I see, from John S's discussion below, that the safety of streets has to be evaluated on the basis of people who:
Don't think ahead
Can't plan to cross tracks as perpendicularly as possible
Have poor bike handling skills
Don't know how to ride in the dark
Don't know how to ride in rain
Are driven into making silly movements by the sound of a siren
And, presumably, have other collections of incompetencies that one would expect to accompany these.

Why should we competent cyclists be asked to evaluate roads for the incompetent? Do we do it better? Would any useful action be taken to implement our advice? For that matter, what do we know about the specific incompetencies of the incompetent?

I say that there is no way to make roads safe for the incompetent while still being useful for the competent. America approves of incompetent cyclists and designs for them, also without knowing their specific incompetencies. It is our task to arrange that the results of this design standard do not make competent cycling more dangerous or less useful. That means, largely, that we must be allowed to escape the designs for the incompetent.

You may think that this expresses callous disregard for the incompetent. Not quite. It expresses callous disregard for those who refuse to learn competence, and utter, complete abhorrence of those who advocate incompetence. Proper instruction has been available for thirty years, but our society is organized to abhor it, because our society wants the supposed results of incompetence.

We have far too much to do to waste time attempting to assist those who advocate incompetence. Let them stew in their own juice, for they would boil us in oil if they could.

Schubley@... wrote:

Hi all,

I realize I'm outnumbered on this, but I thought I'd 'splain my
reasoning anyway.

The question is: can the street in the Toronto video, or other,
similar streets, be ridden safely? Or can they be called safe streets?
Those are two very different questions.

I understand that cyclists who "get it" can ride between trolly tracks.
Like Kalle and Bob. Or myself.

But I don't see how they can be called safe streets.

If you tell people where to ride, many of them won't ride there. Or
they'll follow your instructions badly, and butcher the transition from
between tracks to outside of tracks.

A lot of people don't think very far ahead, and simply lack the ability
to plan a transition from in between tracks to outside of the tracks.
And many have poor bike handling skills. Throw in a dark, rainy night,
a few distractions (a siren approaching from behind, just for example),
and you are sure to overtax the abilities of someone who would be
reasonably safe on a normal street.

Again, I didn't intend to discuss what we on this list can do. I
intended to discuss safe cycling for the public at large.

Of course, after seeing all those stupid sidepath photos from St.
Petersburg, maybe the train tracks aren't so bad after all?

John Schubert
Limeport.org

-- John Forester, MS, PE
Bicycle Transportation Engineer
7585 Church St. Lemon Grove CA 91945-2306
619-644-5481 forester@...
www.johnforester.com