Why all the hysteria about Masonic Avenue?

Why is the city spending another $120,000 to study Masonic Avenue when the EIR on the Bicycle Plan already has an exhaustive analysis of that street? The answer: Because the city's bike people and their enablers in City Hall don't like the conclusions reached by the EIR, which finds that taking away a traffic lane on Masonic to make bike lanes will have "significant unavoidable impacts" on traffic, including the #43 line in our supposedly transit first city. A prediction: the new study will reach a different conclusion to give the city a green light, so to speak, to screw up traffic on Masonic.

Here's the latest article in the Masonic Ave. campaign.

In spite of the claim in the article, no one contacted me for a comment, so they had to make do with recycled quotations. And why do these sites make it virtually impossible to post comments? Could it be that they don't really want comments?

Note too that the headline ("New study to improve dangerous street for cyclists") contradicts the story, which accurately says that there's no evidence that Masonic Ave. is a dangerous street for anyone.