Default_avatar

This is an AWFUL idea! Why should we erode our civil liberties to control where people walk their dogs? And why should we give the city the right to harass both residents and visitors alike because they aren't walking their dogs in a designated area during a designated time? This idea reminds me a lot of the street parking in Santa Monica - it's a complete mess that does not solve the problem. Furthermore, the only claim you make to substantiate your position is to be more like Newport Beach. Well guess what, this isn't NB, and if you like the way they govern, then I suggest you move there. Don't ruin a good thing for the rest of us with your convoluted ideas.

Vote
Default_avatar

It's unfortunate that we live in an age where we permit some people to walk their dogs in certain places due to their proximity and locale. Limiting non residents will, unfortunately, tarnish the image and feeling of this great place we live in. You know not everyone walks their bike when the light is flashing... Everyone should be afforded equal protection under the law. California has made it their mantra that all beaches are public, and I think this same philosophy should be used when thinking about the adjacent areas, including the strand. But because we have an open policy about our beaches, we need to keep them clean and kept up, hence the no dogs rule. But I agree with you, there is no true dog park within our city limits. Noble Park (between 14th and 15th) may be the closest thing to a dog park, and I hear people want to keep dogs out of it. Sometimes I wish people used the same motivation to push drug users out of that same park.

Vote
Default_avatar

I'm from a place that has medians throughout the city, and there are 2 lights for every intersection like this, meaning traffic piles up between the two (in our case between Valley and Ardmore). This intersection is no different, and would behave the same. Cars that have the green light on Ardmore would turn left onto pier, only to find cars stopped at a red light creating worse congestion than we have now. Therefore, the stop sign is the only viable option for this intersection, for we do not want people to begin breaking the law (going straight on red to alleviate the congestion).

Vote
Default_avatar

Again with throwing the baby out with the bath water.. Here's the thing, right of ways are exactly that: people have a legal right to use them, as do their animals/property. And rather than mandate people carry around spray bottles, why doesn't the city take a street/strand cleaning initiative? Plenty of other cities (Long Beach, New Orleans) employ local teams to spray down the side walks with an eco friendly cleaning solutions. I think that's a much better option than creating more laws, which inevitably erode our civil liberties.

Vote