I think it was both was graduate and deliberate, in different ways. San Francisco has actually allowed a remarkable takeover of pedestrian space through curb c

I think it was both was graduate and deliberate, in different ways. San Francisco has actually allowed a remarkable takeover of pedestrian space through curb cuts and a lax attitude toward paving front yards and and sidewalk parking. http://www.spur.org/publications/urbanist-article/2008-06-01/eye-street http://www.spur.org/publications/urbanist-article/2008-06-01... I grew up in SF, and it wasn't really until I read this article that I realized why I found the urban streets in NY and Paris more relaxing than SF. I really mean it, relaxing. Once you allow cars to cross back and forth over the sidewalk to get to driveways, the pedestrian areas become hazardous. This became especially apparent to me when I had small children. I found I really had to grip my kid's hands when out on walks when were were on the sidewalk. There actually were a few close calls - I let my kids run ahead on a street with relatively few curb cuts, and they crossed the driveway section just as a car was turning in - and being small, of course they couldn't be seen above the other cars. It actually wasn't that close a call, because the other driver was very aware and paying attention. But go through this a few times, and I gotta tell you, no driveways and curb cuts is actually a very, very desirable aspect to an urban neighborhood. The sad thing for SF is that it was originally build without the curb cuts - many of the curb cuts and garages were added to the older houses. And SF did go through that very foolish period of time where new houses were required to add parking. And apparently, because the curb cuts break up the sidewalk, they don't add much net parking - supposedly every curb cut removes about 2/3 of a parking space. We really did let cars run all over us, and it's very ingrained now. hard to change.