invisiblehand

I know you don't read anyone else's posts for meaning, but could you check your own?

Assuming I understand Gene's point, I think that the psychology and engineering work hand and hand. For instance, if you build local roads for freeway speeds and flow, you shouldn't be surprised when people expect to be driving at those speeds even if the change in trip time is superficially decreased from the more aggressive driving.

Two quick comments:

With regards to making people happier, I think that we should remember that happier is not necessarily safer in an absolute sense. Instead what we should be thinking about is some acceptable combination of utility, efficiency, and safety. Although we should keep in mind that there is an abundance of evidence that people are generally really really really bad at comprehending teeny tiny numbers (as well as big ones). Consequently, if we think that cycling is basically a safe activity, we should expect most people to have biased estimates of risk.

Estimating safety effects across treatments is pretty hard around here since general cycling among adults is a small proportion of the population and rider characteristics will change. For instance, if I put a facility in place and I suddenly attract many more "slow" and/or "adult" riders, we shouldn't be surprised that the collision rate has changed.

randya

none of these separated facilities are really about increasing actual safety, they are about changing the non-cycling public's risk perception, in order to entice them to try cycling. When they have a bad experience on the cycle track and find out that risk perception =/= actual safety they are liable to quit cycling just as fast as they started.

Bekologist

just 300,000 trips of perception in vancouver, with many more women and children making the crossing.
and safer too!

randya

did I hear a noise? I guess the wind is picking up.

TheHen

Wow, a whole 300,000 trips. My family of three would account for over 1% of those trips if we moved to Vancouver. Just sayin'.

closetbiker

I definitely noticed someone passing some wind, that's for sure....

Bekologist

over a quarter of a millon bicycling trips, 300,000 trips otherwise not taken by bike across the burrard street bridge, with significantly more women and anecdotally more children, is not something vacuous or smelly when looking at how Vancouver is redesigning its road network to better serve more Vancouverites more safely when they choose to bicycle into downtown.

Those that think those levels of increases in bicycling counts in Vancouver smell had best self examine for cranial incontinence.

CB HI

More babble about how women cyclist must be incompetent and cannot ride without feel good facilities.

Why do some hate and discredit women cyclist so much?

Bekologist

no, Vancouver added 300,000 bike trips in short order across the Burrard Bridge. counts indicated a significant growth in women cycling across the bridge.

Why is CBHI trying to spin road conditions that are enabling more women to ride into Downtown Vancouver into something misogynistic?


I have no predication of incompetency if a mother chooses not to ride with their children in 40mph + bridge traffic.

I do not hate cyclists, I'm actually pretty happy Vancouver has added facilities that make it much more convenient for Vancouverites to be able to ride their bikes into downtown.

closetbiker

I was on Burrard yesterday and I didn't see a single cyclist on the street.

Just sayin'