To the editor:

I just don’t understand the logic in our system. Why sidewalks now? With all the frustration caused by the city in attempting to force a decade-old law regarding who pays for repair, doesn’t it seem a bit foolish to put new sidewalks on streets that have been in place for almost 60 years? Seems it would be easier to rewrite the law than stick it to property owners.

Having said that, there are at least two new sidewalks going in that, in my humble opinion, make no sense. First, Yale Road between Centennial and Crestline Drive. There has never been a sidewalk on that street. I went to West Junior High in the 1960s. No sidewalk. Why now? Second, West Harvard Road between Kasold Drive and Lawrence Avenue. Why now? Just because there’s a stoplight at one corner? On a windy day, you can almost spit across to the other side of the street. Why does that street now need a sidewalk on both sides? The sad question: Who has to pay for it? The property owners who lost their yard or the city? Guess who currently gets the bill when those new sidewalks deteriorate in five years due to lack of quality install. If the city can’t pay to have existing sidewalks repaired, why put in sidewalks at locations that haven’t needed them for 50-60 years?

Roger Powell,

Lawrence