Ta. Just 'guidelines' though not 'mandatory'? Still better than nothing...
Some of the guidelines are almost mandatory alongside A roads because they were included in the Design Manual for Roads and Bridges TA90/05 in 2005 which says it "should be used forthwith on all schemes for the construction, improvement and maintenance of trunk roads currently being prepared provided that, in the opinion of the Overseeing Organisation, this would not result in significant additional expense or delay progress."
However, Cycle Friendly Infrastructure isn't very good, there's been at least two updates since then (LTN2/08 and LTN1/12) which haven't been included yet, plus the bit about "expense or delay" is a loophole you could drive an HGV through (simply fail to include it in the first draft design, then it'll cause delay to redesign to add it?) and no-one with teeth seems to be pressing for the guidelines to be followed (gov.uk don't seem to care at the moment because localism, councils don't care because cyclists are a small and fragmented lobby group in most places, cyclists don't cause enough damage when crashing for our insurers to be a major force).
Anyway, it's worth doing, but you're basically playing poker without much to use as stakes. Often the most effective tactics seem to be making a nuisance of yourselves in the media (the pretty pictures in Making Space for Cycling and the Sustrans Handbook for Design are more media-friendly than the gov.uk ones) and contradicting any false cycling claims in transport grant applications that you learn about (some councils like to claim they've consulted cyclists even when they haven't... or have only consulted a pet club, or consulted but ignored the response).
