These are something that cyclists complain voraciously about, or specifically, the lack thereof.
They complain in the small presses, in the national presses.
So when one is built for them, alongside a dangerous road that, whilst technically is a 30MPH zone, is one that people have done upwards of 60MPH on? A road with no pavements, simply nettle-infested grass verges and ditches?
Do they use it?
Hell as like.
I'm losing count of the amount of cyclists I've seen riding down this road - which, by the way, is only just wide enough for two cars to pass - when there is a SHINY. NEW. CYCLEPATH. It's signposted, even! My gods, is it signposted! You can't move for the amount of Pedestrian/Cyclist signs once you hit the roundabout!
It's a wide cyclepath, even! It's at least the width and a half of a normal English pavement, and it's wider than a lot of the pavements in this town.
And they complained so much about the lack of cycle routes in this town and the surrounding ones. They complained that the bridge built over the railway would be busy so no one could cycle on it. (HAH. We'll ignore the fact that the cycle route beside the narrow route was always designed to carry on over the bridge, it's one of the reasons the application to build was approved! And busy? Can't recall it ever being exactly backed up with traffic and HGVs... Of course, it's only been there for two years. Nooo time at all for one of the major routes out of town, of course.)
And now they have a nice long, wide cyclepath, do they use it?
Hell no. That'd be easy, wouldn't it?