We've all heard this adage. Someone I met recently was lamenting living in Elm Grove because there are no sidewalks. She's lived there 17 years.
These were exactly the things that appealed to my family. We had lived in the city on a busy street and no longer liked all the traffic noises. We chose Elm Grove forty years ago because there were no sidewalks, no streetlights and because of the spacious lawns.
When downsizing three decades later, the choice was Brookfield. The decision points were affordability, proximity to family and to familiar locations. Sidewalks were not a 'selling point.'
Brookfield does have many sidewalks. 95% of the time there's not a soul on them. Brookfield is not a walking city nor a campus town. Just remember all the parents who drive their children to school.
The Department of Transportation does do highway "traffic counts" periodically. But the city doesn't do pedestrian counts for its sidewalks.
Do you feel sidewalks (on both sides of a street) are needed? Please use the commenting tool.