The city of SF just finished the Draft EIR which will now be reviewed, moving us a step closer to putting some new bike infrastructure in the City. For the last 2 years nary a bike rack could be put in, and let me tell you, they can use 2-3 of them in front of Pakwan.
As I understand it (this whole paragraph is subject to technical error but you will get the point) - generally, the "government" (city, county, state) in California can decide not to do an EIR for a project if the impact of such project is negligible. Rob Anderson argued that the bike plan needed an EIR, a judge agreed with him. The City could have prepared a statement to say there need not be an EIR but decided it would be easier to just do an EIR. The draft is now done.
Now, how could adding in bike lanes and bike racks have a negative impact on the environment? To hear Mr. Anderson, the removal of lanes will cause a backup of traffic and cause more pollution. I don't agree - but we can look at the EIR and see what that says.
What I wonder is - did Costco need to do an EIR on their gas station? I have never ridden by this place and not seen the following scene...
4 lines ten deep to fill up, cars all running. Talk about gridlock. What's amusing is I saw a co-worker in this line as I rode to Caltrain. He lives in Menlo Park, 1 mile from Caltrain. I urged him to take the train, he said "It takes too much time". Is he factoring in the 30 minutes he spends filling up twice a week?
Auto traffic and autism association found
9 hours ago