Sidewalk plan suggests using federal grant / LJWorld.com

Archive for Tuesday, February 5, 2008

A pedestrian and a bike rider take to the street at North Second and Lyon streets in North Lawrence as the sidewalk ends. A plan to improve sidewalks in several areas of town, including North Lawrence, proposes spending federal funds appropriated through the Community Development Block Grant program.

By Chad Lawhorn

February 5, 2008

City leaders in sidewalk talks

Lawrence city leaders may look to a new funding source to fill in some significant gaps in parts of the city, including an upgrade to sidewalks. Enlarge video

Reader poll

Being pedestrian-friendly may create a friendly competition for scarce city dollars.

The city's Public Works Department is proposing a nearly $210,000 plan to improve sidewalks in east Lawrence and North Lawrence, but the department is asking city commissioners to fund the project with federal grant money that normally is used for the homeless, neighborhood associations and affordable housing projects.

City commissioners are expressing an interest in the program, but also are raising questions about whether it is the best use of the federal Community Development Block Grant funds that the city receives each year.

"There are an awful lot of uses for those CDBG funds already," Mayor Sue Hack said.

Hack and fellow Commissioner Boog Highberger, though, said they'll consider adding sidewalk repairs to the list. A 2006 city report found that more than 50 miles of city sidewalks are either in poor or critical condition.

"Obviously, sidewalk replacement is crucial, if we're going to build a pedestrian-friendly city," Highberger said.

The proposed program would address both gaps in the city's sidewalk system and repairs to existing sidewalks that represent tripping hazards. Here's a look at the major improvements proposed:

¢ New sidewalk on the south side of 15th Street, between Haskell Avenue and Harper Street. The area lacks a continuous sidewalk. City engineers said the sidewalk would aid pedestrians wanting to go to the East Lawrence Recreation Center, 1245 E. 15th St., Kennedy School, 1605 Davis Road, and nearby shopping areas. Estimated cost: $49,000.

¢ New sidewalk on the west side of Haskell Avenue between 15th and 23rd streets. The new sidewalk would serve bus stops in the area and make it easier for people to walk to the Independence Inc. facility and the Health Care Access clinic near 23rd Street. Estimated cost: $84,000.

¢ New sidewalk on the east side of North Seventh Street in North Lawrence. The improvements would close a gap in the sidewalk system near Lyon Park. Estimated cost: $24,500.

¢ Various small sidewalk repairs in the east Lawrence and Pinckney neighborhoods. City engineers have picked about 10 locations in need of repair. The majority are either in the area along 12th Street between Connecticut Street and Haskell Avenue or along Fourth Street between Maine Street and the Kansas River. Estimated cost: $50,000.

Typically, the small repairs in front of people's homes would be the responsibility of homeowners. But Chuck Soules, director of public works for the city, said low-income residents often have a hard time paying for the repairs, even when the city orders them to do so.

"One guy told me that he had a leaky roof, the car was in the shop, he couldn't get to work and he couldn't buy groceries," Soules said. "Spending $1,000 to fix his sidewalk was the furthest thing from his mind."

Commissioners, though, said they wanted to have more discussion about using public funds to fix sidewalks in front of people's homes. They said they wanted to be careful not to create a precedent that the city start paying for all sidewalk repairs.

"We would need to get a clear policy in place," Highberger said.

Federal regulations require that the CDBG funding be spent on areas that are designated as low-income. Soules said that worked out well for a sidewalk program, because many of the city's worst sidewalks were in old areas of town that also were designated as low-income areas.

The city receives anywhere from about $850,000 to $1.1 million a year in CDBG funding. It won't know how much money it will receive for 2008 until later this year. But already, the city has about $1 million worth of requests for the money.

The money traditionally has been a major source of funding for social service and housing providers in the community. The Lawrence Community Shelter, the Salvation Army, Independence Inc., Tenants to Homeowners, Van Go Mobile Arts and Health Care Access are all seeking funding through the grant program this year.

A city advisory board will review the funding requests and make a recommendation to city commissioners in April.

Discussion

LJWorld.com doesn't necessarily condone the comments here, nor does it review every post.
Read our full policy. Also, read about banned accounts and harassing comments.

5 February 2008
at 8:10 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

pace (Anonymous) says…

Good sidewalks would help a lot of people.

But Sue Hack should resign.
5 February 2008
at 8:29 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

JackRipper (Anonymous) says…

Isn't it interesting that the city had money for big super wide streets and sidewalks out west, moving town way out west almost like a separate entity from the core of Lawrence, and has +$500,000 for clearing the streets of snow, but we have to get federal money to build sidewalks in the core part of town. Doesn't that validate the concerns that the city has grown too fast, got to big for its britches, and isn't able to provide basic services for core part of the city?
Jeremy that is very interesting. Funny how sidewalks in front of rental properties with owners who don't live in town can be covered in mud and broken beer bottles and not a thing is done about those.
5 February 2008
at 8:44 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

JackRipper (Anonymous) says…

Not talking about snow removal, talking about sidewalks that are sunk into the ground or the yard is a muddy mess so it runs all over the sidewalk. I guess maybe the mentality of many of the out of town rental people would be to have the tenants fix those too?
5 February 2008
at 9:05 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

75x55 (Anonymous) says…

Federal money for 'sidewalks'?? Is there any wonder that this country wallows in debt…
5 February 2008
at 9:42 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

toefungus (Anonymous) says…

Hey, no bikes on the sidewalk! It is not called a sideride.
5 February 2008
at 9:42 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

JackRipper (Anonymous) says…

It does seem odd that the city provides all the streets in the world but can't quite cover the cost of the sidewalks. Guess they aren't really interested in changes that would promote health and energy savings. Suppose they all suck from the same oil teet for all those easy tax funds.
5 February 2008
at 9:57 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

jrlii (Anonymous) says…

At the very least, the city should support areas with low-cost housing by taking charge of the sidewalks. $1,000 to fix the sidewalk in front of a $100,000 home is a whole lot bigger bite than $1,000 to fix the sidewalk in front of a $250,000 home.

I'd suggest full city support for single family homes with a market value of less than $125,000, phasing out to where the owner was fully responsible at values over $250,000. Or perhaps, full coverage for sidewalks in front of (single family) homes in the bottom 20% of valuations, phasing out to around the 40th or 50th percentile of valuations.

5 February 2008
at 1 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

tir (Anonymous) says…

Sidewalks that are for public use should be the city's responsibility, like public streets and roads. Everyone in the city uses the public streets and they are maintained using tax money. Public sidewalks should be maintained with public funds. To stick individual homeowners with the cost is wrong and unfair.
5 February 2008
at 1:22 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

smitty (Anonymous) says…

In all the cities I have resided the builders build the sidewalks to code then turn over the care by means of dedication of rights. The builder dedicates the sidewalks to the governing body and the city accepts the responsibility for the maintenance of the side walks. Same with sewers, water lines, street/curbs. Generally, specials are accessed to a given address for all these improvements, paid for in the monthly payment as is principle, interest, insurance and taxes. Is this not what Lawrence does?
5 February 2008
at 1:48 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

merrill (Anonymous) says…

If my memory serves me well those funds cannot be used to repair sidewalks associated with rental properties because rental properties are considered commercial. Slumlords are not low income… they just don't give a damn.

Instead of building a sewage treatment plant for the home builders Lawrence should take care of existing infrastructure. Let the homebuilders pay for the sewage treatment plant because they are the ones that want to create new neighborhoods for huge profits. Lawrence does not need new neighborhoods

What could $88 million or less accomplish? Invest in existing infrastructure instead of allowing it to become a victim of neglect for which I offer suggestions:

*Rehab streets and sidewalks in:
Downtown
Old west Lawrence
Old East Lawrence
Barker
Brookcreek
North Lawrence
Oread

*Develop an exciting public transportation plan complete with an appropriate maintenance facility

*Build a $17.5 million dollar library across the street from the New Hampshire parking garage(saves $10 million) and makes a failed TIF project somewhat successful.

*Convert the existing library building into a convention center which saves millions and millions over any new plan and prevents another TIF project funding a private profit making venture. When library shelves and office space is removed there is a huge space. Lawrence does not need an extravagant new building. It could easily house two large meeting spaces and two small. Clean it up, remodel, landscape, landscape,landscape and Lawrence is set to go.

*Provide initial funding for development of an economic growth team in city hall.

*Build the east Lawrence hike and bike trail

*Investing in existing infrastructure is a dependable economic growth plan which pays back and is good for business.
5 February 2008
at 2:16 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

JackRipper (Anonymous) says…

“how many times can you possibly paste the same messsage dude?”

Hopefully until they sink in! They appear to be fiscally responsible and a lot better than the options we are rushing into that are making Lawrence too expensive.
5 February 2008
at 2:32 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

jumpin_catfish (Anonymous) says…

I'm with 75x55, fed monies for local sidewalk repair. Madness, simply madness!
5 February 2008
at 2:47 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

JackRipper (Anonymous) says…

Always been curious how the old west Lawrence neighborhood association could receive federal neighborhood funds. It must be equally hard for professors as it is for working stiffs in east or north Lawrence who don't even have curbs! But never saw too many boomers who weren't first to the hog trough.
5 February 2008
at 3:15 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

toefungus (Anonymous) says…

Could convicts be used to replace and build sidewalks?
5 February 2008
at 3:43 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

justthefacts (Anonymous) says…

Any time any money is spent, it came from someone's pockets, unless you think the government grows it on trees (printing presses) somewhere?

So, who decides what money to take from others, to spend elsewhere? The government.

And just like a lot of American people and families, the governments (local, state and federal) have gotten used to spending more and making less. Robbing Peter to pay Paul. Living on credit. Borrowing from the future.

That cannot continue forever. Eventually, the family, person, or government will go bankrupt. Unless they tighten their belts, pay off their debts, and live on a cash basis forever after!

I don't hold out much hope. Most people have not only gotten used to a certain high level of services provided to society by government(s) but have come to demand more every year. And never mind who is paying for it or who will have to pay for it in the future!

A lot of people fear and attempt to avoid a recession. But what happens to anything that never stops growing; be it a person, an organism, or an ecomony? It explodes and dies!! So, at the risk of seeming gloomy, I say “bring on the cut backs!” It's either learn to live with less or learn to not live at all!

5 February 2008
at 4:13 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

merrill (Anonymous) says…

When I sat on the CDBG committee the rule was sidewalks could be repaired for live in homeowners not commercial residential properties.
5 February 2008
at 4:18 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

justfornow (Anonymous) says…

75x55 (Anonymous) says:

Federal money for 'sidewalks'?? Is there any wonder that this country wallows in debt:

I agree 100% 75x55. Great post.
5 February 2008
at 6:59 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Multidisciplinary (Anonymous) says…

I bought a new house in a new neighborhood in 95. The storm sewer access cuts into the sidewalk. Half on my property, half on the neighbor's.The sewer concrete block top was 3+ inches HIGHER than the sidewalk.
RIGHT after I bought the house..a JUST finished house, a man from the city came up to tell me that the sidewalk and top had to be at the same height, I would have to pay for the sidewalk to be changed. I looked at him like he was crazy, called my realtor, who had done all my negotiations for the house, and the contractor (not a Stultz company) came out cussing at the city.He pointed out, that anyone could tell that the sidewalk had been poured first, was in place before the sewer access was poured. (You could tell by certain things involved with cement pouring.) He said the city should have made the sewer the same height as the sidewalk, but he very angrily built a ramp up to that slab, and then built the adjacent part of the sidewalk that “my property” was responsible for.
The neighbors asked what was up, I explained. They either chose to do nothing, or Stultz, their contractor chose to do nothing.
The result? A sidewalk-wide 3+ inches abrupt change in the sidewalk height. Everyone trips over it. I've cleaned up a few young children that had bicycle wrecks do to that sudden change. Fun to shovel snow over. Kids skating, parents with strollers, not expecting it.
Damn work crews!
5 February 2008
at 7:56 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

JackRipper (Anonymous) says…

Ahhh the joys of modern development. Seems nothing is thought out, is it.
5 February 2008
at 8:40 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

pace (Anonymous) says…

I think all the churches who have decided to prey on us through their tax free base, should have to commit volunteers to build sidewalks. If they want to legislate our lifes, make them make material contributions.