In many places we experience a cycling infrastructure that is not sufficiently safe and/or is perceived as not sufficiently safe. But the needs of cyclists seem to be well known. The existing regulations offer a sufficient wealth of knowledge and infrastructure elements. However, these aspects have to be weighed against each other and against additional demands. Decisions on the design of road spaces are made with local political participation, often by committed laypeople. The abundance of criteria and their weighting, which are defined in the regulations for engineers and planners, seem to overwhelm the decision-makers or do not sufficiently address them. Uncertainty in decision-making fosters a lack of road safety in infrastructure. There is a need for a more suitable decision-making basis for the construction of infrastructure that addresses a responsible decision by the laypersons involved outside of the numerous technical criteria and their weighing against each other or against each other and supports decision-making more strongly.In the following, an approach from planning practice is presented based on two exemplary situations, which requires systematic validation. Here, a joined approach of engineering sciences and social psychology could provide suitable assistance for better decisions in the sense of a stronger development towards sustainability and quality of life.Practical Relevance: The redesign of traffic facilities for more bicycle and pedestrian traffic and the design of urban street spaces towards living spaces are a particular challenge. It is important that expert planners offer guiding questions to decision-makers. These must focus on the goals and the achievement of goals for the people for whom the goals have been set. This leads to more goal-focused decisions and more goal-directed effective change.