This slide expands on the concept of sustainable safety. My comments.

I generally agree with the concepts of functionality, homogeneity, recognizability and forgiveness. I understand recognizability and homogeneity to mean that bicyclists can recognize the route as a bicycle route, and that it is similar enough throughout to demand the same attention and behaviors. For example, a bicycle route on lightly-traveled roads is homogenous until there is a stretch of underdesigned bicycle path, or heavily-traveled highway.

I don't agree that the project as proposed conforms to these goals, and particularly not so because of

• the many places where it requires bicyclists to use crosswalks as pedestrians, sometimes multiple crosswalks, to continue on the route or to cross it;

• the absence of any sanctioned or designated way to cross for much of its length, while

• requiring travel on the narrowed street or on a sidewalk to reach destinations on the other side from the path

• providing poor access or no access at all across its landscaped median in winter.

High-volume arterial? That contradicts the claim in a previous slide that the volume is low enough to reduce the number of lanes by half. As things stand, there is ample width for motorists to overtake bicyclists. The lanes are wide and there are striped shoulders too. The highest speed limit anywhere on these streets is 35 mph, -- see Google Street View.

"Separate bikes"? Paths have consistently been shown to have a higher crash rate than streets, due to tighter room for maneuvering; restricted sight lines; mixed bicycle and pedestrian traffic; driveway and street crossings which place bicyclists and motorists out of each other's sight. The Lee/Clyde street project proposes to construct 12-foot wide paths which also carry motor traffic. Safety is an incredible claim to make for these.

The issue of separating "bikes" -- meaning, separating bicyclists -- is of real concern as it applies to children, for the same reason we don't let them have drivers' licenses. I contend that a much more conservative redesign would accommodate any children mature enough to ride on the connecting local streets, without forcing adults to tolerate the delays, hazards and outright lack of access in the proposed design.

And I still don't understand what safety has to do with sustainability, other than that lumping them together increases feelgood potential.