[Carfreeliving] Extremists?
Joshua Switzky
Joshua.Switzky at sfgov.org
Fri Apr 15 13:24:49 MDT 2005
well, mike, I think everyone seems to agree that activities like loading
and unloading of passengers and goods is a reaonsable temporary reason for
a car to be partially occupying a sidewalk, but inherent in this is that it
is a temporary activity wherein the driver is immediately available to move
the car should it be necessary to accommodate other users. just like your
playing sports in the streets. I similarly grew up playing street hockey in
the street, and when a car needed to pass, we would move the nets aside and
let the car pass and then resume playing. But we wouldn't bolt our nets
into the asphalt in the middle of the street and then go eat lunch. There's
a fundamental difference. I heartily support a large degree of chaotic "to
and fro" in the urban environment, that's what makes it exciting to live in
a city. But that means there's a to and fro, not just a fro. If there wasnt
a rampant cultural problem with the vast majority of motorists not
understanding basic courtesy and seeing sidewalk parking (not temporary
loading) as their constitutional right, then this would be a different
discussion.
-j
Mike Sallaberry
<Mike.Sallaberry at sfgov.org To: Carfreeliving at livablecity.org
> cc:
Sent by: Subject: [Carfreeliving] Extremists?
Carfreeliving-bounces at liva
blecity.org
04/15/2005 12:09 PM
I used to play football/baseball/frisbee in the middle of the street in the
Sunset when I was growing up. The argument could be made that the streets
are to be kept clear of such activities so that they can be used more
easily by people wishing to travel. I'm generally not a fan of having
segregated space for every use or group...there's a natural fluidity to how
space is used.
There's a give and take inherent to city life. If people react strongly
everytime someone else breaks a rule/law, people would constantly be at
each other's throats. The message I was hearing from some folks is that
sidewalks can NEVER be used by motor vehicles or anything other than
cyclists, period. I don't think that's a realistic position to take.
An example on the other end of the spectrum: People who argue strongly
cyclists should come to a complete stop and put their foot down at every
stop sign regardless of the situation/conditions at the time or be ticketed
are extremists in my book too.
To me, nearly all rules and laws are sources of guidance, not something
that should be blindly adhered to. What should rule overall is common
sense, respect, and civility, especially in a city where people are crammed
together and unique situations constantly arise.
And for the record, I've called in my fair share of cars on the sidewalk,
and do not believe they should be used as personal parking spaces.
Mike_______________________________________________
Carfreeliving at livablecity.org mailing list
to facilitate and promote car-free living in SF
To unsubscribe:
mailto:Carfreeliving-request at livablecity.org?subject=unsubscribe
or, for all options, go to:
http://livablecity.org/mailman/listinfo/carfreeliving_livablecity.org
More information about the Carfreeliving
mailing list