Well, OK, seriously, there’s a bit more to his objection, and he’s talking about residential streets in the ‘burbs, not a blanket dismissal of all sidewalks. His e-mail is copied below.
You forgot the best reason for not building sidewalks in some neighborhoods. It prevents political protests and theatrics.
When liberals get mad at something I have done (or they think I will do) they always threaten to ‘protest’ in front of my house. Their threats are always designed to force my family, friends or neighbors to endure some angry mob as the price to pay for some vote or statement thinking that will change my mind.
Problem is, protesting in the ‘street’ requires a permit and isn’t likely to be granted in a residential neighborhood. Protesting on a sidewalk is a constitutional right.
Build a sidewalk and you guarantee that folks can (and will) show up to protest every decision (left or right) because sidewalks are ‘public.’
No sidewalks means the closest protesters can get to my house [and not be on the street] is about a mile away at the entrance to my sub-division. Of course, there I can’t see them or hear them so there is little point in them showing up.
Sidewalks in the ‘burbs where there are cul-de-sacs are a waste of money and a reduction in privacy.
I live in a sub-division without sidewalks with one road in and out and wouldn’t have it any other way.
Crime is low, protests are non-existent and the quality of life is improved because sidewalks and connectivity don’t exist.
If I need to take a walk, I can walk along the street.