At 04:32 PM 10/27/2005, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[snip] the PBMVC's decision last Tuesday NOT to approve overpass, were both
based on the fact that more people from the community showed up at the
meeting objecting to overpass than those who showed up in support of the
overpass? Is that really how DOT project and city funding is determined
these days? [snip]
_________________________________________________________
Mike, you misunderstand what happened at the PBMVC meeting:
The PBMVC did not fail to approve the Perry St overpass. The Perry St
overpass was not even on the PBMVC agenda (the PBMVC is apparently no
longer on anyone's agenda). The PBMVC failed to approve "improvements"* to
Todd Drive at the Beltline. I voted against it (as did several others,
according to their comments) because the Todd Drive project is planned
using Enhancements funds, originally allocated for the Perry St overpass,
which normally go towards bike and pedestrian facilities, and I (and
others) just thought that the Todd Drive project (although worthwhile in
itself) had little to offer in the way of improvements for bikes and
pedestrians...certainly not ~$700,000 worth (the approximate amount of TE
funds in question, if I remember correctly).
* I put "improvements" in quotes, since, without elaboration,
"improvements" is biased language. For whom are any "improvements" made?
Motorists? bicyclists? Pedestrians? Residents along a road? See the
Victoria Transport Policy Institute's paper "Whose Roads?", specifically,
the table entitled "Biased language in Transportation Planning" at
www.vtpi.org/whoserd.pdf
Chuck S
_______________________________________________
Bikies mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.danenet.org/mailman/listinfo/bikies
