BMA should liberate our footpaths
http://www.bangkokpost.com/opinion/opin ... -footpaths
Pavement: A flat part at the side of a road for people to walk on (Oxford Advanced Learner's Dictionary).
Sidewalk: A walk or raised path along the side of a road for pedestrians (The American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language).
It does not matter whether it's British or American lexicon. Both have a consensus on the definition of the footpath. It's definitely and unarguably a place exclusively reserved for people to walk. The real function of the sidewalk is respected in cities like New York, Tokyo, London and Singapore. Once upon a time _ but no longer, it seems _ it was also respected here in Bangkok.
The pavements in the City of Angels used to be heaven for pedestrians. Increasingly, that is something of the past.
And if the problem goes unaddressed, Bangkok folk wanting to move about the streets on foot without the presence of vendors annoying them, might have no choice but to use the Super Skywalk.
What really happens to this city under the people who run it, the Bangkok Metropolitan Administration?
The BMA missed the point when it said it wanted to use the elevated walkway project to restore the enjoyment of walking for pedestrians. But the BMA has no need to use the public purse of around 15 billion baht to launch a project as ambitious as this if it really wants to encourage more people to walk. It can tackle the problem at the root cause
The problem with cluttered sidewalks in the capital began when the BMA and government in the old days allowed hawkers to temporarily use the pavements to sell their products. There was nothing wrong with that, as this generosity could help poor vendors make ends meet. One condition was they could not permanently occupy the area as if it was their own property.
Of course, what we see today shows that that condition has never been respected, and no legal action taken to enforce it. The pavements are permanently taken by vendors, many of them wealthy ones but pretending to be poor. The pavements in prime areas like Silom have been occupied by these people and the BMA should not underestimate their wealth.
Many drive to work; in many cases someone drops them off to work and picks them up for home. Their physical occupation of the pavements forces pedestrians to walk on the road, leaving the area that is actually set aside for them as space for street vendors.
Among the ugliest scenes are the areas in Bang Kapi and near Ramkhamhaeng University. People risk their own safety when they are forced to step down from the sidewalk to walk on the streets.
Who should be blamed for letting this problem come this far? The BMA is not the only agency responsible, though it is undoubtedly the agency closest to the problem. Another agency directly involved is the police.
All pavements across the country are under the direct supervision of police, according to the Land Transport Act. In Bangkok, the Metropolitan Police Bureau is in charge. The BMA has to get permission from city police to allow street vendors to use them. The BMA usually forwards the request to police every two years. In exchange for gaining permission, City Hall has to make sure that its staff keep sidewalks clean and that pedestrians will be not disturbed. That's the promise; the reality is what everybody sees.
Under the law, a space of one metre has to be set aside as a walkway for pedestrians, and vendors are allowed to set up stalls only on one side of the pavement. Can anybody find any pavement on Bangkok streets which follow this rule? Obviously, the answer is none.
The police should have the courage to withhold permission from the BMA for use of pavement space if city officials cannot regulate the way vendors use this public space. This would ensure that pavements are returned to their rightful owners, the pedestrains.
Now, according to most Bangkok pedestrians, a pavement in Bangkok is merely part of the side of a road for vendors to use and people to avoid.
Pete 
