Incredibly, or would that it were, there is a proposal
before the Minneapolis City Council that could lead to a ban on drive-throughs,
those staples of fast food restaurants and coffee retailers, etc., that allow
for much faster service for customers both inside and out. The push to update
drive-through regulations, or outright ban them going forward, originated with
the “Pedestrian Advisory Committee.” They claim that the more curb cuts or
drive-throughs along a street, the greater the risk of pedestrians getting hit
by cars. If that is what they were
concerned about, they would be pushing to ban light rail, as Twin Cities pedestrians are getting wacked by trains
at an alarming rate.
An
“Editorial Counterpoint” in a recent StarTribune newspaper overflowed with
arrogant infantilism while lauding the proposal. Its author is president of the
East Isles Residents Association, East Isles being an upscale neighborhood in
the city proper. He argues that we live in a “built environment that
prioritizes driving.” The horror.
He
continues on: “The truth is that the car-dependent society that we live in
today is the result of decades of societal engineering. It is a result of
decades of public policy that encouraged driving while discouraging walking.”
No, you guys do the societal engineering thing. The rest of us didn’t want to
walk to Aunt Edna’s in Cleveland. Or to Mount Rushmore. Or to work and back. In
Minnesota, in January.
He revs
up his indignation: “When we design roads with the simple purpose of getting
cars from point A to point B, we encourage driving. When we provide excess
supply of free parking, we encourage driving. When we liberally allow for the
installation of drive-throughs, we encourage driving. As a society, we either
prioritize driving, or we prioritize walking and other alternative modes of
transportation… In Minneapolis, our values are shifting toward the latter, and
it is something that anyone who enjoys city living should be excited about.”
Guess you told us. We’d move to the suburbs if we could ever get “public
policy” to add a lane or two to the freeways. And I can tell you’ve never
attempted to find a parking space downtown, let alone a free one! As for designing roads to get “cars from point A to point
B,” what kind of nut job would do that? If there are to be any roads at all,
they should obviously be in the form of a constant series of linked
round-a-bouts. That way our trips could be as round-a-bout and circular as your
thinking.
In his
missive, he actually sniffs, “To say that it is the pedestrian’s responsibility
to look both ways when approaching a drive-through in response to these safety
concerns is irresponsible.”
He has
to be a gag writer…and a damned good one! It is irresponsible to say that a pedestrian is responsible for looking both ways before he crosses a
drive-through??! What is the first thing every parent tells their child before
they allow them out of the house? “Look both ways before you cross the street.”
The
automobile has been one of the biggest factors in this country’s rise to
economic powerhouse. It has literally paved the way to new lands, discoveries
and adventures for countless millions. In doing so it has opened the minds of
many. This is not about pedestrian safety. That’s not even a “pedestrian”
argument. We are all pedestrians when we aren’t driving.
This is
about “alternative modes” of living and the absolute conviction that you are superior to the majority. And a disdain of others and their freedoms.
No comments:
Post a Comment