CC MInutes - 02/17/99 WS - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Mr. Reinhard provided an overview of the City's sidewalk maintenance program and showed the council slides illustrating examples of sidewalk repairs, including a recent City sidewalk repair project. Mr. Fart left the meeting at 12:15 p.m. Mr. Kelly thanked staff for the useful presentation. He noted that the staff notes regarding the options indicated that the City could still pursue construction of individual high-priority sidewalk segments under option 4, and asked if those projects would compete with other Road Fund dollars. Mr. Reinhard said that the City would assess the property owner for the costs of the project and attempt to minimize related administrative costs to the degree possible. Mr. Kelly noted calls from constituents complaining that when the City made a sidewalk repair, at its higher costs, and discovered a problem related to a street tree, it covered those costs. If the property owner performed the repair or contracted for it to save money, the property owner was responsible for the costs caused by the publicly owned street trees. He asked if the City had considered developing a list of approved sidewalk maintenance/repair contractors for which it would guarantee the work in case of disruption caused by a street tree. Ms. Andersen said that the City was unlikely to have contractor list but could develop a set of specifications and an inspection process for sidewalk repairs. Mr. Kelly endorsed such an approach, saying it would engender goodwill about both trees and sidewalks and would not pit one community interest against another. Ms. Nathanson said that she had long been concerned that pedestrian movement in Eugene was impeded by the City's inattention to such things as support for alternative modes, safety of school children walking to school, and the convenience of access, and the value of exercise. She did not want to take action at this point because the solutions appeared to be too expensive or did nothing, and she was not willing to support doing nothing. Ms. Nathanson said that people appreciate sidewalks when they are installed, and cited Bertelsen Road as an example. She asked if staff could identify those remaining areas where there is not a sidewalk on either side of the street, or the sidewalk is on one side but the street is at least three or more lanes in width, to find where sidewalks were needed for safety or access. She wanted to know what those projects were, and their cost. Responding to a question from Ms. Taylor, Mr. Reinhard confirmed that School District 4J paid for the sidewalk adjacent to Harris School. Responding to a question from Ms. Taylor regarding whether those who paid for sidewalks over a period of time paid interest, Mr. Lyle said yes; the interest was approximately eight percent interest. The City sold bonds for assessment issues, and charged the bond interest rate plus two percent. Ms. Taylor said that sidewalks were important but residents were concerned about their costs. Mr. Meisner agreed with Ms. Nathanson about the option of doing nothing. He said that the issue was a difficult one in terms of community equity. He said that the City mandates that new development have sidewalks. Property owners without sidewalks have not been assessed for the cost of sidewalks and did not pay for them when they purchased their houses. Those with sidewalks paid for them. Now the council was at the point of gap analysis. MINUTES--Eugene City Council February 17, 1999 Page 5 11:30 a.m.