• [I should point out that this leads to one of the classic 'controversies' on cycling forums, but for the record, I consider the great 'segregation vs. non-segregation' debate a bit of a non-issue and won't participate in such a debate (been there, done that).]

    Is it just the benefit of rose-tinted spectacles or am I right in thinking Germany keeps bike and motorised traffic separate almost all of the time?

    Not sure what you mean here--if I thought that that was the case, I'd most certainly feel that I was viewing this through black-tinted spectacles.

    Germany has in the past built quite a lot of cycle-specific infrastructure, better in some places than in others, but of course as everywhere the coverage does not extend to anywhere near the whole street network (good). So in that sense, while facility building marches on, in a lot of places mode segregation has not advanced beyond keeping people on foot segregated from people using vehicular modes of traffic.

    In another sense, as apparently in France, there is facility compulsion in Germany, i.e., where a signed cycle facility exists, you have to use it ("Radwegebenutzungspflicht"). For people who have German, here's the ADFC's (German CTC) guide to it:

    http://www.adfc.de/526_1

    The designation of a cycle facility as such can under certain circumstances be challenged with the relevant authority, but it's a fairly laborious process. Generally, if there is a cycle facility, you can be fined if you're not found using it while riding along.

    The UK, as mentioned still has the freedom not to use facilities, as re-affirmed recently in the case of the Telford One, Daniel Cadden, who was ably defended by the Cyclists' Defence Fund:

    http://www.lcc.org.uk/index.asp?PageID=786

    Let's keep it that way.

About