David Arditti wrote:

snip

Effective networks of cycle tracks encourage a much larger section of the
population to cycle than we generally see on two wheels in the UK.

The real problem comes right on the first word the "effective". I
think the CTC's opposition is reasonable because it realises that we
don't have a setup where it's either mechanically or politically
feasible to re-engineer our roads to accommodate the sort of schemes you
can see in the NL, and even if you could the crucial element of motorist
awareness and deference to bikes I noted would still be absent.

inevitably spill over onto all the other roads, creating the critical mass
on those roads which makes cycling there safer and changes the perception
and behaviour of drivers. The road conditions in Holland that Peter has
experienced and commented upon are a consequence of this mechanism.

I don't think so. The NL had a large cycling population in place before
personal motor transport became widespread, and unlike the UK it has
never lost it. Bikes didn't become popular because of the fietspads for
the simple reason the bikes predate them. So you're making something of
an assumptive leap in saying they would generate cycle traffic in huge
waves, even assuming we could put in something of comparable quality
(and experience to date suggests we can't). Stevenage and MK do have
purpose built segregated paths, but I haven't read any reports saying
you can't see through the clouds of bikes in either town.

I only know one thing for certain, as it is based on official figures.
Studying the cycling statistics of various countries shows a very clear
three-way correlation between the provision of quality segregated
infrastructure, high levels of cycling, and high levels of safety. I suggest
that this cannot be co-incidental.

I would point out that it was high levels of cycling that lead to the
infrastructure being built in the first place, not the other way around.
I have no idea whether their creation did wonders for the safety of
cycling in those places or not: do you have figures?

one kind of wonders why all the cyclists in Denmark and The Netherlands have
not been wiped out by now, since they have both continued to built more
segregated tracks since then.

Because cycling was pretty safe to begin with, and something being dumb
is hardly a precedent for not doing it any more. Just look at the
"farcilities" that the UK imposes on its cyclists. Despite everybody
knowing that a narrow lane painted down the gutter doesn't really help
anyone, they're still being put in. I'm afraid the above argument
relies on "common sense", which is certainly not common and isn't
necessarily sensible.

People who hold this view need to explain why these localised studies, if
correct, seem so out of kilter with the overall national statistics of
cycling deaths and injuries. Why is it so safe in Denmark and The
Netherlands in reality?

I've given you a possible answer, and that is the motorists show a great
deal more awareness of and deference to cycles. With that as a common
attitude it's not surprising to find fewer collisions between the two.

I suggest the problem is that the "micro-studies" do not represent the
large-scale, long-term realities of the changes produced by the cycle
engineering "styles" of various states and regions. The Dutch/Danish
patterns of design do introduce their own issues at junctions, but other
changes occur in the overall environment due to the increased cycling
generated by an attractive cycling environment so that the overall result is
danger reduction on the large stale, averaged over all roads, the "treated"
and the "normal".

Again, the high levels of cycling were there before the engineering.
The paths didn't create the cycling culture, it was the other way around.

As Patrick Herring says,

separate lanes will get many more cycling and we just might end up
like Holland and Denmark.

In a nutshell.

I have yet to see any figures produced that show Stevenage and MK have
vastly greater cycling uptake than anywhere else in the UK, though I'm
willing to be proven wrong if you have the figures. If all it took was
purpose built segregated bike tracks then those places should show such
a thing. And even if they do I don't really see how you're going to get
comparable quality across the UK as a whole, either technically or
through basic political will.

Pete.
--
Peter Clinch University of Dundee
Tel 44 1382 660111 ext. 33637 Medical Physics, Ninewells Hospital
Fax 44 1382 640177 Dundee DD1 9SY Scotland UK
net http://www.dundee.ac.uk/~pjclinch/