From Palo Alto Online
From the 6th paragraph of the story: "... the project, which has the support of the entire City Council and the vast majority of the speakers who addressed the council on the topic in February."
At previous meetings, the project didn't have the support of the majority of speakers. Nothing like it. Then the bicycle advocates caught on and emailed their online friends to pack the chambers. Even gave them a script to read.
I realize the Weekly reporter is hopelessly naive and doesn't realize what astroturf means, but I suspect some of our council members have seen advocates seed the audience before on other issues.
Ah yes, the evil cycling cabal, flying in cyclists from places like "Europe" (especially "Amsterdam") to come give 2 minute public comment at a City Council Meeting in Palo Alto in order to spread their one world vision by taking a 3 block long dead end street that terminates in a train station, and reducing it from 4 lanes to 2 lanes.
Posts
1 comment:
This is a gem:
"Posted by Douglas Moran, a resident of the Barron Park neighborhood, 10 hours ago
Douglas Moran is a member (registered user) of Palo Alto Online
RE: "murphstahoe" and "happy"
This is not about tradeoffs. Making it more inconvenient for motorists is an independent goal of many bicycle advocates, urban planners and other advocates. For example, on the Arastradero restriping project, it has been pointed out repeatedly that there are sections that are confusing to motorists and that improving signage and lane markings would smooth traffic flow and improve safety. But this is opposed by those advocates because it is against policy to improve traffic flow even when those changes have no impact on bicyclists or pedestrians.
If you go to a public hearing on this topic, you will typically hear multiple bicycle advocates being openly hostile and arrogantly dismissive of those that drive."
He must not be aware of LOS in the current EIR standards.
Post a Comment