View Single Post
  #29  
Old May 24th 04, 03:05 PM
Simon Brooke
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default The _Observer_ on "deadly" bike lanes

in message , David Arditti
') wrote:

The article also brings up problems with the position of CTC in the
statements by Geffen and Russell (both of whom I know). The author
rightly attacks the British systems compared to the far better
segregated bike engineering of The Netherlands and Denmark. But CTC
has always tended to oppose the segregating of cyclists and motor
vehicles on British roads, wrong-headedly (in my view) fearing it that
creates more danger and marginalisation for the cyclist - when anyone
who looks at the situation in continental countries can see that
exactly the reverse is true


No, you're completely and diametrically wrong, as research done in both
Holland and Denmark has shown. In both those countries (as in the UK,
US, Canada, Australia and New Zealand) studies have shown that cycle
paths are substantially more dangerous than the roads.

We've been through this argument again and again; it's like helmets.
Common sense says that cycle paths should help, and everyone initially
assumes they do and that experienced cyclists are just being pig-headed
about this. We're not. Initially we all thought as you do, but we've
read the research, and our minds have been changed.

--
(Simon Brooke) http://www.jasmine.org.uk/~simon/
; ... of course nothing said here will be taken notice of by
; the W3C. The official place to be ignored is on www-style or
; www-html. -- George Lund

Ads
 

Home - Home - Home - Home - Home