Maybe we can see the plan for 2013 and 2014 in order to avoid these types of issues. IS THERE A PLAN? SHOW US THE PLAN!

Planning and fiscal responsibility is not what you get with this group. You find out about it when they try to implement it. What residents want doesn't play into the equation. We watch the same thing over and over again . Only 9 months until the May elections. Come on springtime...

Safe pedestrian access throughout the community on ALL streets is not something that should be the topic of extensive debate. Yes, it would be nice to give those neighbors what they want, but what they are asking for is unreasonable and exclusionary. Coincidentally, I walked my baby to that very area yesterday and like many other times, had to go a different route than I wanted because I was unwilling to take the risks of walking in the street. The elderly, young families and folks in wheelchairs are particularly vulnerable. Certain streets and neighborhoods should not be given the opportunity to exclude pedestrians in this manner or subject others to excessive risk. The sidewalks should be installed as planned.

Bill, Although I agree with you on the issue of pedestrian safety, there are other issues I worry about. What is the legality of this? Some of these people have owned their houses for years and this was never an issue. I worry about officials who throw down sidewalks and put up fences at their discretion, no matter how it affects the residents on the receiving end.
My other issue is one of priorities. There's a stretch from N. Park Drive to Pardee Lane that has no sidewalk and there's constant traffic along Grove St. out to Cherry Hill. That stretch needs a sidewalk more.
Regardless, your comments are always articulate, honest and sensible. You really ought to think about running for Commissioner this coming May.

Thanks for your thoughts Brian. I'm certain that the commissioners are sensitive to the neighbors, but the fact is that they do not own that land and it is specifically earmarked as public right of way for the purpose of roads, sidewalks and public utilities. A sidewalk is an entirely appropriate use and exactly why that easement exists. A sidewalk is an enhancement to a neighborhood and I'm sure it does not detract from a property's value. The folks who are objecting have no meaningfully defendable or valid claim to creat a pedestrian exclusionary zone into that neighborhood or to force people to have to walk in the streets. My understanding is that the property owners claimed that nobody walks there. Well, DUH.... That is obvious and it's because safe pedestrian access does not exist. They have no right to deny it just because the original developers somehow got away without building sidewalks. (cont'd)

Your point is very well taken that there may be more pressing locations for sidewalks in town than that particular stretch. However, one overriding factor is that these projects are far more efficiently accomplished when they are done as part of the overall street and right of way work.

On balance, the compromise is that there is only a sidewalk on one side of the street there FOR NOW, That is less than ideal as pedestrians often must decide between safety and an unnecessary street crossing (or two) to get to the single sidewalk. Hopefully at some point in the future there will be sidewalks on both sides.

Thanks again for your thoughts Brian.

Brian and Bill: Great comments, both! I would like to add a thought. When my Parents moved from Philly to Bucks County (like the Jeffersons...."movin on up", developers then were featuring broad lawns, all the way to the roads which gave the urban excapees a sense of suburbia....no city sidewalks. Although I can't speak for our neighbors on Washington Avenue, I am quite certain that the look of an open vista played into their choice of their home's location. Here's the problem....unless or until a feature of YOUR homestead is in jeopardy of being altered, with your input disregarded...you have no idea how disheartening it is (I have a bit of experience in this area.) Just look at the pushback from our Brandywine neighbors and the folks at my end of town regarding Bancroft development. And all residents need to be on alert....if it happens in one neighborhood ..it can happen in all neighborborhoods,....and you may be the next one to have your slice of the American dream compromised. As for the safety issue....no one walks H-field more than I and have never felt threatened....use common sense (and urge the Police to get the drunks off of our streets)!

Bill, Thanks for the insights concerning Washington ave. It does make fiscal sense to add sidewalks to the package if you're doing roadwork in the area. That's why I pointed out N. Park Drive to Pardee, as they did roadwork on Grove last week that past right by that needed sidewalk area . Thanks again for the clarification. Also, give that Commissioner gig some thought.

As I said, no one walks these streets more than I and I would like to point out what I have observed every morning (not exaggerating...every morning) Folks who are out walking....are walking IN THE STREET....not on the sidewalks. Washington Avenue has sidewalks from Lincoln to Upland, and folks still walk in the street. And let's not forget the Wednesday night crowd who overtakes Haddonfield for their run...most often running two or three abreast IN THE STREET. We have sidewalks and bikepaths, but where do the cyclists ride? I am sure you get my point. If the Commission is truly interested in safety, perhaps ordinances should be instated regulating walking/running/biking protocol. As far as appreciating what the Commissioners have done recently, I always give credit where crediit is due, but all I've seen in the recent past is a lot of hand shaking, baby kissing, and figuring new ways to raise our taxes. I know that you fellows were raised in this town, but as I said before unless and until something that is precious and important to you is threatened you can't understand the frustration and dispair it causes.