Laserfiche WebLink
264 <br />staff would look into a barrier options, and would also hopefully have that <br />265 <br />information available at the neighborhood meeting. <br />266 <br />267 <br />Discussion included the poor condition of the existing shoulder beyond the <br />268 <br />roadway; total footage of an interim project; review of typical section proposed <br />269 <br />for a separated pathway and widening of the eastbound portion with a 6' <br />270 <br />pedestrian area and a striped 2.5' buffer between the roadway and pedestrian <br />271 <br />facility; snow removal challenges with or without physical barriers to allow <br />272 <br />continued access during winter months; current parking versus future parking and <br />273 <br />signage needs with an interim solution; and difficul ' in an interim path solution <br />274 <br />on the north side due to ditches, vegetation, pow s, other utility poles, and <br />275 <br />multiple single - family driveways. <br />276 <br />277 <br />Member Stenlund noted the extensive nnpervious surface as a result of this <br />278 <br />proposal and suggested other options sidered; with Mr. Schwartz <br />279 <br />responding that staff would look i mage mitigation options. <br />280 <br />281 <br />282 <br />Pathway Master Plan Build -out <br />Chair Vanderwall focused discussion on ast Ian priority list seeking any <br />283 <br />changes in ranking of individual members i pacting the composite rankings, <br />284 <br />seeking consensus to finalize a recommendation for the City Council. <br />OBO <br />286 Member DeBenedet noted the difficulties in prioritizing rankings based on the <br />lip <br />287 broader picture, even though every neighborhood or business area would prefer <br />288 their segment to receive a high ranking. Specific to the County Road B <br />289 neighborhood, Member DeBenedet noted his concern with results of the speed <br />290 study and learning that vehicles on the eastern end of the roadway were going up <br />291 to 46 mph with no shoulder for pedestrians or bicycles, and it being only a two - <br />292 lane, paved road. Member DeBenedet advised that this had caused him to <br />293 reconsider his original ranking and due to those safety concerns, include this <br />294 segment from the subdivision on the south side easterly to Fulham Street, if a <br />295 consensus could be achieved by this body. Member DeBenedet noted that one of <br />296 the main concerns of the City Council in their charge to the PWETC was the <br />297 amount of money needed over a multi -year period to get this pathway build -out <br />298 completed. Member DeBenedet referenced the significant dollar amount shown <br />299 collectively with the various segments already listed as priorities and how long <br />300 many of these segments have been on the drawing board. <br />301 <br />302 <br />As a starting point, Member DeBenedet suggested review of Map #26 (Rosedale <br />303 <br />to HarMar Connection and its current ranking. <br />304 <br />305 <br />Member Felice noted the importance of the priority rankings for access to parks, <br />306 <br />which is important; however, she also noted the importance of the County Road B <br />307 <br />segment to allow children safe access to school since that was their only option. <br />308 <br />Page 7 of 18 <br />