urbanMSP

http://www.startribune.com/local/west/283286561.html

You just can't make these headlines up. "Longtime Edina residents 'up in arms' over plan to build more sidewalks" "Longtime residents say plan to build more will change the city’s identity."

Well, there goes any chance of me raising my future kid in Edina.

But then how will your kid make varsity a year early after his hockey buddies make fun of his dessert choices?

My suburban neighborhood (density = 1,537 per sq. mi.) has no sidewalks. Everyone walks and bikes in the middle of the street. It’s perfectly safe because drivers are well aware of this. Cars are infrequent, drivers go slower than the 25 mph limit, and we watch for pedestrians. If the city proposed sidewalks here I’d oppose them.

There are tons of areas in the ‘burbs for which sidewalks aren’t necessary. Maybe this particular Edina area is one of ‘em?

This plan is mostly to add sidewalks to collectors and arterials that currently (shamefully) lack them:

http://edinamn.gov/edinafiles/files/Cit ... nNov14.pdf

The streets getting sidewalks are ones where cars regularly drive 40mph. In my experience, the traffic is heavy and fast enough on the side streets in most neighborhoods east of Hwy 100 that they should get sidewalks too. I'm surprised at how conservative this plan is.

I hear a lot of people who mostly drive say that people don't drive fast in their suburban neighborhood streets. But when I walk in the suburbs it seems to me that cars are usually going at least 30mph and rarely looking for pedestrians.

I wonder if drivers subconsciously speed up a bit on suburban streets where there are sidewalks - thinking that they’re unlikely to encounter a pedestrian in the street.

My suburban neighborhood (density = 1,537 per sq. mi.) has no sidewalks. Everyone walks and bikes in the middle of the street. It’s perfectly safe because drivers are well aware of this. Cars are infrequent, drivers go slower than the 25 mph limit, and we watch for pedestrians. If the city proposed sidewalks here I’d oppose them.

There are tons of areas in the ‘burbs for which sidewalks aren’t necessary. Maybe this particular Edina area is one of ‘em?

I don't know the neighborhood you live in, but it seems risky to make the safety of your walkers and bikers dependent on there never being new residents, or even visitors, who don't follow the unwritten rules.

it seems risky to make the safety of your walkers and bikers dependent on there never being new residents, or even visitors, who don't follow the unwritten rules

I know it’s counterintuitive, but it’s not at all risky. On suburban side streets, cars are relatively rare. And drivers show more deference to pedestrians because it’s expected that they’ll be in the street. Folks unfamiliar with the area are smart enough to go slow when they enter a road without sidewalks and nothing but houses. I’ve lived here almost 20 years. There’s never been a pedestrian/car accident.

In your neighborhood, or your city? A quick check of Google shows plenty of suburban pedestrian fatalities in the last three years, with incidents in Chaska, Shoreview, Wayzata, Maplewood and others.

On a more anecdotal level, I was hit by a car biking in White Bear Lake as a child. So was my brother. My sister-in-law was hit by a car while biking in her neighborhood in Woodbury. My uncle was killed by a car while biking in Mahtomedi as a child. Perhaps you live in an extraordinarily lucky area. Or perhaps you just haven't heard about the accidents that do happen.

Yeah, people gain a certain level of driving competence by simply driving into select suburban neighborhoods. Sound counter-intuitive but it's true.

In your neighborhood, or your city?

My neighborhood. Almost anywhere within a 2-mile radius. Yeah, there are busy roads further away around which pedestrians have to be more careful. But the vast majority of streets in the immediate area are safe for pedestrians despite the lack of sidewalks. I’m not saying sidewalks aren’t necessary. I just don’t think they’re necessary everywhere.

Almost anywhere within two miles of your house no pedestrian has ever been hit by a car in 20 years? Judging by the 18 years I lived in quiet residential portions of second and third ring suburbs, that seems so unlikely as to beggar belief.

Almost anywhere within two miles of your house no pedestrian has ever been hit by a car in 20 years? Judging by the 18 years I lived in quiet residential portions of second and third ring suburbs, that seems so unlikely as to beggar belief.

I lived in such a neighborhood for 15 years. Not one collision, much less an injury or fatality. My parents still live there (going on 26 years) and I haven't heard of any problem. Some neighborhoods are just really well insulated from traffic.

To this day, sidewalks are not necessary in that neighborhood. Rich is right that places like that do exist.

My street doesn't have sidewalks either. And there is a very noticeable difference! The street a couple blocks down has them and there is much more activity. Neighborhoods in Edina have them and I see more kids walking or people out and about. People walk and jog and stuff in my neighborhood as well but I'm sure they'd have more of a sense of safety if there were some sidewalks. I don't really know why you'd be against sidewalks? I mean it's a sidewalk. It makes your neighborhood look safer. I would even go to the point to argue it helps kids trick or treat later. And you wouldn't have to worry about reflective clothing as much at night! I get so nervous that I might hit someone at night who isn't wearing reflectors, and yes, there have been close calls.

Almost anywhere within two miles of your house no pedestrian has ever been hit by a car in 20 years? Judging by the 18 years I lived in quiet residential portions of second and third ring suburbs, that seems so unlikely as to beggar belief.

I think there are so few people that walk anywhere in his neighborhood that it'd be hard to hit a pedestrian with your car if you were trying. So there were no accidents in 20 years, but there were also only 100 pedestrians in 20 years.

Almost anywhere within two miles of your house no pedestrian has ever been hit by a car in 20 years? Judging by the 18 years I lived in quiet residential portions of second and third ring suburbs, that seems so unlikely as to beggar belief.

I think there are so few people that walk anywhere in his neighborhood that it'd be hard to hit a pedestrian with your car if you were trying. So there were no accidents in 20 years, but there were also only 100 pedestrians in 20 years.

Not true in the neighborhood I grew up in. Everyone walked to school and church. The difference was walkability to places people wanted to go. There isn't as much car traffic because people don't have to drive as much.

My street doesn't have sidewalks either. And there is a very noticeable difference! The street a couple blocks down has them and there is much more activity. Neighborhoods in Edina have them and I see more kids walking or people out and about. People walk and jog and stuff in my neighborhood as well but I'm sure they'd have more of a sense of safety if there were some sidewalks. I don't really know why you'd be against sidewalks? I mean it's a sidewalk. It makes your neighborhood look safer. I would even go to the point to argue it helps kids trick or treat later. And you wouldn't have to worry about reflective clothing as much at night! I get so nervous that I might hit someone at night who isn't wearing reflectors, and yes, there have been close calls.

Face it,there are two reason they oppose it. One. People outside their neighborhood can follow it into their hood. Damn outsiders!! Second is they are too lazy to have to shovel or blow some sidewalk off in the winter. Thanks my 2 cents.

Face it,there are two reason they oppose it. One. People outside their neighborhood can follow it into their hood. Damn outsiders!! Second is they are too lazy to have to shovel or blow some sidewalk off in the winter. Thanks my 2 cents.

You are assuming quite a lot. In the neighborhood where I lived, adding sidewalks would likely require the removal of a lot of mature trees. I can totally understand why people would be against that if there's no actual need for a sidewalk.

I mean, people shovel their long drivays in the suburbs, what's a sidewalk?

Glancing at the map -- some of the additions are obvious and others seem unnecessary. That Schaffer Rd loop is pointless, for example. A few of you don't seem to understand how little auto traffic some of these suburban street get.

Good point. Cul de sacs and dead ends really don't need sidewalks, while long through streets and especially busy streets with faster-moving traffic (like France Ave or Xerxes Ave) absolutely need sidewalks. I used to trek through this part of Edina (near Hwy. 62 & France Ave) all of the time and the only time I was ever really in danger with vehicular traffic was when I was forced into the street to ride my bike or rollerblade because there weren't any sidewalks. In addition, people with small children -- whether playing in front of their home or walking down the street with a stroller -- should want these sidewalks the absolute most, since it feels and looks completely insane for toddlers and vehicles to share the same space.

Once I was yelled at by an angry mom for driving my car at or below the posted speed limit while passing their children who decided to play in the street because they didn't have a sidewalk. Never mind that I was on the complete opposite side of the road to give them plenty of room, and there wasn't like a bouncing ball or young toddler walking aimlessly while I was driving by -- these were 10-12 year-olds.

In the end, some people are simply hypocrites, and just want whatever serves them the best right now.

Redbook does the suburbs:


In The Suburbs (1957): http://youtu.be/QFk5y5C82tk