[SDCBC] What where they thinking?

[John Forester]

The Rose Canyon Bike Path is useful and reasonably safe. However, we are 
not talking about driving to one end of it, cycling to the other end of 
it, returning, and driving away. The RCBP is useful because it allows 
the cyclist to make a journey between areas that are otherwise directly 
connected only by the freeway. The cyclist still has to have the skill 
and, need we say it, courage, to ride to one end of the path and away 
from the other end to make his complete journey. This hope that bike 
paths will promote bicycle transportation has little foundation; bike 
paths allow bicycle transportation between a few areas, but they cannot 
form a bicycle transportation system.

Eric Converse wrote:
> True, but "actual safety" and real safety can and do line up.  No 
> amount of "education" will convince frightened riders to give the 
> freeway a try, but a new separated bike path will attract even the 
> most novice of riders.  I believe the litmus test should be, whether 
> or not a parent would consider letting their child ride on it (bike 
> path, lane, whatever).  Separated facilities offer this and provide a 
> large draw for "average" people to use the facility.  It's the 
> difference between Rose Canyon bike path and Miramar bike lane.
>
> Eric
>
> ----- Original Message ----
> From: "JonIsaacs at aol.com" <JonIsaacs at aol.com>
> To: econver at yahoo.com; sdcbc at bikesandiego.org
> Sent: Thursday, March 27, 2008 5:32:15 PM
> Subject: Re: [SDCBC] What where they thinking?
>
> In a message dated 3/27/2008 3:44:31 PM Pacific Daylight Time, 
> econver at yahoo.com writes:
>
>> More thoughts:
>>
>> I agree that we should base safety programs for facilities on sound 
>> science and analysis, but that will not ensure those facilities will 
>> get used (if there is a perception of danger).
>>
>> I'd suggest that policy be dictated both by safety and perceived 
>> safety.  If it takes separated bike paths for people to start riding 
>> their bikes then that should be the direction organizations like 
>> SDCBC take.
>>
>> I believe "actual safety" is irrelevant if the public perception 
>> doesn't match up.  Take the freeway as a perfect example (most people 
>> think I'm crazy if I rode a bike on the freeway).
>>
>> Eric
>
> ----------------------
>
> I have to disagree.  Our goal should be education and actual safety.  
> "Perceived Safety" is an education issue and can be addressed more 
> effectively by education than by engineering.
>
> The major difficulty with "Perceived safety" is that it is often at 
> odds with "actual safety."  Proper signage can be help educate both 
> motorists and cyclists alike so that their perception of what is safe 
> is in accordance with what is actually safe. 
>
> I think it is unsound to try to attract people to cycling by providing 
> facilities that are inharently flawed and then expect to educate them 
> that safe riding actually requires ignoring those same facilities.  
> Best to start by educating them as to safe practices and get them 
> riding because they are knowledgeable as well as confident.
>
> Jon Isaacs
>
>
>
>
>
> **************
> Create a Home Theater Like the Pros. Watch the video on AOL Home.
> (http://home.aol.com/diy/home-improvement-eric-stromer?video=15&ncid=aolhom00030000000001 
> <http://home.aol.com/diy/home-improvement-eric-stromer?video=15&ncid=aolhom00030000000001>)
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
>
> You are subscribed to the SDCBC mailing list as forester at johnforester.com
> To unsubscribe or change mailing options, go to http://www.bikesandiego.org/mailman/listinfo/sdcbc
> List privacy information is located at http://www.stickman-computing.org/aup
> For help or to talk with someone other than the mail robot, send e-mail to postmaster at stickman-computing.org

-- 
John Forester, MS, PE
Bicycle Transportation Engineer
7585 Church St, Lemon Grove CA 91945
619-644-5481