Ann Arbor officials may ask voters for increase in street millage to cover sidewalk repairs
When it comes time to fix crumbling city sidewalks in Ann Arbor, the burden is on homeowners to hire private contractors to do repairs needed adjacent to their properties.
That's often at a cost of $125 for every 5-foot-by-5-foot slab, according to city officials. And that's an arrangement that's frustrated city residents over the years.
Ann Arbor officials now say they have a plan to shift responsibility for sidewalk repairs back to the city, but it might require approval of a tax increase.
Homayoon Pirooz, head of the city's project management unit, told Ann Arbor City Council members Monday night that city staff has a plan to take on the responsibility of hiring contractors to do city sidewalk repairs. It involves rolling the sidewalk repair program into the scope of work covered by the city's street reconstruction millage.
Homayoon Pirooz
Pirooz said the question city officials are asking now is: Would voters be willing to approve an increase in the street millage from 2 mills to 2.125 mills to make those changes happen?
Ann Arbor taxpayers have supported a street millage since 1984. It was last renewed for five years in 2006, and it expires at the end of 2011.
Pirooz said the 1/8-mill increase in the amount levied would raise an extra $500,000 a year, which he believes would be enough to cover ongoing sidewalk repairs.
That translates to about $13.37 for a resident with an average assessed home value of $107,000 and an estimated market value $214,000, according to data provided by the city.
Council members responded positively to the plan Monday night.
"I think that's an interesting alternative or option to put in front of residents," said Council Member Stephen Rapundalo, D-2nd Ward. "Certainly we've received many complaints over the last number of years as to why the city couldn't be accommodating the repair of the sidewalks given the high amount of property taxes that people already pay. So there's certainly some logic in rolling the sidewalk repair into the street millage."
Rapundalo said he's not sure how voters will react, but it seems to make sense from a monetary standpoint. He noted it would take the average homeowner about a decade of paying the $13 tax to equal the price of a $125 slab of sidewalk.
"It's a long time coming," said Council Member Christopher Taylor, D-3rd Ward. "I think the residents have been frustrated by the current program."
Taylor said the current program has had the potential to be unfair. He said it's arguably arbitrary that one resident would bear the cost of replacing a city sidewalk that is to the benefit of many residents just because it happens to be in front of his or her property.
"I think the system that is being contemplated would have the benefit of spreading those costs out over the community of users that gain the benefit of the sidewalks," he said.
In the meantime, city staff will work on getting feedback from the public. Ballot language for the Nov. 8 election must be filed in the city clerk's office by Aug. 16.
In 2005, the city initiated a five-year citywide sidewalk inspection program and has made sure property owners hired contractors to do the repairs identified. Pirooz said the city would see a reduction in sidewalk repair enforcement costs by switching to the new program.
Pirooz noted more than 15 percent of Ann Arbor residents walk to work, which is nearly six times the national average. The city has more than 400 miles of sidewalks and 55 miles of shared-use paths, according to data Pirooz provided at Monday's meeting.
"We take pride in being a walk-friendly community," he said.
Comments
dlb
Fri, Aug 12, 2011 : 10:10 p.m.
Sure, wait until we have all done our sidewalks out of pocket...
Dee_AA
Sun, Jun 19, 2011 : 2:05 p.m.
I strongly support this. I'd be happy to pay a tiny amount annually, rather than being hit with a BIG bill once in a while. I've been there, done that. Fixing a couple of slabs can really run into money! This will average out over 10 years and be much easier to swallow! Go for it!
Stuart Brown
Wed, Jun 15, 2011 : 4:53 a.m.
The city has a lot of nerve asking for a renewal of a road repair millage when there is two years worth of unspent funds in the current bucket while 7% of the city streets are crumbling. This plan to repair sidewalks is a blatant attempt to shift the focus off of the city's mismanagement of its road repair obligation. The city hopes residents will be dumb enough to approve the millage renewal even though Ann Arbor has roads ranked third worst in Michigan if they throw in sidewalk repair after a major campaign to shake-down individual homeowners who have already paid for a major portion of the work. The jerks even want to throw in a millage increase to pay for the benefit when they are sitting on numerous surpluses not only in the road repair fund but other buckets as well. This should be a no brainer if you are a homeowner watching your taxes still go up while your home equity is evaporating, vote no on this millage! Drain the Buckets! The problem is not the disrepair and non-maintenance of city streets, it is a city administration that does not spend money according to resident priorities. Stop feeding the dysfunction; Drain the Buckets! Vote NO on any millage that comes up for renewal! Drain the Buckets! Drain the Buckets! Drain the Buckets NOW!
John M Cellars
Wed, Jun 15, 2011 : 2:39 a.m.
You've got to be kidding! After hundreds of us have spent our own money replacing sidewalks that were arbitrarily condemed by the city, they now want to tax us to fix other resident's sidewalks. Can the mayor and city council get anything right! No new Taxes! Start working within the funds you have. If you want to take money from the street improvement program to fix sidewalks, then I want to be reimbursed for the money I spent to replace the sidewalk in front of my house that had a slight "dip" in it for over 20 years, and then suddenely it became a hazard. Give me a break! John C
Tony Livingston
Wed, Jun 15, 2011 : 2:27 a.m.
Christopher Taylor, the residents are frustrated by the current program because it is so unbelievably poorly run. Most of us do not object to replacing sidewalk slabs that are truly broken and deteriorated. But that is not what the city is after. People are frustrated at being forced to replace slabs that did not need replacing.
PLGreen
Wed, Jun 15, 2011 : 2:19 a.m.
So the City Fathers want the sidewalks to be in the same disrepair as the roads. Sounds like a great solution. Oh and by the way, another bucket for an extra $2-3million.
Lets Get Real
Wed, Jun 15, 2011 : 2:09 a.m.
I'm a senior citizen who spent $1200 on sidewalk repair and would have spent another $300 if I had given into the incompetent sidewalk markers who can't event determine a property line. I had to fight with the "supervisor", who suggested I get "a surveyor out to verify my property line." Finally, he conceided the slab on each side of my property didn't belong to me. My "horribly unsafe" slabs have been replaced. The same "horribly unsafe" slabs the neighbors decided to pay the city to repair, have not been repaired - that was two summers ago. Me, I should just have $1200 laying around to cough up at whim of the "sidewalk police." When it is the city's responsibility, it is not so important. So do I get $1200 credit on my taxes? or a $1200 rebate? or an even an appology from the arrogant, power drunk sidewalk police? I won't hold my breath.
Mark Wilson
Wed, Jun 15, 2011 : 2:08 a.m.
Put my vote in the NO column. I paid to have my sidewalk repaired and I'm still nearly tripping over slabs in my neighborhood. I'd pay a dime for enforcement, but not one penny to have the city take over this job. I'm with a2grateful on the likelihood that the city can do this efficiently. It can't.
David Cahill
Tue, Jun 14, 2011 : 11:16 p.m.
I strongly favor a sidewalk repair millage. The history of sidewalk repairs is not happy. In nearly all of Ann Arbor, the City itself owns the streets, the sidewalks, and the margins (including the threes). This wide area is used by all of the public, not just the abutting homeowners. A rational system would place the burden of repair on the City, since it owns the land. But oh, no. Many Michigan cities do repair sidewalks. Many others, including Our Fair City, passed stupid ordinances which require abutting homeowners to repair them. Yes, this is legal. (I checked.) This system results in arbitrary, crazy requirements on individual homeowners. For decades, our ordinance didn't mean much. It was only enforced on a complaint basis. Then, several years, the Center for Independent Living forced the City to begin repairing curb cuts. In order to avoid similar problems with the sidewalks, the City began enforcing its ordinance, with the resulting city-wide inspections and gnashings of teeth. I will support this new millage, but only if, as part of the deal, the present ordinance is repealed.
aes
Tue, Jun 14, 2011 : 10:40 p.m.
What I have never understood is why sidewalks on some quiet little street where hardly anyone ever walks are marked for repair, while right downtown there are big holes and gaps in the sidewalks that are used by hundreds of people, and those areas are seldom marked and never properly repaired. Like a lot of city policies and processes, this makes very little sense.
Bogie
Tue, Jun 14, 2011 : 9:16 p.m.
I wonder how long it took Mr.Pirooz to think up that plan? Who will get the contracts? Just another money grab, by the A2 govt.
OverTaxed
Tue, Jun 14, 2011 : 8:57 p.m.
This is a money grab by the city. Sure, we can trust them to collect our sidewalk money and hold it until it's needed. Rubbish! They will collect that money for sidewalks that are already repaired and spend it how they want. Odds are, they will never fix the sidewalks again. When have you ever spent our money on us? The new city hall is an example, it was extra money..... I say kill the whole renewal, because they need to address spending here and assign true priority. It is time for Dem's to support the middle class and lower taxes.
average joe
Tue, Jun 14, 2011 : 6:12 p.m.
So does the u of m and other property owners who are exempt from property taxes still exempt from this new taxation, even though they have many sidewalks also?
Mick52
Tue, Jun 14, 2011 : 6:11 p.m.
If any issue deserves a voter initiative to put it on the ballot, this is it. I've always thought this was a big scam and an illegal tax. The home owner does not own the sidewalk and should not have to pay for it, especially when you cannot have the choice of removing any trees near your sidewalk. I think it is enough to require snow and ice removal and care of the lawn extension for home owners, not pay for repair of city property used by the general public. If you have to pay for its maintenance you should be able to put up a toll booth at each end of your sidewalk.
lynel
Tue, Jun 14, 2011 : 5:43 p.m.
Ryan, I thought there was still a year or two left to the city's sidewalk replacement program. Has the whole city been done? Could you find out?
GerryD
Tue, Jun 14, 2011 : 5:26 p.m.
Hmmm - this should have been this way from the start, of course. I live on a corner lot and a few years ago, spent nearly $1,800 on repairing the marked up side walk. Even though I'm out that cash, I still think this should always have been a city responsibility and would support this (grudgingly, perhaps). That said, while there is likely no way they could ever refund the many folks who have repaired their own walks over the years, maybe they could extend some gesture to them -- something like a $10 credit for every $200 spent on sidewalk repair? Wouldn't undo the pain and wouldn't bankrupt the city, but at least it would feel like a bit of sharing of the pain/costs. (yeah, I know that will never happen, in part because the city would never "set precedent" like that, but...)
Bertha Venation
Tue, Jun 14, 2011 : 5:19 p.m.
OOOO, council.... NOW you went and done it! Stirred up the hornet's nest. Pretty nervy if ya's ask me.
John B.
Tue, Jun 14, 2011 : 10:05 p.m.
Now granny, simmer down now! ;-) (You said it, sister)!
snapshot
Tue, Jun 14, 2011 : 4:46 p.m.
Another reason they want this millage is so they can add additional sidewalks in neighborhoods to increase taxes and fees from those residents fortunate enough to live in areas without sidewalks. If our leaders concentrated on issues of saftey, police, and infrastructure as much as they do on food, art, and grass, we wouldn't have "crap" backing up in our basements. How long we going to let leaders crap all over us?
snapshot
Tue, Jun 14, 2011 : 4:41 p.m.
Folks this is a simple way of keeping the "sidewalk inspectors" employed now that there isn't any work for them since residents have paid for all repairs. What a joke this city's leadership is. The five year sidewalk repair program is at an end, all the sidewalks are fixed, and therefore the funds for sidewalk inspectors is gone. The city should have funded this "infrastructure" out of the general fund instead of all the other pet expenditures in art, greenbelts, consultants, planning (or should I say "lack of planning".
A2Since74
Tue, Jun 14, 2011 : 4:29 p.m.
The left hand does not know what the right hand is doing in this city with regards to infrastructure. It's like "try something and see if it works". The sidewalk repair project is one example. No discipline, no follow through. No accountability. The streets are a disgrace. I live on Delaware Drive which was completely resurfaced roughly 15 years ago from Scio Church to Seventh Street. It has held up well. Seventh Street was resurfaced south from Seventh about 8 years ago, and is crumbling to bits. About 5 years ago Seventh from Stadium to Scio Church was resurfaced and has had to be patched several times since. Scio Church is a mess. And all this is included in my $7000 yearly taxes.
BobbyJohn
Tue, Jun 14, 2011 : 4:01 p.m.
There are still HUNDREDS of flags of sidewalk across the city that were marked for necessary repair that the property owners still have not fixed. The city needs to make sure that those that were previously required to be fixed are to be done at the individual owners expense, NOT at city expense. As for the city doing the repairs, the city previously stated that it costs them way more than $125 to fix a flag of concrete sidewalk. What has changed?
5c0++ H4d13y
Tue, Jun 14, 2011 : 3:25 p.m.
What guaranty do we have that they will actually fix the sidewalks? They can't even keep the roads plowed and the potholes filled.
brimble
Tue, Jun 14, 2011 : 3:21 p.m.
Might a journalist at AnnArbor.com investigate the claims made by the city in this proposal? By what criteria does the City assess "Street Condition" as presented in the graphic reproduced in the article? And what is the logic of a "four-year running average"? Does the city not actively assess road condition at least annually? What are the definitions of "poor", "fair", "good" and "very good" roads? How many of the 85 miles of road in "poor" or "fair" condition will be addressed this year? What impact would approval or failure of the millage have on that rate of repair? The sidewalk repair element is not insignificant, because it certainly appears disingenuous on the part of the City to obfuscate discussion of the roads with the "hot button" of sidewalks? How would the voting go were the two issues offered on the ballot separately? Given the assertion that the remaining sidewalks requiring repair adjoin downtown businesses -- whether this is a correct assumption or not -- what role might the DDA have in supporting the repair of those sidewalks? Or is that yet another red herring? Am I the only one asking these questions?
Cici
Tue, Jun 14, 2011 : 3:06 p.m.
NO NEW TAXES!! AMEN! It's time for a taxpayer revolt! Every issue of this newsletter/paper seems to talk about this and that calling for tax increases for different specific purpose or attached to another one. I'm waiting for one for city-wide free Wi-Fi..... PORK in A2!!
John B.
Tue, Jun 14, 2011 : 10 p.m.
This just in: We can win the war in Vietnam!
djm12652
Tue, Jun 14, 2011 : 1:40 p.m.
Sure, let them do it. As someone who lives downtown and walks to work, I'd say give the job to the city, they've done such a fine job on all of the handicap ramps on all of the street corners...well, except for the ones that flood when it rains, oh wait...same design on all of them...so they all do. I think the city leaders are looking at this in the same light of the private sector. When someone takes on more duties, they hope to garner job security...watch out Mayor and Council...it don't work that way in guvmint..you guys take on another task and all that happens is the typical city hall SNAFU, overbudget, overtime and less than quality work! But given that the residents have had to replace sidewalks, the work is done now for a while. That will give city hall more time to make it a total mess....BTW...when will downtown sidewalks be repaired? I twisted my ankle yesterday catching my heel in a hole in front of Mongolian BBQ...which floods every time it rains as well...did Shapiro not have to replace the bad sidewalk in front of his property or is the BIZ gonna get involved as well...?
Catherine
Tue, Jun 14, 2011 : 1:27 p.m.
Absolutely! I'll vote for a millage increase..........as long as the city states that the increase will be assesssed only on citizens who didn't comply with the directive to repair sidewalks at their own expense. Those of us who struggled with contractors and paid for our repairs should not pay twice for neighbors who didn't do the repairs.
johnnya2
Tue, Jun 14, 2011 : 3:36 p.m.
You are not paying twice. You are paying for the entire city sidewalks that you can use and every other person can use. The former program is the wrong way to do it, but its sunk cost. Get over it and move forward.
blahblahblah
Tue, Jun 14, 2011 : 1:19 p.m.
Another day, another millage vote emerging from the shadows. I am having trouble keeping track of the shopping list here, let's see...sidewalks (check), new computers (check), new bus routes (check), new train station (check).... Since the news is a bit slow these days, how about AA.com reporting on how many millage renewals are coming down the pipeline in the next year or two. Also, throw in all the previously mentioned or considered new millages (school, AATA, library, etc.) and let's add them all up.
Adam Bauer
Tue, Jun 14, 2011 : 1:02 p.m.
Well considering I spent $875 replacing 7 slabs a two years ago that is a pretty damn good deal. However why now we should get credit on our taxes? Aren't they also supposed to charge the property owners if they don't have them repaired, seem that is a fair way to go. Would have been good to propose this in 2006 when they had an idea they were going to start asking home owners to do it. Also how about requiring people to put in sidewalks if everyone else around them has them. In our neighborhood we have what is called sidewalks to nowhere where one property has them and two others don't and then the next one does, big distances with no sidewalks, I am sure a consultant came up with that idea. Would have been cheaper to rip my sidewalk out and turn it to grass. $13 is a drop in the buck to deter that cost down the road but right now I would rather have fixed streets and bike lanes down major streets like Huron. Should have, would have, could have.
grye
Tue, Jun 14, 2011 : 12:48 p.m.
Sidewalks are for public use and the cost to repair and replace slabs should be borne by all taxpayers in the the city. This is no different than city streets, city parks., or any other asset of the city. Maintenance of these assets is one reason we pay taxes. Since the sidewalks exist on city owned property, the city should be responsible for their maintenance. Currently, the city requires the property owner who is adjacent to the sidewalk to maintain the sidewalk, repair and replace slabs, and the clear it of snow and ice during the winter. Interesting though that my property line is approximately 1 foot from the sidewalk, therefore the city owns the property that is adjacent to the sidewalk. In the past I have talked with city employees as to why the city did not want to be responsible for repairs and replacement. I was told that it is more costly for the city since they must pay the living wage rate whereas homeowners can find the lowest bidder. If this is true, the collect a tax for sidewalk replacement, have the homeowner replace the slabs, and then get reimbursed through the tax fund. Just because the city council approved a previous ordinance requiring homeowners to maintain the sidewalks didn't make it right. The city council could pass any ordinance they want. Homeowners must pay for the gas in a fire truck that responds to an emergency. Homeowners with even number addresses must wash all the police cars. The council can do just about anything they want, but it isn't always right. This is an ordinance that is longer overdue to be changed.
1bit
Wed, Jun 15, 2011 : 2:49 a.m.
I like grye's idea of a tax fund that reimburses homeowners for sidewalk replacement (at set caps per slab) in theory. The problem is that contractors would then just charge the "cap rate" rather than compete, but maybe if the cap is set low enough (or fair enough) then who cares. a2roots: What if the fund grye is proposing would be made accessible to anyone who repaired their own slab over the past five years?
a2roots
Tue, Jun 14, 2011 : 6:37 p.m.
@johnnyA2..You know full well there will be future sidewalk repairs. At my home it is unlikely because the roots were taken care of. Feel free to walk your dog by my house. But you better pick up after him. The plan stinks for those of us that have already paid. If you want to pay beyond your share I will let you.
johnnya2
Tue, Jun 14, 2011 : 3:34 p.m.
@a2roots, You are making it sound like there will not be FUTURE repairs. Even is every homeowner in the city replaced some sidewalk, I bet there will be new slabs needing replacement in the next 5 years. I think this is a good plan, and that is coming from somebody who currently pays for his own sidewalk replacement in a condo association. I will pay higher taxes for sidewalks NOT in front of my townhouse. I have no problem with it, because I do walk a significant amount in the city on side walk that is not "mine". If the sidewalk is the property of the homeowner that would mean you could stop me from walking a dog in front of your house
Cici
Tue, Jun 14, 2011 : 3:14 p.m.
City owned property. Why isn't this already included in the budget for street, park, or whichever budget - as part of our taxes? Forget the fountains, fancy art works, Wi Fi, etc. Just fix our roads and sidewalks on land that is owned by the city.
a2roots
Tue, Jun 14, 2011 : 1:01 p.m.
Your logic is correct. However, hundreds of residents over the past several years were mandated by the city to make repairs which most probably did. Now to come back and ask those same residents to pay for repairs others have yet to make via a new tax is not right. All residents that have already paid for repairs should be due a refund if any such tax plan passes.
Brad
Tue, Jun 14, 2011 : 12:46 p.m.
15 percent of Ann Arbor residents walk to work? Baloney. That must include everyone that works at home. Do one out of six people you know walk to work?
foobar417
Tue, Jun 14, 2011 : 3:46 p.m.
Higher than that. (Ugh. Can't delete replies with typos.)
foobar417
Tue, Jun 14, 2011 : 3:45 p.m.
Hirer than that on my street.
djm12652
Tue, Jun 14, 2011 : 3:07 p.m.
well, they may be including walking to work from one of the parking structures...lol
markguy
Tue, Jun 14, 2011 : 1:06 p.m.
Pretty close, actually, at least for people I know living in Ann Arbor.
justwondering
Tue, Jun 14, 2011 : 12:45 p.m.
I live on a corner lot with roughly 200+ feet of sidewalk. After a whole lot of back-and-forth with the city of what needed to be replaced, and what did not, I finally caved in and spent over $1500 to replace various sections of sidewalk. If the city hands me a refund check for $1500 then I will vote for this millage. I'm guessing they won't, so I won't vote for it. What this tells us all is that we should have just said no, or stonewalled, and then everyone else would pick up the tab for me. Lesson learned for any future requirements mandated by the city.... Unbelievable that the city is only thinking of this "novel" solution now!
caledonia
Tue, Jun 14, 2011 : 12:44 p.m.
I've always loved how sidewalk repairs, which benefit everybody, are funded by the homeowners, while speed bumps, which benefit only the neighborhood, are funded by the city. This plan seems, as many have said, a few years late for this round of maintenance.
Brian Kuehn
Tue, Jun 14, 2011 : 4:05 p.m.
Let's think long term. Eventually we homeowners will have the benefit of the City replacing the sidewalks in front of our property and the repairs will be funded by everyone.
Cici
Tue, Jun 14, 2011 : 3:16 p.m.
Great point, Caledonia!
Bertha Venation
Tue, Jun 14, 2011 : 12:44 p.m.
Sure am glad my street does not have sidewalks!!
Mick52
Tue, Jun 14, 2011 : 6:07 p.m.
I used to live on Gladstone when it was unpaved. In order to get it paved, the majority of property owners had to agree. Then you got tagged for sidewalks, street lights and I think, storm drains. Nobody wanted it. Then along comes a developer who wanted to build several houses at the south half of the street and guess what happened after all the lots were drawn up? Also, your property taxes increase because of the "improvements."
a2roots
Tue, Jun 14, 2011 : 12:32 p.m.
If this or any other backdoor attempt to get taxpayers to pay through a millage for sidewalk repairs happens I want a full and complete refund of what I paid for repairs to my sidewalk. Repairs that in my opinion were unjustified . Those of us that bit the bullet and did the repairs get the shaft again.
Arboriginal
Tue, Jun 14, 2011 : 12:26 p.m.
If our fantastically qualified student council rejects and their >leader" don't have a plan to manage the roots of the trees that are planted by the city on "our" extensions, then chalk up another boondoggle on the growing list. The sidewalks are in disrepair because of the tree roots. Right? Who planted the trees? Who didn't maintain the trees and their roots? Sick.
Cici
Tue, Jun 14, 2011 : 3:18 p.m.
Now that is a great point!!
a2roots
Tue, Jun 14, 2011 : 12:23 p.m.
What a bunch of junk. I just paid last summer to have some city mandated sidewalk repairs. Now I could end up paying for everyone else's as well. No way....
Pete Warburton
Tue, Jun 14, 2011 : 12:05 p.m.
I find it interesting that this issue is getting such attention. It seems the mayor and council never considered a millage until the big property owners on Main Street might have to pay for sidewalk repair.
blahblahblah
Tue, Jun 14, 2011 : 1:04 p.m.
I think you hit the nail on the head. My first reaction was which neighborhood group is next in line? They must be the tail that's wagging the dog here.
Dive75
Tue, Jun 14, 2011 : 11:57 a.m.
I doubt the cities ability to the manage such a program. They ran the 5 year inspections and made people replace slabs that are now to be torn out because of major street projects. So slabs paid for by the homeowner to be replaced less than a year ago are now to be demolished. They cannot have had this planned street rennovation for less than a years time. Someone messed up and now the homeowners pay the price. Not only for the sidewalks each individual homeowner repaired once but the rest of us are paying for them again less than a year later.
a2susan
Tue, Jun 14, 2011 : 11:53 a.m.
This proposal comes at the end of the 5 year plan where residents were mandated to replace their sidewalk slabs. Kind of feels like a slap in the face. After we pay a very high price to have this done the city now says it can do it for less money. Here's why I would be in favor of the tax: on my street there are only sidewalks on one side of the street. Whereas I have to pay to repair slabs (and shovel all winter) my neighbors across the street don't contribute at all. This tax would make all taxpayers responsible for the upkeep.
Dee_AA
Sun, Jun 19, 2011 : 2:10 p.m.
I completely agree. We have the same situation in my neighborhood.
Brian Kuehn
Tue, Jun 14, 2011 : 4:03 p.m.
Absolutely, a2susan. Sidewalks are a shared resource and should be a shared expense.
Craig Lounsbury
Tue, Jun 14, 2011 : 11:37 a.m.
I replaced 3 slabs in 2008. On the route where I walk my dogs of the 30 some slabs replaced, (I don't remember the exact number) I do remember all but 2 were sitting next to a city owned tree in the easement. Everyone of those slabs were lifted and or cracked by the root system of the city tree. Further more some of those slabs are showing cracks again , only 3 years later.....right across from a city owned tree. I don't have an answer since "we the people" own the city trees but it sure is frustrating.
Mick52
Tue, Jun 14, 2011 : 6:03 p.m.
I was thinking the same thing. A2 like to promote this "Tree Town" stuff, then tag you with the bill when the tree roots buckle the sidewalks. If I were buying a home in Ann Arbor, I would avoid a house with trees near the sidewalk or a house on a corner lot.
KJMClark
Tue, Jun 14, 2011 : 11:19 a.m.
Along with Steve, I was conflicted for a minute. We just paid a bunch to replace our entire sidewalk. Seems a bit unfair to those of us who just took care of the problem for 30 years or so. OTOH, I'm *very* in favor of good conditions for pedestrians. Then I did some math, and thought about how streets are paid for. First the math. The $13.37 comes to $400 over 30 years. That's a heck of a lot cheaper than what I just paid. So 13 bucks a year to never have to do that again would be a good deal. Then I thought about streets. Most people don't know this, but when someone builds a neighborhood, the city doesn't put in a street. It's the developer's job to build the street. If the developer doesn't - if they just put in a dirt road - the city won't maintain it. When a road is put in to city standards, *then* the city will take over maintenance. I think Ann Arbor just requires the developer to put in the pavement right away and be done with it. My parents lived on a dirt road in Westland and had to help pay to have it paved so their city would take over maintenance. So, if the city required that you repaired your sidewalks recently, I'm completely in favor. Then those of us who have sidewalks that need work aren't free-loading on those of us who just shelled out the money to fix ours. I think they should start with an inspection and require really messed up sidewalks be repaired before the city agrees to take over repairs for the future. It seems like they just did this inspection in most of the city, so there shouldn't be much left in really bad shape. I don't want people who thumbed their noses at the city repair requirements getting a free ride.
Brian Kuehn
Tue, Jun 14, 2011 : 4:01 p.m.
A very thoughtful response and one that I fully support. Having replaced 11 slabs, I am willing to pay an additional tax to be relieved of the responsibility in the future IF the City surveys all the walks that never were repaired and makes the homeowners comply prior to implementing the change.
a2grateful
Tue, Jun 14, 2011 : 11:18 a.m.
Rapundalo: ". . . it would take the average homeowner about a decade of paying the $13 tax to equal the price of a $125 slab of sidewalk." As I walk through my neighborhood, there are many WPA slabs in existence. This gives an indication of how long a slab can last. Many of those old slabs still in good shape. 2011-1939 = 72 years. So, the city is using a 10-year life span to sell us on the savings? Taylor: ". . . it's arguably arbitrary that one resident would bear the cost of replacing a city sidewalk that is to the benefit of many residents just because it happens to be in front of his or her property. I think the system that is being contemplated would have the benefit of spreading those costs out over the community of users that gain the benefit of the sidewalks. . ." Too bad Mr. Taylor didn't have this sense of fairness for those that are paying for the new "gigantic sidewalk paths" along Washtenaw.
spm
Tue, Jun 14, 2011 : 11:18 a.m.
I can only thank my lucky stars that we never had a little circle placed on our broken slab that cracked when a Detroit Edison truck drove up on the sidewalk and broke it. Edison refused to give us money for it and I wasn't about to pay for repairs myself. Now Ann Arbor can pay for it instead...of course, considering what a "great" job they do fixing our roadways, I'm not holding my breath!
walker101
Tue, Jun 14, 2011 : 11:15 a.m.
"We take pride in being a walk-friendly community," he said? Only at the expense of the resident. Unbelievable.
Ricebrnr
Tue, Jun 14, 2011 : 10:58 a.m.
H E double hockey sticks not with the current administratin in place. For all their buckets I am not comfortable with how they spend our money.
johnnya2
Tue, Jun 14, 2011 : 3:23 p.m.
Bertha, You have had MANY opportunities to vote them out. They still win, which mans the MAJORITY of those that vote do not agree with you.
Bertha Venation
Tue, Jun 14, 2011 : 12:46 p.m.
Hey Rice. I'm with you 100%! Been saying that for YEARS. Hope we can vote all of the city council and Mayor out soon! Fountains instead of safe roads.... nice priorities!
a2grateful
Tue, Jun 14, 2011 : 10:32 a.m.
Given the condition of the streets as the model here, we should probably continue to fix our own sidewalks, thank you. Savings can only be realized if service is actually provided for the fee. The true historical performance for the city has been to charge double the amount of private contractors for sidewalk repairs. Now, they can perform the service for substantially less than the private sector? Very odd, this proposal. What new folly buckets are really in the works? It's beyond my imagination, as is the idea of new sidewalks in a timely fashion. The sad result of bundling this proposal with street millage renewal is that it may threaten the already-weak chance of approval.
KJMClark
Tue, Jun 14, 2011 : 1:09 p.m.
If they have to fix the sidewalk when you won't, they charge administrative fees, and do it as a small side job. That should be more expensive, if you think about it. If they do it as part of a construction project, they can do all the sidewalks in an area at once. There wouldn't be any administrative fees, since it's just a small part of a much larger project. You would expect the city to get bids much lower than an individual homeowner would get. This all makes a lot more sense than you're giving them credit for.
Bill Sloan
Tue, Jun 14, 2011 : 10:26 a.m.
A good idea, but a little late now that most city sidewalks have been repaired on the homeowners dime. Cost me a thousand bucks. If this is passed I hope that the city will impose upon itself the same repair criteria and timelines that are imposed upon homeowners now. It will be interesting to see how soon repairs are made from the time a faulty sidewalk section is reported. Given the lousy history of road and pothole repair I'm afraid I don't hold out much hope. Same department.
John B.
Tue, Jun 14, 2011 : 9:43 p.m.
The relative criteria will probably be about the same as those for snow removal. If the taxpayer is responsible (e.g. sidewalks), better darn well get it shoveled stat! If the city is responsible (e.g. streets), well.... :-)
Steve Burling
Tue, Jun 14, 2011 : 10:23 a.m.
As someone who just replaced his sidewalk on his own dime, I'd be against this. As someone who remembers when this used to be the case, I'd be in favor. Conflicted...
Alan Goldsmith
Tue, Jun 14, 2011 : 10:23 a.m.
So do I get an apology and rebate my property taxes for the four sidewalk blocks I paid for a couple of years ago? You know, the ones where high school interns reviewed when they were running around the city with spray paint cans with a different set of rating standards depending on the phase of the moon?
Mick52
Tue, Jun 14, 2011 : 5:58 p.m.
I think you should get the rebate.
Alan Goldsmith
Tue, Jun 14, 2011 : 10:20 a.m.
Now that everyone in the city has replaced their 'flawed' sidewalks over the past five years at their own expense, our City, who can't seem to do anything right, wants to raise our taxes and take over this now. And, drum roll PLEASE for the lamest ever reason to raise taxes: "Pirooz noted more than 15 percent of Ann Arbor residents walk to work, which is nearly six times the national average". Not one nickle more in higher taxes while we have our Mayor and current City leadership in power. Forget it.
Goober
Tue, Jun 14, 2011 : 10:20 a.m.
Stop hiring and using consultants. This should generate a significant pool of money that can then be used for the right purposes.