2014-02-25_PWETC_AgendaPacket - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Attachment F SouthWest Area of Roseville Neighborhoods SWARN February 1, 2014 Duane Schwartz, Director Roseville Public Works Department Dear Mr. Schwartz: We want to thank you for the January 16"' neighborhood meeting on developing a pedestrian pathway along County Road B west of Cleveland in SW Roseville. We especially appreciated your direct response to many of the questions and concerns SWARN had provided you earlier. You clearly and with candor responded to those concerns and other questions addressed to you and the City Engineer that evening. A SWARN neighborhood committee from areas adjoining this proposed pathway agrees that the project as presented on January 16ffi should proceed and that it fully supports it, as the summary discussion of participants articulated at the close of the January 161' meeting also clearly indicated. As became apparent at that meeting there are three issues remaining which will need further review and resolution. These are as follows: 1. Whether the trail should be pedestrian only or multi - purpose: The trail (estimated to be 6 -7 feet in width) will not be as wide as standard multipurpose trails (8 feet). For this reason, some neighbors expressed concern about fast cyclists on the trail and advocated for a pedestrian -only trail. On the other hand, others expressed concern about having a place for children to ride their bikes off the main road. 2. Whether the space between the trail and road should have rumble strips: An approximately 2 -foot divide between road and trail was presented and discussed. Neighbors raised rumble strips as one idea for warning drivers (and trail users) of an automobile crossing over into the trail. The strips would provide more than visual warning but a negative is that it may produce noise for neighbors. An alternative is to have the divide painted to mark the separation. This will not produce any noise but may not be as effective of warning drivers and trail users. 3. The impact of the trail on parking on the south side of County Road B: Residential houses do not exist on most of the southern side of County Road B. However, there are a few who would lose parking on their side of the street due to the placement of the trail. Parking on the north side of County Road B and parking on a cross street were discussed as options for these homeowners. However, for at least one south -side home owner, these options will be not be feasible. We discussed the option of allowing parking on the trail in front of these southern houses, but this may not be ideal as it will force trail users to go into the road for this section of the trail.