You are not logged in.
Pages: 1
Compromise is fine, and to be expected as part of any political process, but the status quo is unacceptable. The LOBV plan is a good compromise that allows vehicular access while encouraging beginner cyclists, which is the whole point. It seems that it is the property owners who want to say no to everything- no traffic calming, no effort to reduce through traffic, etc. It would be interesting to find out how binding the committee's decision is. And yes, there would definitely be many irate people if this is defeated- many more than if it goes through (a small but vocal minority). We just can't go into this willing to give away the whole farm to people whose idea of a compromise is they get everything, and we get nothing.
If this is about worrying about the attitudes of property owners, and especially about asking their permission to make changes on a public street that belongs to the entire community, then nothing is going to happen. It seems more and more as if the outcome of this process is preordained.
"having no changes at all isn't the worst thing that can happen" Excuse me but were you picked to represent the cycling community or the property owners?
Pages: 1
[ Generated in 0.061 seconds, 7 queries executed - Memory usage: 498.54 KiB (Peak: 499.16 KiB) ]