have written elsewhere on here about the huge irony of the CTC implicated in our general national lack of cycle infrastructure,
funnily enough this popped up today for readers of this thread:-
I don't think it's ironic that mass motorisation happened and that the CTC was relatively powerless to do much about that--cycle tracks wouldn't have made any difference to that whatsoever. They were built at the time to get cyclists off the road and to enable motorists to drive without looking out for cyclists. The thin veil of 'improving cyclists' safety' was then, as now, testament to a failure to tackle the root cause of the problem, which is the road danger created by mass motorisation.
NB roughly 75% of crashes occur at junctions, which is where the real improvements need to be made. Sidepaths show evidence of increasing the risk of crashes, cycle tracks considerably so. The track along the A40 also became disrupted at every side street/site entrance junction that inevitably appeared as the land alongside it became built up.
What irony?
I don't think it's ironic that mass motorisation happened and that the CTC was relatively powerless to do much about that--cycle tracks wouldn't have made any difference to that whatsoever. They were built at the time to get cyclists off the road and to enable motorists to drive without looking out for cyclists. The thin veil of 'improving cyclists' safety' was then, as now, testament to a failure to tackle the root cause of the problem, which is the road danger created by mass motorisation.
NB roughly 75% of crashes occur at junctions, which is where the real improvements need to be made. Sidepaths show evidence of increasing the risk of crashes, cycle tracks considerably so. The track along the A40 also became disrupted at every side street/site entrance junction that inevitably appeared as the land alongside it became built up.