F
Frkrygowhaltspa
Guest
Chalo wrote:
> [email protected] (sbirn) wrote:
>
> [re: neighborhood streets]
>>If you want to use it as a playground, you must do so with the understanding that it was not
>>designed for this function and you should yield to primary users.
>
>
> I would argue, and I bet I'm not alone, that the primary purpose of a residential street is to
> provide the people who live on it with access to their homes and a common space in which to
> interact. This is the basis of design for neighborhood streets for much, much longer than there
> have been cars to drive on them. To the extent that the law might give rights-of-way to cars that
> supersede those of the people who live there, it diverges from the traditional understanding of
> residential streets.
You're not alone. I agree.
People now assume that anyone passing by in a motor vehicle should have more rights than the
resident living on the street.
It's a relatively recent idea - and a foolish one.
--
Frank Krygowski
> [email protected] (sbirn) wrote:
>
> [re: neighborhood streets]
>>If you want to use it as a playground, you must do so with the understanding that it was not
>>designed for this function and you should yield to primary users.
>
>
> I would argue, and I bet I'm not alone, that the primary purpose of a residential street is to
> provide the people who live on it with access to their homes and a common space in which to
> interact. This is the basis of design for neighborhood streets for much, much longer than there
> have been cars to drive on them. To the extent that the law might give rights-of-way to cars that
> supersede those of the people who live there, it diverges from the traditional understanding of
> residential streets.
You're not alone. I agree.
People now assume that anyone passing by in a motor vehicle should have more rights than the
resident living on the street.
It's a relatively recent idea - and a foolish one.
--
Frank Krygowski