742.3, and are generally appropriate where cyclists or
performed in accordance with Australian Standard pedestrians are detoured onto roads. Temporary (lower)
AS 1742.3 (Standards Australia 1996) and speed limits may also be appropriate in this circumstance.
any relevant local codes of practice and regulations. In
general, provision for works on paths should be made in With reference to Figure E-l (Austroads 1999) where
accordance with the principles of these standards. adequate provision for cyclists is not possible on a road,
Additional consideration of cyclists should be made in access along a path in the area of
accordance with the details set out below. the roadside verge may be appropriate. Provided
adequate separation from the work area can be
Section 8 (Austroads 1999) highlights a range of issues maintained, it is generally acceptable to initiate and
that are important to cyclists in relation to construction and terminate the roadside verge bicycle access within the
maintenance works. As a principle objective of provision road lane transition zones either side of the work area.
for cyclists adjacent to the works site, the riding
surface should be maintained in a clean and smooth state. For paths, reference should be made to Section 6.6
This may necessitate sweeping of the riding surface on at (Austroads 1999) (in relation to paths located away
least a daily basis. from road reserves) and to 6.6.2 (Austroads 1999)
(separated paths) where temporary roadside verge
Figures G1, G2 and G3 (in this Appendix) highlight the access is required. The controls highlighted in these
desired level of provision required in the vicinity of works, sections are applicable to temporary paths.
depending on he circumstances. The actual provisions to be
Containment fences should be provided in accordance
made are dependent on the conditions that exist, including:
with the requirements of AS 1742.3 and otherwise as
• presence of a traffic controller; required by Section 7.6.2 Austroads 1999). These may be
appropriate to separate pedestrians and cyclists where
• existing level of bicycle use, and also of pedes-r a footpath is to be used for access by cyclists and where:
-trians in the case of shared use path diversions;
• significant pedestrian or bicycle volumes
• available opportunities to provide for cyclists;
exist; or
• road or path alignment; • safety issues may arise due to the unexpected use
• traffic speeds and volumes; of a footpath by cyclists.
• duration of work; Examples of provisions for paths located adjacent roads

• surface material and condition; and and in reserves are shown in Figures G2 and G3
respectively.
• environmental impact. Temporary paths should be sealed. Whilst dependent on
circumstances, such as bicycle volumes, safety and the
Provision for cyclists on roads should be made in the extent of inconvenience to cyclists, this may be
following circumstances: unnecessary where:
• where bicycle lanes exist; • the works are carried out during dry weather
• arterial roads; conditions;
• temporary path surface is firm, smooth and free of
• collector roads, with an AADT in excess of 3000
thorns.
vehicles per day; or
• the works are carried out over a short period (e.g.
• strategic and other significant bicycle routes.
less than 2 or 3 weeks duration); and
• path traffic is minimal;
Figure G1: Works on Roads – Exclusive Bikeway Diversion
Figure G2: Works on Paths adjacent Roads – Shared Use Path Diversion
Figure G3: Works on Paths adjacent Roads – Shared Use Path Diversion
However, it is very desirable that temporary paths are Specific consideration may need to be given to the inter-
sealed and delineated where works are carried out over sections of paths and roads. The measures taken to
longer periods. Separated paths should be suitably protect traffic should be balanced with consideration to all of
delineated regardless of the period of construction. the potential users and movements at such locations.
Where works on paths are carried out for a period Where containment fences are used, to avoid catching the
exceeding one day, the works should be made sufficiently pedals of cyclists the fence should be set back from paths
visible for night time path travel, so that path users are used by cyclists by at least 0.3 m. In the case of mesh
able to observe conditions under low ambient light fencing particular care is needed to ensure it remains tightly
conditions including temporary access paths, and stretched and that it is supported regularly along its length.
take appropriate action. In addition, as a general
principle, lighting on temporary access paths should not Surface tolerances for bicycle riding surfaces are provided
be less than the existing level on the original path. in Section 8.5.1 (Austroads 1999). Where steel road plates
are used to cover excavated or damaged pavement
surfaces, appropriate steps should be taken to ensure that
any steps and grooves are within the tolerances of Table 8-
1 (Austroads 1999).
nd
Reproduced from Austroads’ Guide to Engineering Practice: Part 14 - Bicycles 2 . Ed. 1999.
REFERENCES Bikeway Pavement Design, Construction & Maintenance
REFERENCES
Aguero, P. (1996). Concrete dual use pathways and rider comfort: recent developments
and review of guidelines. Paper from Municipal Engineering 13th Annual State Conference
Perth (WA), 6-8 March 1996, 12pp.
ARRB (2005a). User guide to bicycle and shared path selection – using whole-of-life
costing. ARRB Group, Vermont South, Victoria.
ARRB (2005b). Bicycle and Shared Path – Whole-Of-Life Costing Tool. ARRB Group.
ARRB (2005c). Sealed Local Roads Manual. Guidelines to Good Practice for the
Construction, Maintenance & Rehabilitation of Pavements. ARRB Group.
Austroads/AAPA (2006). Asphalt Cooling Rates, pavement work tips – no.46.
nd
Austroads (1991). Road Maintenance Practice. 2 Edition, Austroads, Sydney, New
South Wales.
Austroads (1993). Guide to Traffic Engineering Practice: Part 14 - Bicycles.
nd
Austroads (1999). Guide to Traffic Engineering Practice: Part 14 - Bicycles. 2 Edition.
Austroads (2006). Guide to Pavement Technology: Part 4D Stabilised Materials.
Austroads (2009a). Guide to Road Design: Part 6A: Pedestrian and Cyclist Paths.
Austroads (2009b). Guide to Traffic Management.
Austroads (2009c). Guide to Pavement Technology: Part 10 Subsurface Drainage.
Austroads (2009d). Guide to Pavement Technology: Part 3 Pavement Surfacings.
Austroads (2009e). Guide to Pavement Technology: Part 8 Pavement Construction.
Austroads (2009f). Guide to Pavement Technology: Part 9 Pavement Work Practices.
Austroads (2009g). Guide to Pavement Technology: Part 7 Pavement Maintenance.
Austroads (2011). Guide to Pavement Technology: Part 5 Pavement Evaluation and
Treatment Design.
Austroads (2012). Guide to Pavement Technology: Part 2 Pavement Structural Design.
Austroads (2014a). Cycling Aspects of Austroads Guides.
Austroads (2014b). Guide to Pavement Technology: Part 4B Asphalt.
Barry I.M. (1986). Technical Report No. 75: The Influence of Trees and Shrubs on
Pavement Loss of Shape. Road Construction Authority, Kew, Victoria.
Bennett, D. and Moffatt, M. A. (1995). Whole of life maintenance requirements of heavy
duty pavements. ARRB Research Report ARR 264.
BikeWest (1988). Guidelines for the Design of Bicycle Facilities. First Edition, Department
of Transport, Nedlands, Western Australia.
Caltrans (1995). Californian Department of Transportation, Californian Highway Design
Manual: Chapter 1000 —Bikeway Planning & Design. California, USA.
C&CAA (1997). Concrete Pavement Design for Residential Streets.
C&CAA (1999). Road Note 56—Cycleways.
CMAA (1997a). Concrete Segmental Pavements, Guide to Specifying. T44. Concrete
Masonary Association of Australia, St Leonards, New South Wales
CMAA (1997b). Concrete Segmental Pavements, Design Guide for Residential
Accessways and Roads. T45.
REFERENCES Bikeway Pavement Design, Construction & Maintenance
CMAA (1997c). Concrete Segmental Pavements, Detailing Guide T46.

DPTI (2010). Method of Estimation of CBR from Classification Tests, TP133
DSS (DYNAMIC SATELLITE SURVEYS) (1998). Final Operations Report on the
Canberra Community Paths Survey for A.C.T. City Services. Report Number 97-55.
Foley, G.D. (2001). Evaluation of Pavement Surfacing Characteristics – Victoria, Draft
ARR, ARRB Transport Research Ltd. Vermont South.
Mulholland, P.J. (1989). Into a new age of pavement design. A structural design guide for
flexible residential street pavements. ARRB Special Report No. 41.
Oliver, J.W.H. (1986). Road trials to evaluate mix designs for resurfacing residential
streets: results after 6 years. AIR 305-2, ARRB Transport Research, Vermont South.
Prem, H. (1989). NAASRA Roughness Meter Calibration via the Road-Profile-Based
International Roughness Index (IRI). ARRB Research Report No. 164.
Robinson, P.D., Clayton, B., (2001). Strategic Study into Asset Management, Condition
Audit & Development of Performance Based Standards. Contract Report RC1596, March
2001. ARRB Transport Research, Vermont South.
RTA (2000). Interim Guide to the Maintenance of Concrete Pavements. Roads & Traffic
Authority Sydney, New South Wales.
RTA (2009). Concrete Pavement Manual – Design and Construction (Edition 2). Roads &
Traffic Authority Sydney, New South Wales.
Standards Australia (1996). AS 1742.3-1996 Manual of uniform traffic control devices -
Traffic control devices for works on roads. Standards Australia, Sydney.
Transport Research Laboratory (1996). Application Guide No. 26: Footways - Design &
Maintenance Guide. Crowthorne, Berkshire, England.
Transport SA (1997). MTRD Report No.105: Use of Controlled Low Strength Material as
Infill, Materials Technology, Walkley Heights, South Australia.
INDEX Bikeway Pavement Design, Construction & Maintenance
INDEX
Asphalt Concrete bikeways, 36
ARRB Gap-graded mix, 23 Contraction joints, 36
Dense graded, 5, 8 Expansion joints, 37
Fine gap graded, 8 Isolation joints, 38
Low air voids, 22 Reinforcement, 39
Stone Mastic, 23 Terminal Block, 38
Thin surfacing, 22 Vehicle crossovers, 39
Type L, 8, 23 Cracking, 4, 8, 23, 43, 48, 49, 50
Types, 23 Trees, 41
Australian Standard Contraction joint location, 36
AS 2008, 23 Environment, 23
Bikeway Edges, 33
Types, 2 Reflection, 23
Users, 2 Reinforcing to control, 38
Widths, 2 Shrinkage, 37
Bikeway performance Unplanned in rigid, 37
functional, 4 Curing, 39
structural, 4, 12 Design traffic loading
Bikeway Selection Foot and bicycle, 25
Based on functional criteria, 13 Heavy vehicle, 25
Based on structural criteria, 11 Indicative loadings, 26
Bitumen Recommended loadings, 26
Class 50, 23 Distress types, 48
Class 170, 23 Drainage
Class 320, 23 Maintenance, 42
Coloured pavements Subsurface, 40
Asphalt and Slurry, 10 Surface, 40
Block pavers, 10 Dynamic cone penetrometer, 18
Concrete, 10 Edge restraint, 9
Spray seals, 11 Expansive Subgrades
Concrete Classification of, 20
Block Pavers, 4, 10, 21, 24 Effects of, 19
Delineation of line marking, 9 Treatment of, 19
Detailing of designs, 32 Geotextile, 11, 29
General, 24 Granular Material
Hessian dragged, 8 Definition of, 20
Minimum compressive strengths, 24 Descriptions, 21
Transversely broomed, 8 Intervention Treatments, 49
Construction Asphalt bikeways, 50
Attributes of asphalt, 9 Concrete bikeways, 51
Attributes of concrete, 9 Concrete pavers bikeways, 51
Detail requirements, 9 Gravel bikeways, 50
Edge restraint, 34 Investigation Levels
Construction—Flexible Parameters, 4
Asphalt bikeways, 36 Maintenance
Compaction levels for granular layers, Asphalt bikeway, 9
35 Concrete bikeway, 9
Concrete block pavers, 39 Crack filling, 43
Granular Material, 35 Flexible bikeways, 43
Construction—Rigid General Requirements, 42
Anchor blocks, 38 Resurfacing, 43
Bullfloat, 36 Maintenance—Rigid
INDEX Bikeway Pavement Design, Construction & Maintenance
Cracked slabs, 45 Prime, 7, 22

Faulting of concrete, 45 Prime and sprayed, 7
Slab jacking, 45 Primerseal, 7
Spalling of concrete, 45 Select Fill
Material specifications Type A Material, 21
Bedding sand for CBPs, 56 Service crossings, 41
Class 2 quarried pavement material, 54 Signing and delineation of works, 60
Class 3 quarried pavement material, 54 Skid resistance, 4, 11, 39, 43, 44, 48
Joint-filling sand for CBPs, 56 British Pendulum Number, 47
Sand Type C, 55 Grip Number, 47
Pavement Design Recommended Investigatory Levels,
Asphalt surfaced, 30 48
Concrete Block Paver, 30 Sideways Force Coefficient, 47
Flexible, 27 Subgrade
Jointed Concrete, 32 CBR, 15
Slurry seal, 29 Evaluation of, 15
Sprayed seal, 28 Presumptive design values, 17
Unsurfaced granular, 27 Strength of, 15
Vehicle Crossover for CBPs, 31 Subgrades
Pavement types Stabilisation of, 20
Flexible, 6 Surface
Granular with sprayed treatment, 7 Asphalt, 4, 8, 9
Rigid, 6 Asphalt overlay, 43
Selection of, 6 Bituminous Slurry, 4, 8
Unsurfaced granular, 6 Concrete, 9
Performance Delineation, 13
Characteristics, 4 Enrichment treatment, 7
Rating Systems Function of, 3
Asphalt bikeways, 49 Life expectancies, 5
Concrete bikeways, 48 Microsurfacing, 4, 8, 43
Ride Quality, 13 Pavement shape variability, 47
Roughness, 4, 37, 46, 47, 48 Shape, 4, 40, 46
ARRB Walking Profiler, 46 Sprayed, 3, 7, 27, 28, 29, 35, 43
IRI, 46 Tolerances of pavement, 42
Laser profilers, 46 Unsealed, 3, 43
NAASRA Roughness Meter, 46 Surface tolerance, 33
Typical requirements, 46 Technical basis
Safety during works, 45 Subgrade strength, 52
Seals Traffic loading, 52
Design of, 28 Vegetation
Multiple application, 7 Pavement Damage, 40

DPTI Bikeway Pavement Guidelines 2

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

DPTI Bikeway Pavement Guidelines 2

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

DPTI Bikeway Pavement Guidelines 2

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Safety and Service Division

2. BIKEWAY CHARACTERISTICS ...................................................................... 2

3. BIKEWAY SURFACES .................................................................................... 3

4. ECONOMIC CONSIDERATIONS ..................................................................... 5

PART B – PAVEMENT SELECTION 6

6. SELECTION OF PAVEMENT TYPE ................................................................ 6

PART C – PAVEMENT DESIGN 14

8. SUBGRADE EVALUATION ........................................................................... 15

9. PAVEMENT MATERIALS .............................................................................. 20

11. FLEXIBLE PAVEMENT DESIGN ................................................................... 27

12. RIGID PAVEMENT DESIGN .......................................................................... 31

14. EDGE RESTRAINT AND SEPARATION ....................................................... 33

15. GRANULAR MATERIAL CONSTRUCTION .................................................. 35

16. ASPHALT BIKEWAY CONSTRUCTION ....................................................... 36

17. CONCRETE BIKEWAY CONSTRUCTION .................................................... 36

18. CONCRETE BLOCK PAVER CONSTRUCTION ........................................... 39

19. DRAINAGE ..................................................................................................... 40

20. VEGETATION ................................................................................................ 40

21. CONSTRUCTION OF SERVICE CROSSINGS .............................................. 41

23. MAINTENANCE CONSIDERATIONS ............................................................ 43

24. SAFETY DURING WORKS ............................................................................ 45

25. MONITORING ................................................................................................ 46

APPENDIX A: PROPOSED INTERVENTION TREATMENTS ................................ 50

APPENDIX B: TECHNICAL BASIS FOR BIKEWAY DESIGNS.............................. 52

APPENDIX C: MATERIAL SPECIFICATIONS ........................................................ 54

APPENDIX D: CONCRETE BLOCK PAVER SAND GRADINGS ........................... 56

APPENDIX E: DESIGN CHART FOR GRANULAR PAVEMENTS WITH THIN

APPENDIX F: THICKNESS DESIGN OF CONCRETE BIKEWAYS ....................... 58

APPENDIX G: SIGNING AND DELINEATION OF WORKS..................................... 60

The document is arranged in 5 principal parts, as follows:

C. Design – Discusses the pavement design components of subgrades, pavement

D. Construction – Considers many of the critical construction details and specification

E. Maintenance – Includes monitoring and maintenance activities and techniques, as

2.1 Bikeway Types and Users

Figure 2.1: Shared use path

2.2 Bikeway Widths

3.1 Function of Bikeway Surfaces

3.2 Types of Surfacing

3.2.1 Unsealed Surface

3.2.2 Sprayed Treatment

Figure 3.1 Spray sealed bikeway

3.2.3 Bituminous Slurry and Microsurfacings

3.2.4 Asphalt Surface

3.2.6 Concrete Block Pavers

3.3 Performance Characteristics

Monitoring of the performance of a bikeway surfacing requires the assessment of relevant

3.4 Investigation Levels

Table 4.1: Typical Surfacing Life Expectancies

Surfacing type Expected service life of surfacing (years)

Sprayed seal, 5mm / 7mm 5 to 10

PART B – PAVEMENT SELECTION

6. SELECTION OF PAVEMENT TYPE

The performance of a bikeway pavement is strongly influenced by the pavement materials,

6.1 Unsurfaced Granular

Suitability for traffic

6.2 Granular with Sprayed Treatment

• Primerseal - an application of a primer-binder applied to a prepared granular base to

The following are treatments used in conjunction with sprayed surfaces:

• Prime - an application of a primer to a prepared base, without a subsequent