Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Sidewalks topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council backs revised sidewalk prioritization, adds equity index and asks staff to revisit developer standards
Summary
Council directed staff to adjust sidewalk-prioritization criteria to give extra weight to areas near schools and to include DRCOG's equity index; it also asked staff to review development standards and funding options for sidewalk infill.
Get email alerts on the Sidewalks topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Lakewood directors and councilors discussed a multi-year sidewalk strategy on Dec. 1, with staff recommending a focused inventory of missing and substandard sidewalks on arterials and collectors and proposed changes to the ranking criteria used to prioritize segments for construction.
Director Deandra said staff estimate about 840 miles of existing sidewalks and shared-use paths in the city and roughly 210 miles of missing or requested segments that would bring a full system to about 1,050 miles. She told council that building new sidewalks costs about $1.5 million to just over $3 million per mile depending on right-of-way, drainage and utility relocations.
Recognizing those costs, staff proposed modifying prioritization to give more points to segments near schools, to increase prioritization for arterials and collectors, to incorporate DRCOG's equity index score and to consider shortening the distance threshold used to award points for proximity to activity generators. Councilors debated whether elementary, middle or high schools should be weighted differently and asked for evidence on walking patterns; several members said they preferred staff return with a refined point scheme rather than making numeric adjustments in the study session.
Council gave staff direction to update the evaluation criteria to emphasize schools and equity, to flatten extreme weighting for roadway classification so collectors and arterials are recognized without overwhelming the list, to evaluate changes to development standards and exaction requirements, and to continue seeking grant funding. The council asked staff to return with a prioritized list and additional funding options at a future retreat or follow-up session.

