Micahville #1

I took a few notes on the drive in today, when I was drinking my fake latte and pondering the fate of our fair nation. I, like many around me, see room for improvement. But I'm a pseudo-engineer (went to an engineering school, loved legos as a kid) and so the improvements I'm talking about have nothing to do with the administration or red states or blue states. I'm thinking more about infrastructure and regulations. I'm thinking about what little pieces and parts would make this city a better place to live.

Sidewalks. The Europeans have them. Downtown has them. Why don't the burbs? Or shopping centers? We need them along all roads, both sides. We need them in shopping centers to allow ingress and egress of pedestrians and handicapped folk. Currently, a person cannot simply walk from their home in Mabletucky to the local Publix without crossing a few unpaved stretches of land, some ditches, and crossing roads with no crosswalks. It's tough to do, and is typically only braved by those with the need - the poor and disadvantaged, who can't drive to the store. The rest of us drive to the store. It's like 1.25 miles away, but I still drive everytime I need some doritos. That's f'ed up.

Counterpoints - a. Europeans and downtowns have sidewalks because of the density of land use and near total urbanization, so it's not a fair comparison to say that suburbs should have sidewalks everywhere. b. The cost of paving those sidewalks has to be borne by somebody. Who would be willing to pay for sidewalks? Plus, the cost goes beyond just paving the sidewalks - it goes to purchasing land from landowners on which to build the sidewalks, get easements or leasing the land from them for the use...as well as the future cost of maintenance and demolition when roadways are expanded. It's a lot easier to tear up some unpaved grass to build that extra lane than to tear out some sidewalks, curbs, and gutters. c. Danger to pedestrians. Having all these pedestrians walking around is a risk and could lead to more accidents, as drivers aren't used to yielding to pedestrians.

Micahpoints - a. Suburbs still need them, regardless of the density of land use. To say that sidewalks are only beneficial in dense, urban settings is clearly a baseless argument. Anyone who lives in the burbs of America has seen plenty of immigrants trying to walk to stores and places of interest to know that if we gave them a sidewalk, it would make their day. Plus, by doing so we'd encourage fatass Americans to get off their keisters and shed a pound or two. b. It's called a SPLOST, like the one Georgia's Cobb County recently passed. It's estimated that the 1% sales tax increase will affect the average person in Cobb by $140 a year. That's just over $10 a month. If people could cut back on their video rentals or overage charges on the cell phone, or perhaps cut out two meals at Krystal a month, there's their tax burden balanced by some sound fiscal behavior. Besides, the work created by contracting for some massive city/county/statewide sidewalk building initiative will make more than one set of construction workers happy and that money is thrown back into the economy anyway. c. This argument is lame, and you are a dumbass for thinking it.

Look for more on this later! I can think of several more things that would make our cities SUCK LESS.