CR 92-159 Sidewalk Repair
- ' ._-- ( 1 y I
I
, \ 0'
CJ '" !
.' m
..y '. . ,'"",
0' .'~ Council Report:
July 29, 1992 ' ! p K. \, 92-159
Sidewalk Repair Project
Funding
prooosed Action.
staff recommends the following motion: Move that Council
amend the current Leqislative Policy #8-G - Sidewalk Reoair
and Maintenance such that 70% of reoair costs will be
recovered by assessinq the resident whose orooertv abuts
the defective walk. such that all reoairs are under the
exclusive ourview of the City. and authorize staff to
oreoare necessary formal revisions of the City Ordinance
and leqislative oolicy concerninq sidewalk reoairs for
Council action.
Overview. I
At its July 21 meeting council was given a project review of
sidewalk inspections and repairs. council was also advised
the city needed to proceed with a public hearing to continue
an assessable project and Council set a hearing date of
. August 4. Council members discussed funding of sidewalk
repair costs, inquired of staff the administrative costs to
administer the present pOlicy, and eventually requested
staff to revisit the issue of funding.
Primary Issues to Consider
0 Repairs by residents
0 Furiding options -costs to city
0 Liability issue
0 Staff recommendation
Suooortinq Information
0 LegiSlative Policy #8-G
~~.
J mes Gessele
Engineering Superintendent
.
'^ ._c:~_.,__....:..-;..",-,.~ _'~",,'-'-'.c:..
.
Analvsis.
0 Repairs by residents
The current City Code specifically cites the duty of
residents to repair or cause to repair all defective or
unsafe sidewalks. Legislative Policy #8-G endorses
that principle but staff in .its project procedures has
allowed for residents to request in written form by
mail to have the City perform the repairs.
This procedure has two distinct disadvantages:
a) Those residents electing to do their own repairs
are required to obtain a City permit. From this
point on, engineering staff members must track the
progress of the repair work to a deadline
arbitrarily chosen to facilitate mailing of
hearing notices. This procedure places undue
burden on engineering time with its inherent
checking, rechecking, and telephone calls in
between.
b) Although residents choosing to do their own
repairs are required to follow standards and
. specifications that are part of. the permit
process, quite frankly much of the repair work is
of unacceptable quality. staff is already facing
in this 1992 project the unpleasant task of
rejecting some repair work.
0 Funding options - cost to city
Although the city assumes the least amount of cost with
its current policy there are some hidden costs at
issue. The current policy expends 160 hours of staff
time over that which would be spent in a 30% option.
These are 160 hours not spent on other projects just as
deserving of staff attention. In addition, there is
the issue with the present policy where the City is
left with below standard repairs made by residents
themselves.
The optional policy of 100% city participation in
sidewalk repair costs still has the City assuming a
modest cost for staff administrative hours. This
option also compels the ordinary residents to bear the
cost of repairs adjacent to churches and schools. The
City's general fund is the source of funding for the
100% option. Residents pay their property taxes which
. go into the general fund. Schools and churches do not
contribute to the general fund. The only means to put
equity in repair funding is through some participation
on the part of the effected property owners and
collection of that participation in a special
assessment.
.
City Cost For Tvoical $40.000 proiect
Current Optional. Optional,
Policy(a) . Policy Policy(b)
Proiect Element 100% Resident 100% City 30% City
Initial inspection 80 hrs 80 hrs 80 hrs
Notification 80 hrs 80 hrs
PR (telephone calls) 80 hrs 20 hrs
Second notification 40 hrs,
Assessment hearing 80 hrs 80 hrs
Inspection of final 80 hrs 20 hrs 20 hrs
work
. Total staff hours 440 hrs 100 hrs 280 hrs
Actual Admin. Cost (c) $8,800 $2,000 $5,600
Amt. Recovered (d) 2.800 0 1.960
Subtotal $6,000 $2,000 $3,640
City Share of project 0 40.000 12.000
Total Actual City Cost $6,000 $42,000 $15,640
a) Resident is given option to do own repairs
b) city reserves exclusive right to do repairs
c) Based on average wage of $20/hr.
d) Present policy is 7% of project cost
.
.
0 Liability issue
As stated in a previous report, the issue of city
liability is diminished where a municipality requires
residents to bear 100% of sidewalk repair costs...
However, the City'S liability exposure is only lessened
and not eliminated. It is very difficult to determine
degrees of liability between a program of 0% City cost
participation versus one of 30%.
0 Staff recommendation
Given the modest increase in administrative cost, a
reduced workload demand, and tighter control of
quality, staff recommends that Council amend its
present sidewalk repair policy and commit the city to
30% cost participation with no repairs allowed by
residents.
.
.
- ~,~ ,.' ----~----- ----- -- -
. POLICY #8-G
SIDEWALK REPAIR AND MAINTENANCE
1. PURPOSE
1.01 The purpose of this policy is to ensure that all sidewalks along the streets in the City of Hopkins are kept and
maintained in a safe' condition for use by the public.
2. GENERAL
.2.01 This policy relates to repairs of sidewalks as outlined in Section 820.07. of the Hopkins City Code. The repair
of sidewalks outlined in this section are eligible to be assessed under authorization of Mimlesota State
Statutes Chapter 429.
3. POLICY
3.01 It shall be the policy of the City to inspect sidewalks along city streets once every four years in accordance
with the zones described in Attachment "A: of this policy. Following sidewalk inspection, recOmmendations
for repair will be made to the City Engineer.
3.02 Sidewalks shall be repaired. in accordance with Minnesota Department of Transportation Standard
Specifications for Construction, 1988 Edition, Section 2521.
. 4. RES PONS IBILI1Y
4.01 It shall be the responsibility of the City Engineering division to perform sidewalk inspections on. all such
sidewalks designated for inspection during each given year. The City Engineering division shall keep signed.
and dated inspection records indicating areas inspected, problems discovered and reCommendations to the
City Engineer.
,
4.02 Any sidewalk repair recommendation approved by the City Engineer shall be repaired by and at the expense
of the owner of the premise abutting the defective sidewalk. On street comers, repair of sidewalk panels
which are bounded by the extension of the property lines and the street, but not directly. adjacent to the
property, will be paid by the City. .
s. PROCEDURES
5.01 By reason of the fact that the following sidewalk conditions endanger life, limb, and property, they are hereby
declared to be nuisances, to wit:
(a) Any crack fISSure, 1/2 inch or greater raise between panels, hump, unevenness or condition therein of
such width, height, depth or form that pedestrians lawfully using such walk. might catch their shoes,
feet, canes, crutches or other proper implements thereon or therein; or which might cause pedestrians
using such walk to trip, stumble, or fall; or. which endanger the use of such walks for travel with
wheelchairs, perambulators or similar conveyances.
(b) Sags or depressions which are considered hazardous by the City Engineer.
., (c) Accumulations of sod, vegetation or other materials creating hazardous conditions on such sidewalks,
and any such accumulations extending more than three (3) inches over the edge of the sidewalk.
(d) Water service valve covers on the sidewalk which are not flush with the walk.
Any such conditions noted during a sidewalk inspection or otherwise observed by city employees will be
recommended for repair to the City Engineer.
~-'- - ,-.---
. LPM - Policy #8-G
Page 2
5.02 . Complaints regarding sidewalks shall be recorded by city personnel and permanently tiled. Following receipt
of a complaint, the City Engineering division will inspect the problem area and determine if repairs are
necessary under this policy. Such repairs will then be recommended by the City Engineer.
5.03 If the City Engineer fmds that any sidewalk abutting private property is unsafe and in need of repairs,. he/she
shall cause notice to be served ordering the owner . of the property to . correct the condition causing the
nuisance within 20 days of receipt of notice. The notice will also state that if the repairs are not made within
the specified time, the City will complete the repairs at the owner's, expense, and if unpaid, it will be made a
special assessment against the property. ' .
5.04 If such sidewalk is not repaired within the specified time, or if proof cannot be shown that a contract has
been signed to have the repairs completed, the City will cause the repairs to be completed at the owner's
expense and will cause the expense, thereof, to be assessed. against the premise in accordance with Section
8~.07, Sub. 3 of the Hopkins City Code.
Established 4/21/92
City of Hopkins
.
I
I
.
- ~--- ___A_ __u__
. THE CITY OF
MINHETONKA
. (it. . HOPKINS, MINNESOTA
.......""' ,~.;..~ r .u......;.. . . ~~ HENNEPIN . COUNTY
...."" ...... f""i"'.j_ ~-
I . It . ~~_lVlr SCALE
I ~ ..// ~~. "':., _ ~ "~ '":>>
--I ~.
I r---- _T<"'.. " Y' II; 5
~l ~,~
t.\ ..8m" ~y '77 ,
= , I 1
.<' I I ,
, ,!. MIHNfTONKA'
l " ~5=
=' .-.._1 ~ :
= i I~~
i ~~ 1
.:......,.: i . ~ , ........
1'#. ,., r:1~:=r~,... o. 1 ~ ,.{8 I@CD . ~
, - """":':;; ,iL II .
~~., h...."""'-""IT' ~ .
= JI'- r'~ f!\ '"
- ':l~ '\ " ,,~'1'" r r .. c_ ..
_.:::::: II .. . .. " tII~ \ .'.,.._ :. , !k '- :'".\ m.,~ft t 101
<&.! III .~ . ~ - .... .."....~% , '. . To , l
'-' ~ - '.;'~~I . ,
~<. "":.~.,,~~ ~ . 1/~. ~ <. y\....~..:i:I ~ V ~
~ ' ~, ... r . ~ ~ ~ J\i ~lfA.l1t, =~ .. ~ I ~ '
_,~~ . [J. ,1 .. . ~i'UllJ" ~;(j~~(;~:~[""~'" '!I~;~
..:.:, ----I ~ n "'< ~//,.; , ~ . 2. t ~ ,
. t1. .,.,. ..: 1 1"10 .."II '"
-. ~ .. zI . l ~ ,; I' . :.. J 1I II i ~. II --, ,.
, . . ... ~~U/ . , .~ .' _l~ I
- ~ 'fjf':; , .. -.. , -
- ~. i ~ . ~ '~~ ! ~f 1i@1 J .~ ,:~" ~ I I I --- I'
.@)'". .. ~I 1/ I" , i - "'~!. [1rC[.... tj' , .
~~ .. III ~.. ~ It C .. ~"c....."'-
~1 . ; . i ; ;.J ;: i/Di. : s I1JJ.. ~@ (f .- ' ; ULJ " In.,. I ~ .
...~ ~ .. - - -:""11 ~,\..."'~ v ) .nYU *I luJ I
r '. 3[00 ~~'l=H '
. I '" . _ - ~ . w '
II l, ~ ' , '. .. ._ ~
i I! " ! ,) ~ 't ~ U" 't . : I~ --- .. ~ !', 1 ..: .1 . == . ~.
~ ~ ~ J[]I. ,I <-:.. Il -I] .li ~ '! I!!;! ' [lln. ~11 ·
(i' _'ll - "il - - ~I L']'H~' ~ b ~ IlI.H~" ! '.1 f I
,,l! ,.. .. ~: ,- , .ili. .
I~ " '--' -I~ - - !!!!! _- - -..-...-...........
s. I "'........ /fli' I ~...II II 1 "(0IH4' nr : ""'"''''
~$ // ,....$.... $
I. . I ==
,.1 ,. * / 1. ' SCHEDULE OF IMPROVEMENTS
~ ' , . 3/ .. tt .~ ~
~I ~:...." . - ff !D Fill '. 1"
, ~ .: ,c. '<, J... 'i ~ ~ i ~ .. 1992 .
,o! ""~I I... JI.~ ii_. 1 B \
.p \ 1 2
i~V c..".~ \~.. I !!u.,J \ :1 1993
::; ! ...".~ ,~"""'"' r
z .
! I~vr)~. 1':\ c,
:I -=:'\\ I
,.,,,,.,,~ \.~~~ l . 3 ' 1994
CPV')'".I~ ~ ..... .1