I recently found about Overpass Turbo which allows you to query the OpenStreetMaps API. I used it to help produce a map of the density of off-road cycle routes (bridleways, BOATS, cycleways etc) by local authority district in England:
East London and Cambridge turn out to have the highest density of off-road cycle paths. Obviously mostly flat cycleways of little interest to a mountain biker but off-road cycling nonetheless.
Devon has the lowest.
While there are a few problems with the map (it largely resembles a population density map) I was surprised at how easy it was to create using Overpass Turbo, Datawrapper, and ChatGPT for assistance with Overpass queries.
The full article showing how the data was produced, and limitations and analysis: https://laurencetennant.com/overpass-api-cycling-density
Could you divide the density stats by the population to get the miles per person in an area?
Most of it is very obvious (national parks, peaks, cities etc) but what's the reason for the patch up in the North East/Newcastle?
I'd never thought about it being a particular centre of cycling, am I wrong? Is it cycle lanes and modern infrastructure, or Bridalways etc that's bumping it up?
Could you divide the density stats by the population to get the miles per person in an area?
I tried this at the county level and the map is in the "Per capita" section of the linked article. That puts Cumbria, Northumberland, and Herefordshire on top. That map has the same problem in the other direction; just because there is less population I don't know if it makes an area's off-road cycling network more valuable. Unless you like cycling in peace I suppose. Perhaps there's some kind of constant that could be applied to find the truth somewhere between these two maps.
Most of it is very obvious (national parks, peaks, cities etc) but what's the reason for the patch up in the North East/Newcastle?
I'd never thought about it being a particular centre of cycling, am I wrong? Is it cycle lanes and modern infrastructure, or Bridalways etc that's bumping it up?
It appears to be due mostly to a number of cycleways alongside A roads, plus permissive paths through housing estates.
North Tyneside does have a pretty decent network:
North Tyneside does hdave a pretty decent network:
It's news to me that I live in the centre of some kind of urban cycling Mecca. I mean I guess we have the odd bit of half decent infrastructure, but it's hardly Amsterdam, or even London. God help the rest of the country if we're a leading light.
Following feedback I've expressed the off-road cycling routes as a percentage of the length of the road network in each district instead. Which seems to give a much more intuitive visualisation.
Now Mole Valley and Chichester come out on top. I've seen a few people on this forum claim that Dorking possibly has the best XC riding on its doorstep of any town in the country, the result here would support the extensiveness of the off-road network.
Kensington and Chelsea, and Isle of Anglesey are lowest.
God help the rest of the country if we're a leading light.
It’s a great area for getting about legally off road. Lots of new estates are build next to the old mining wagon trails that are legal routes for cycling.
You’re right that elsewhere cycling infrastructure away from roads is next to zero. Non-existent compared to most European countries.