Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Safe Pathway Sidewalk topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Mayfield council approves $210,000 local share for Safe Pathway sidewalk after resident objections
Summary
Council approved $210,000 for the town’s contribution to a state Safe Pathway sidewalk project after extended public comment from a nearby resident who said the proposed alignment would pose safety and property risks.
The Mayfield Town Council voted Oct. 8 to authorize the town’s local share for a state‑funded Safe Pathway Connect sidewalk project after residents raised safety and property concerns about the proposed alignment.
Speaker 2 told the council the project had been awarded $325,000 in state funds and an additional $140,000 (UOR grant) in the packet materials, bringing total grant funding cited in the meeting to approximately $364,000; the town’s local portion discussed in the meeting was $210,000. Council members said grant reimbursement would follow, and they discussed change‑order risk if the town paused construction to request design changes.
A nearby property owner (Speaker 9) strongly opposed siting the sidewalk on the downhill side adjacent to his property, saying cyclists and off‑road vehicles have damaged his fence in the past and that a sidewalk on that side increases the risk to pedestrians because of limited sight lines on a curve. “I’m against that all the way,” Speaker 9 said. He asked that the sidewalk be located on the opposite side of the road and raised concerns about grading, retaining walls and future dirt encroaching onto his land.
Council members said state engineers prefer the current alignment for design reasons but that staff would follow up with engineers and the resident about grade and sight‑line issues. After discussion, Speaker 7 moved to approve the town’s portion; Speaker 10 seconded. The council called for a vote and recorded ayes; the motion passed.
Council members and staff said they will follow up with the engineers on design details raised by the resident and noted the guardrail issue is a separate state roadway matter that would require a different application and funding source.
