Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Sidewalks Pedestrian Safety topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council discusses Creekside sidewalk plan, asks staff for cost and right‑of‑way estimates
Summary
Councilors pressed staff to prioritize safe walking routes for students along Ninth Street in the Creekside area and asked for cost estimates and right‑of‑way needs to extend sidewalks from Elm/Griffith to Creekside.
City staff and councilors on Oct. 21 revisited a years‑old Creekside development agreement and the planned sidewalk network along Ninth Street, focusing on student safety and right‑of‑way constraints.
Staff presented maps showing the sidewalks already built, the portion required under the existing Creekside agreement (an east‑side route ending near Elm), and several narrow chokepoints where a five‑foot sidewalk would be very close to existing houses or driveways. Raylan Smith and engineering staff identified four properties where narrow setbacks or driveways create the most significant design and acquisition challenges.
Nut graf: Council members said their top priority was to get safe, walkable routes for middle and high school students who currently use Ninth Street as a main pedestrian corridor. Several members and residents said children “will take the shortest path” and asked the city to seek options that place pedestrians off the roadway even where land acquisition is required.
Discussion and next steps: Council asked staff to proceed with the portion of the Creekside agreement that is already contracted (sidewalks to Elm/Griffith) and to return with estimates for acquiring the additional strips of right‑of‑way needed to extend sidewalks from Griffith/Colquitt back to Creekside. Staff said the developer would construct concrete sidewalk but the city must acquire the necessary easements or land; the number of parcels to acquire depends on the route chosen and could be smaller for an alternate route but would still require property‑by‑property negotiations and engineering to handle slopes and driveways.
Council members asked for cost ranges and engineering obstacles for both east‑ and west‑side options and directed staff to bring those estimates back to the November meeting. No formal vote was taken; the council moved to take no action on proposed amendments and asked staff to return with a full cost and right‑of‑way analysis.
Ending: Councilors said they want a solution that keeps students off Ninth Street and preserves neighborhood character; staff committed to returning with estimated acquisition costs and construction implications for both sides of Ninth Street.
