Alamo Roads Around Town, posted by A. Watson, a resident of the Alamo neighborhood, on Feb 23, 2008 at 4:27 pm
The February 22 issue of Danville Weekly has a story concerning the recent Alamo Community Council meeting. At that meeting there was good discussion about traffic and the lack of safety on Danville Blvd. When Millie Greenberg was our appointed Supervisor the citizens of Alamo met with her, Chris Lau and other officials from county. Various suggestions were made including an "on-demand" signal at Orchard. The only options that were actually voted on were a roundabout and a traffic signal.
Greenberg was in favor of the roundabout and had various plans to show the group. One expensive roundabout proposal included a concrete Welcome to Alamo sign and many costly plants requiring water, all of which we would be taxed to pay for. Other roundabouts were shown and a less expensive one was the voted choice. It was stated by the vote counters that consensus was shown. This is far from correct. It's important to understand that "consensus" means an opinion held by all or most of those present and such was not the case.
The so-called "vote" represented .01% of the citizens of Alamo and a number of people voted "yes" as a lark because we thought the entire concept of a roundabout near the downtown area was ridiculous and would never be taken seriously. We were wrong...
I assure you that there WAS NOT unanimity or "consensus" regarding a roundabout at this meeting. I was there.
Posted by Hal Bailey, a resident of another community, on Feb 23, 2008 at 5:10 pm
This very well presented reality of the political roundabout that led to a handful voting for a Danville Blvd roundabout design is confirmation of how the Alamo Community as <90 active participants gains consensus from regional aggregated politics.
Any plan for Danville Blvd in the Alamo business district that does no consider overall access and appropriate access lanes is simply another version of a safety hazard. More than a handful have spoken among the Iron Horse neighbors and it is time for the county to set aside excuses and remove Danville Blvd as a throughway in our business district.
Further discussions is only avoidance of the danger,
Posted by Kathy Bell, a resident of another community, on Feb 24, 2008 at 8:19 am
Posted at request of the author
Iron Horse neighbors for the length of Danville Blvd in Alamo are committed to removal of the current roadway in the business district and creating a well-planned mall with appropriate access lanes and primary concerns for pedestrian safety. Any configuration of the Danville Blvd as a thoroughfare, including a completely silly roundabout, will not be considered a serious effort by our county representatives to serve our interests, needs and advisory.
Posted by Osymo Ron, a resident of another community, on Feb 25, 2008 at 12:36 pm
Ah, Ron, welcome back!
It is hard to imagine anything more silly than a roundabout. But let me add to the humor with a 2005 concept from "Alamorata, living with our mistakes, CA 94507." The Alamo Town Fools at that time wanted to build a light house in the middle of the roundabout as the Good Day to Die Mortuary with the slogan, "it's a good day to die but you have to get around to it!"
Just imagine how many commuters we could bury as a result of the roundabout. Yes, just imagine!