In the Copenhagen thread, an american bicycle obstructionist made claims that bike lanes in Portland were installed on 'the safer streets' first, minimizing the postive effects of bike specific street planning.
The question was raised that if jhon considers some streets 'safer' than others independant of the bicyclist, what constitutes a 'safer' street and what characteristics combine to create some streets less safe?
john recognizes that some streets are safer for bicycling than others.... how does that play out?
John wants bikes banned from high speed transportation cooridors if slow speed alternatives are available. you better belive he does! (I wonder where his proposed bans would stop? is a 65MPH road merit banning bikes? how about a 55MPH road? a 45 MPH road?) Seems jhon not only thinks some roads are safer than others, but some are meant to be reserved soley for cars, banning bikes for the conveinence of motorists.