View Single Post
Old 12-22-13 | 08:53 PM
  #102  
buzzman's Avatar
buzzman
----
 
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 4,578
Likes: 17
From: Becket, MA
Originally Posted by spare_wheel
No...I got it wrong. For some reason Hudson River made me think new bridge path (and I clearly do not know this area). Nevertheless, I still think that these kind of street counts are anecdotal because they don't demonstrated an overall increase in mode share.

And NYC ACS mode share statistics are nothing to brag about:

http://www.streetsblog.org/wp-conten...hare-Graph.jpg
Okay, so figures that you seemed to have accepted when you thought they were a "bridge count" you now say are undependable when you realize they are for a segregated facility. I took another look at the OP and it seems some of us are on an endless loop of providing evidence that demonstrates in many cases that "when you build it they will come" but either the criteria for that information keeps changing or it gets rejected as propaganda.

Before I totally throw in the towel here I want to jump back to a previous post of yours.

You brought into the discussion the concept of "induced demand".


My guess is you are familiar with the theory as it applies to transportation infrastructure and that the basic premise is that building infrastructure or widening it will lead to an increase in traffic share. In other words, if you build it they will come.

My questions are: How would you define the induced demand theory? Do you ascribe to the theory of induced demand? Do you see any application of the induced demand theory as it applies to bicycle specific infrastructure?
buzzman is offline  
Reply