The Conversation posted a very useful article. So many times you hear naysayers spouting inaccuracies about cycleways. Many will never be convinced. They see empty cycleways, and think that is the way that it always is. They fail to see them when they are full of riders... and even when they do cycles take up so little room that even 5 or 6 bikes is nothing compared to a line of the same number of cars.
Don't Believe The Backlash
- in The Conversation.
But there is also another counter-intuitive factor. Cyclists are more likely to see full lanes because of self selection - they are most likely to cycle and see other cyclists because they are amongst the same high number of cyclists.
So this article is a great way to put some numbers to the effectiveness of cycle lanes. It points out the Return on Investment, and how the reason for the cycle lanes is to get more non-cyclists cycling... not to support existing cyclists alone. And protected lanes are the way to do it.
I will link to this article whenever I need to post on social media - it is unlikely to sway everyone... but perhaps we can peel a few waverers... especially the cyclists who are confident enough without lanes who always comment "I'm a cyclist but I don't use the lanes and think they are dangerous because I ride at 30km/h"... sigh. Yes - they really don't understand the reason is to keep children safe, get more women riding, and to encourage more people onto bikes.
And for the effectiveness they are cheap at twice the price.