Cycle routes, double standards

Some people have commented that I seem to contradict myself on the issue of what is necessary to encourage cycling. On the one hand I say that slower speeds and less traffic is what is required - on the other hand I am enthusiastic about cycle routes, on and off-road.

The answer is that I think you have to do what is appropriate in a particular location. Take the example of London. When I lived there and commuted from Camberwell to the City in the 80's,
the main problem was that you couldn't actually get along the streets becvause they were so jammed up with traffic. Then cycle and bus lanes started appearing, but the cycle lanes were frequently parked on and London buses are less than accommodating to cyclists. The problem was too big to be dealt with by enforcement so off-road cycle routes, as advocated by Camden Cycle Campaign, started to be built. These aren't ideal - often too narrow - but they do at least allow you to get around. That's an appropriate solution for that particular problem, given that congestion isn't going to disappear overnight, even with the congestion charge. Now that Boris is in charge congestion is going to get worse again.

I would still say that building a cycling culture is more important than infrastructure, but both are needed.