Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Sidewalk Easement topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Resident raises liability, traffic and communication concerns over proposed sidewalk easement at 5101 South 600 West
Summary
A Washington Terrace homeowner asked council to pause a sidewalk easement offer, citing safety, enforcement and property-value concerns and requesting a meeting with city staff.
Anna Davidson, a Washington Terrace resident who lives at 5101 South 600 West, told the City Council during citizen comments on June 3 that she and her husband have been approached about granting a piece of their property for a proposed sidewalk and want more information before agreeing.
Davidson said she and her husband are willing to "do the right thing," but raised specific concerns about traffic speed near a nearby park, enforcement and liability. "If we give you that easement, that we're actually legally responsible if someone gets hurt on that property because it's still ours," she said, asking the council to "correct me if this is wrong." She also said a prior sidewalk left after road work created a tripping hazard that city staff had not repaired a year after she reported it.
Mayor Hallen and city staff offered to set up a meeting with appropriate staff, including the city manager and public works director, to review details and address Davidson's concerns. Tom, a city staff member who addressed several agenda items during the meeting, confirmed staff would follow up. City staff also said Jake (city staff) had been in contact with Davidson and would continue outreach.
Davidson asked how the city would address speeding and limited parking near the park if a new sidewalk were installed, noting she sometimes cannot access her own driveway because of fast-moving vehicles. She also asked about police patrols and said she had been approached by a city representative in April and then waited about a month for follow-up, which contributed to her unease about the timeline and process.
Council members and staff agreed to arrange a meeting to discuss the easement, enforcement expectations, what maintenance or safety measures the city would assume and timing for any work. No formal action or vote on the easement occurred at the meeting.
The discussion took place during the citizen comment portion of the June 3 council meeting; councilmembers asked staff to follow up with the homeowner to clarify legal responsibilities, project timeline and any traffic-calming options.
