Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Transportation topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Downtown crosswalk debate exposes title and right-of-way questions on Main Street
Summary
A sustained council and public exchange about a proposed mid-block crosswalk on Main Street (Highway 102B) revealed conflicting survey data over who owns the sidewalks and adjacent right-of-way. Council asked staff to provide certified survey data to Arkansas Department of Transportation (ARDOT), pursue title/survey clarifications and consider temporary measures while pursuing long-term STP/grant funding.
Business owners, residents and councilmembers spent a prolonged portion of the July 14 meeting debating pedestrian safety along Main Street (State Highway 102B) and how to add an ADA-compliant crossing near the Ravington and other downtown businesses. The discussion covered three linked issues: the best crossing location (intersection vs mid-block), the physical condition and ADA compliance of existing sidewalks, and whether the sidewalk parcels are privately owned or part of the public right-of-way controlled by ARDOT.
Key facts raised in the meeting: - Beth Dave (speaker 18), owner of the Ravington, described frequent pedestrian crossings to the bakery and said a plan proposed three years earlier did not proceed because of ownership and funding complications. - Staff and planning consultants noted that ARDOT historically required either intersection crossings or expensive mid-block infrastructure with pedestrian beacons, curb work and ADA upgrades. Temporary measures—ramps or rapid-flashing beacons—were discussed as near-term options, but ARDOT permitting and funding would influence requirements. - A certified survey supplied by a property owner showed the right-of-way extending to the face of a building in the block, which if accurate would affect whether the city may lawfully spend public funds to improve the sidewalk. Staff observed the Benton County GIS layer had previously been interpreted differently, creating a record conflict.
Council actions and next steps: Council asked staff to send a certified digital copy of the relevant survey to ARDOT and request written clarification on its position regarding ownership and permitting requirements. Council asked staff to investigate title/survey history and, pending answers, to prepare cost estimates for temporary vs permanent fixes and to explore grant opportunities (STP-type funds) for longer-term reconstruction. A special meeting was proposed once ARDOT’s response and title/survey clarification are available.
Why it matters: The downtown crosswalk issue affects pedestrian safety, local businesses’ viability and how the city and property owners share responsibilities for ADA-compliant access. Conflicting public records and the state DOT’s permitting requirements complicate rapid fixes.
What’s next: Staff to forward survey materials to ARDOT, follow up with the property-owner-donated survey, collect title/survey history as needed and return to council with recommended temporary measures and a grant/program timeline for permanent reconstruction.
