North side neighbors in dispute with city over who's responsible for mid-block sidewalk
A mid-block sidewalk off Manor Drive on Ann Arbor's north side is now a point of dispute after the city told nearby neighbors they were responsible for repairing it - after the city has maintained it for close to 30 years.
Angela Cesere | AnnArbor.com
It’s a dilemma many other Ann Arbor homeowners could also be in.Â
Ann Arbor City Council Member Sabra Briere, D-1st Ward, said staff is aware of as many as 30 similar anomalous situations where the city might be maintaining property that it shouldn't be.
"I just think the whole thing is arbitrary and capricious,” Gibson said.Â
He became aware of the situation earlier this month after receiving a letter from the city’s Sidewalk Program Repair office informing him of his failure to fix the sidewalk. He’d been told of the offending walkway in 2006, the letter stated, and he had until Sept. 7 to fix it.
According to city code, the maintenance of sidewalks, paths, or any “concrete or bituminous walkway, or walkway of other materials constructed in the public right-of-way” is the responsibility of the adjacent property owner. That includes snow and ice removal from the sidewalk and mowing the grass near the path.
Residents can either hire a private contractor to repair a sidewalk, or defer to the city for the repair. The cost to privately repair a slab of sidewalk, according to the city's website, was most recently estimated between $130 and $165 per slab. If the city does it, it will cost between $100 and $120 for the slab plus a $225 administrative fee.Â
FAQs on sidewalks in Ann Arbor
Here are three of the most frequently asked questions pertaining to sidewalks in the city of Ann Arbor, taken directly from the city's website:
- Q: Whose responsibility is it to maintain and repair the public sidewalks and walkways? A: Per City Code, Chapter 49, Section 4:58, all sidewalks within the city shall be kept and maintained in good repair by the owner of the adjacent land.
- Q: How do I report a sidewalk that needs repair? How can I check if my sidewalk needs repair? A: Call the city’s Customer Service Center at 734-994-2493. This call will trigger a request to the Technical Services Unit for a sidewalk inspection. If repairs are needed, the city will notify the property owner by letter of the specific requirements to bring the sidewalk into compliance.
- Q: What if the sidewalk damage appears to be caused by tree roots? A: Call 734-994-2768 to initiate an inspection by a staff person from forestry to see if a problematic root can be removed without endangering the stability and health of the tree. The concrete must be removed by the contractor before the tree root inspection can be made. The property owner is still responsible for the sidewalk repair costs.
- Source: City of Ann Arbor
In an e-mail, Kirk Pennington, a field services supervisor for the city of Ann Arbor, acknowledged the contradiction in Gibson's neighborhood and said the city is reviewing the situation for the four property owners off Manor and Cloverdale.
“In the case of the Cloverdale / Manor walk, parks has been doing the vegetation maintenance for an unknown number of years contrary to the guidance contained in City Code,” he said. “(We are) reviewing all data throughout the city to determine where similar locations exist, what the uses are, who is currently providing maintenance, the level of service provided and at what cost.”
After that is complete, Pennington said city staff will present its findings to the City Council to help determine whether city code needs to be amended.
“I’ll be pushing for answers because this is a murky area,” said Briere, noting she'd like to see the city’s street millage re-written to include sidewalk maintenance, taking the burden off individual property owners.
For now, Pennington said that the walkway between Manor and Clover will receive temporary patching until everything can be sorted out.
If the city decides that, indeed, the homeowners in adjacent properties must fix the sidewalk, the nearby property owners are still unclear who would be responsible for what.
Jamie Coleman, who lives across the pedestrian path from Gibson and received the same letter he did, wondered how the city would decide how much to bill each property. The two homeowners on the Manor end of the sidewalk have not yet received letters from the city as of last week.
“Are we supposed to paint a line down the middle of the path?” Coleman asked.
Wendy Ochoa is a high school English teacher at Plymouth High School in Plymouth-Canton Community Schools. She is a summer intern on the Community Team for AnnArbor.com. Wendy is a journalism student at Washtenaw Community College, where she writes for the Washtenaw Voice.
Comments
Lets Get Real
Wed, Sep 8, 2010 : 10:36 p.m.
Lets Get Real, about annarbor62's comments: this debate is not about "the sidewalk program being based on certain compliance standards that were established in a consent decree following a lawsuit filed against Ann Arbor under the ADA." It is about the way this program is being administered - arbitrary, inconsistent, punitive, favoritism - need I continue. Suggesting that I should personally "take my complaint regarding these standards to the judge presiding over the case" suggests that the costs of the city's legal fees should also be carried on the backs of the citizens. More evidence of the incompentence with which funds are being expended - on our behalf. There is no "insensitivity towards the disabled citizens of Ann Arbor and their ability to use public walkways." The walkways adjacent to my property posed no safety hazard or danger to anyone using them, able or disabled." In fact the damage to the sidewalks adjacent to my property was done by the too heavy snow removal equipment driven over the walkways designed for people to walk, not designed or poured to a thickness appropriate for vehicles. This also has nothing to do about shirking responsibility based on the city code chapter 49. I did what I was asked in 2006. Because no one did their job, no one came out to check or sign off for 4 years, is it my fault? Not to mention that the "new" markings were additional slabs, not originally marked. And, although the city claimed they had photos to corraborate their original markings, they couldn't produce them. City employees who are enforcing current law as written by representatives I didn't elect, are being paid to do what they should have done 4 years ago. If it took them that long to do what they were supposed to, they should even be on the payroll. They should be replaced by competent, civil servants who believe in working for the citizens who pay their salaries. And one more little piece of information for those who haven't been in the throws of this controversy; the city will do the work for you with their hand selected NATIONAL contractor + a $225 administrative fee - unless you are one of the favorites - a country club who gets their administrative fee waived - the very country club who drove the too heavy snow removal equipment over the sidewalks adjacent to my property and broke them in the first place. With so many of our own Michigan construction workers out of work due to the economic decline in housing starts and construction projects, why would the city choose to bring in an out of state based, national company rather than hiring our perfectly capable local concrete specialists? I wonder what the city "gets", or those working closely with that firm, "get" in return? So annarbor62, perhaps you should take your own advice and educate yourself before you speak rather than just cite law. Lets Get Real: how the law is administered, applied and executed, interpreted with bias or personal agenda, is neither fair or just.
Corey
Sat, Sep 4, 2010 : 7:45 p.m.
As this article begins to fade away...let me present a final review for those that just don't get it. 1 - There is an established precident of city/parks maintenance on this walkway that conincides with Cloverdale park that has lasted 30+ years. 2 - This is not a case that is so easily defined. Our residences are seperated from the walkway by a fence (city owned). The fence abuts to grass (city owned) which abuts to the "shared" sidewalk (city owned). Our property abuts the fence, not the grass or sidewalk (city owned). 3 - None of you arguing for the city would do anything different than we are. If you were popped with a bill like this out of nowhere, you would fight it at least to some degree. Period.
EcoRonE
Fri, Sep 3, 2010 : 8:58 p.m.
Right on AnnArbor62, ignorance (of the law) is no excuse and the laws were passed by elected officials which city staff try to interpret and enforce. Let's Get Real: It's high time a path was created along Washtenaw. Sidewalks are always paid for by the owners of the adjacent property. That's the way it was when I grew up in Grand Rapids and the way it's been in AA for the 30 years I've lived here. If you live in a city, you pay for the public construction and maintenance of public conveyances. People who complain that the right of way isn't their property don't understand property rights and the provisioning of public utilities. Effective services could not be delivered and maintained if the city/utility company had to get legal clearance to trespass on private property to fix public sewer, electric or gas main problems. Just because you don't see it, doesn't mean it isn't there. The public right of way is more than just the road. If your house was on fire but the hydrant was on my property, would you want to wait until I gave the fire dept permission to go onto my property?
annarbor62
Thu, Sep 2, 2010 : 10:07 p.m.
Yes, "Lets Get Real", the sidewalk program is based on certain compliance standards. These standards were established in a consent decree following a lawsuit filed against Ann Arbor under the ADA. You should take your complaint regarding these standards to the judge presiding over the case, I'm sure he would greatly appreciate your insensitivity towards the disabled citizens of Ann Arbor and their ability to use public walkways. Based on city code chapter 49, which you are on notice of when purchasing property within the city limits, the homeowner is required to maintain sidewalk adjacent to their property. If you do not like this law, try legitimate channels to change it. But insulting city employees who are enforcing current law as written by your elected representatives, which they are paid to do, while remaining ignorant to the law is truly pathetic. Lets get real, "Lets Get Real", educate yourself before you speak.
Lets Get Real
Thu, Sep 2, 2010 : 4:46 p.m.
Let's Get Real, the city wants all of it's projects funded on the backs of the citizen taxpayer. Evidence? This from the Chronicle regarding a SPECIAL ASSESSMENT, "Another one of the easements accepted by the council involved a non-motorized path to be constructed on the north side of Washtenaw Avenue between Glenwood and Tuomy roads. That project has a history dating back to 2006. At Mondays meeting, the council also completed the third of four required steps in the process to establish a special assessment of residents whose property abuts the non-motorized path." Another throwback to 2006. Hmmm. More incompetence from that era. Let's Get Real, the budget woes will be solved by figuring out a way to add fees and overcharge for services that are not a priority to erase the minuses. Like the sidewalk policeman with the grafitti spray can said to me, "We have standards in Ann Arbor." I see our standards: a crumbling bridge that no one will fix until they squeeze more "stimulus funds" spending from the Federal Government. But we definitely need a non-motorized path on the north side of Washtenaw; yup - we do!
John Q
Thu, Sep 2, 2010 : 2:24 p.m.
Start a petition. There's ways to amend the ordinances that don't require Council's approval.
grye
Wed, Sep 1, 2010 : 2:19 p.m.
for John Q: I have had many a conversation with council members regarding this ordinance and others. Most of the time it falls on deaf ears. Don't get me wrong, citizens need to comply with the law. However, laws that are not fair, just, or constitutional need to be changed. I have recommended change that would be equitable. Guess the ear aids have been turned off.
LetThePoisonOut
Tue, Aug 31, 2010 : 8:09 p.m.
@EcoRonE - Besides taxes I would say civic duty includes stuff like jury duty, voting, helping people in need cross the street, helping out at a soup kitchen, etc.... I've never seen civic duty defined as paying a city approved contractor to fix loosely defined "problem" slabs of sidewalk that are, but aren't really yours...that may or may not be compromised by trees and foot traffic you also have no control over.
EcoRonE
Tue, Aug 31, 2010 : 6:27 p.m.
Many responders apparently believe that civic duty only involves paying taxes. Fine, then let's talk about how to collectively pay for sidewalks and walkways everywhere in the city and to maintain them. Something like the water utilities assessment would work.
Corey
Tue, Aug 31, 2010 : 1:51 p.m.
@John Q - No worries...we're abiding all laws. Hopefully though, we've raised some awareness on the issue not only for our plight, but the potential plight of many other residences whose pathways are under review.
Rasputin
Tue, Aug 31, 2010 : 1:45 p.m.
@ calmic, wrong. We pay property taxes so that our roads and other infrastructure are maintained by the city. Just an FYI.
John Q
Tue, Aug 31, 2010 : 1:17 p.m.
"I guess JohnQ would just roll over and accept any ordinance passed by council." I would go talk to my Councilmembers and go to Council meetings and ask for the ordinance to be changed. Until that happens, I would follow the ordinances. Last time I checked, individuals don't get to exempt themselves from the laws.
setsyfly
Tue, Aug 31, 2010 : 11:42 a.m.
I am one of those who objects to the demand on citizens to maintain public walkways. I grew up in a town that had the right equipment and did the walks. Ann Arbor's repair citations were capricious, in that slabs that were merely cracked and not raised were cited. I also complained when city plows covered the walks I had just cleaned with two feet of icy slush. Public walkways should be treated the same as roadways, in my opinion. The only difference between the two is the method of conveyance... car of legs. The purpose is the same. Logic, though, does not dictate political decisions. In this case, the city wants to avoid the expense of maintenance and has dumped it on the homeowner. To be fair, however, the city should not now change its policy until all sidewalks have been repaired, unless it wants to refund those of us who have been forced to pay for repairs. The northside pathway is just a stronger example of the current foolishness we must all suffer with unless the city comes up with funding to do all the sidewalks.
calmic
Tue, Aug 31, 2010 : 10:08 a.m.
The city doesn't make homeowner pay for repairing the road in front of their house -- whey should homeowners be expected to pay for the sidewalk? There are areas in the city where entire sections of sidewalk are missing, but the city won't step in to fill these gaps. They insist that it is the responsibility of the property owners, yet they don't enforce this. So, bottom line, no sidewalks. If the city management truly supported pedestrian friendly infrastructure, as they claim, then the city would take responsibility for all the sidewalks. Money is tight you say? They found the money to build a parking garage for 500 cars!
actionjackson
Tue, Aug 31, 2010 : 8:46 a.m.
I always enjoyed the German residents of Baumholder. On Saturday mornings the property owners would all hang the comforters out the window then sweep and take care of the walkways and streets halfway out to their neighbor's across the street. Social activities such as this are still a great idea.
Stephen Landes
Mon, Aug 30, 2010 : 10:28 p.m.
I suggest that all of us who write in these pages on issues that upset us -- essentially improper or inefficient management of this City -- take action in addition to writing: next time there is an election for City council take out a petition and run for office. Get yourself elected to Council and make some changes. We have allowed the same very narrow group of people to run, often unopposed, for these positions for years. If you don't like what they're doing then do something about it.
5c0++ H4d13y
Mon, Aug 30, 2010 : 10:09 p.m.
I would support these home owners in a move to remove the easements and reclaim the land from the city. Possession is 9/10th of the law. "Every normal man must be tempted at times to spit on his hands, hoist the black flag..."
grye
Mon, Aug 30, 2010 : 10:06 p.m.
I guess JohnQ would just roll over and accept any ordinance passed by council. I recommend they pass an ordinance that requires JohnQ to fix my sidewalk. Would that be fair? Obviously not. There needs to be a better and more equitable way to handle sidewalk repair and replacement. City council would rather spend time voting on water art for the new building instead of tackling real issues. I gues you are happy forking out money for maintenance of something that doesn't belong to you. PT Barnum was right. One is born every minute.
leaguebus
Mon, Aug 30, 2010 : 10:06 p.m.
I had my sidewalks done two years ago. What bothers me most is that I had to pay (through the contractor) for a permit to do the work on property that I do not own. That permit triggered the reassessment of my property and the assessed valuation went up.
John Q
Mon, Aug 30, 2010 : 9:44 p.m.
The city code makes the responsibility of maintenance quite clear: "all sidewalks within the city shall be kept and maintained in good repair by the owner of the adjacent land." You own the adjacent land, you maintain the sidewalk. You own a corner lot or a property with an adjoining walkway, you have extra responsibility. Don't like it? Take it up with the Council and have them change the ordinances.
grye
Mon, Aug 30, 2010 : 9:37 p.m.
I have complained to the city council about sidewalk responsibilities for several years, so here is my 2 cents again. The city owns most sidewalks in Ann Arbor. Check you property deeds. Your property begins at the inside of the sidewalk and extends to the back of your property. The city declared a right of way from the middle of the street through the sidewalk. However, since the council did not want to take responsibility for what is theirs, they declared by ordinance that the homeowner would be responsible. Power is a wonderful thing. I have talked with city workers regarding this issue. I have been told the city does not want to repair/replace sidewalks because they would have to pay contractors a living wage. Homeowners can find the least expensive contractor and pay less. However this is not equitable. Wider lot, more sidewalk. Corner lot, double the responsibility. My suggestion to council has been to generate funds through a millage on property taxes. The homeowner can submit their repair bills to the city for reimbursement. The cost must be less than the living wage cost. Fair? Obviously. Sidewalks are available to everyone. Just as street maintenance is covered by property taxes, so should be sidewalks. Just because city council opts to pass an ordinance doesn't make it fair or right. What next? I am required to gas up a city vehicle on the opposite side of the gas pump? All it takes is an ordinance.
LetThePoisonOut
Mon, Aug 30, 2010 : 7:26 p.m.
I'm an A2 resident and I'm pretty sure my hefty tax bill should be covering all the wonderful "amenities" the city showers upon me.
48104
Mon, Aug 30, 2010 : 7:12 p.m.
Hear, hear, EcoRonE! I love all the people who want the amenities of a city and then shirk the responsibilities, but not as much as the non-residents who know nothing about the topic at hand, but feel compelled to comment. What's the matter, does your city not have a blog where you can share your opinions?
Bababooey
Mon, Aug 30, 2010 : 6:06 p.m.
@EcoRonE - Isn't a huge portion of AnnArborites civic duty wrapped up in thousands of $'s in property taxes each year? Come on man.
EcoRonE
Mon, Aug 30, 2010 : 5:44 p.m.
I believe that ALL neighborhoods in AA or any incorporated city in MI should have sidewalks everywhere including midblock or where-ever necessary for kids & adults to walk/bike/wheelchair to parks, schools and markets. It surprises - and perturbs - me that so many AA residents fight against this basic provisioning in a city. Easy street fought mightily against a sidewalk. Thankfully, the city at least did one side and assessed homeowners on both sides of the road. There's a midblock sidewalk on Easy that goes to Buhr for ALL the kids in the Kensington subdivision. The walkway along Washtenaw between Twoumy and Platt is another nasty affair with property owners to the North opposed to the civilized feature of a sidewalk on their side of the road. I read recently that an agreement has been reached where the city will maintain the walkway for the seemingly well-to-do folks North of Washtenaw. It is irksome that some people under the city ordinance are more privileged than others. People who choose to live outside the city in the townships without sidewalks obviously don't value sidewalks and public conveyances. They do however expect the city dwellers to pay the bulk of the school taxes that provide the buses and county roads for their children to go to school. Your opinions about what the city does to provide infrastructure is without standing in this matter. Come on AA dwellers. Step up to the plate and do your civic duty. You don't live in a non-city. the expectation is for sidewalks and everywhere else in Michigan, property owners are responsible for sidewalks in the city and for care and tending of the public right of ways.
sandy schopbach
Mon, Aug 30, 2010 : 5:31 p.m.
- If the sidewalk is on MY property, then it's MY responsibility to repair it. - If I build a sidewalk on the city's right-of-way - which is NOT legally MY property - it's still MY responsibility to repair it. - But if the city has put in a sidewalk on its own right-of-way, I really don't see why it should be my responsibility to repair it. - Keeping it free of ice is another matter. And even mowing. That's easy enough to do. Repair is very costly, and the city gets a better deal (translate: lower cost).
karma06
Mon, Aug 30, 2010 : 5:04 p.m.
@Thick Candy Shell: that's a great point on Ann Arbor not managing its funds properly. Between the underground parking structure and the city hall addition, they have managed to spend over $100 million dollars..yet the City of Ann Arbor continues to find ways to complain about budget shortfalls in attempt to justify pushing their spending mistakes onto their residence. (ie: sidewalk repair program)
Donald
Mon, Aug 30, 2010 : 4:32 p.m.
And this showcases one of the reasons why I was so happy to buy a house last year: My neighborhood doesn't have sidewalks, and I've a gravel drive. No shoveling except for the porch!
Bill Sloan
Mon, Aug 30, 2010 : 4:07 p.m.
Hurray for Sabra, and I would suppose some other council members who are in touch with the neighborhoods. Wouldn't this be an opportune time, now that most of the work is done for the time being, to shift the sidewalk concrete maintenance where it belongs -- the city. Work could still be contracted out to independent contractors in some share-the-wealth way to preserve jobs. On a similar front, I wonder how many Ann Arbor homeowners realize that they are charged for storm water runoff from their sidewalks?
GRANDPABOB
Mon, Aug 30, 2010 : 4:01 p.m.
At least 35 years ago my sister got the same letter so I jacked the slab up and shoveled sand under it to level it up. That satisfied them, and to my knowledge it is still level with the rest of the sidewalk. I am sure if it was the law then it still is.
KJMClark
Mon, Aug 30, 2010 : 3:31 p.m.
Have to agree with Tex. My wife and I looked at buying one of those four houses 16 years ago. It was clear to me at the time that the house had two sidewalks, just like a corner property, and if we had bought the house we would have been responsible for maintenance of the 1/4 of it next to the house. That's one reason people are hesitant about buying corner lots.
C6
Mon, Aug 30, 2010 : 3:21 p.m.
Several years ago I read an announcement somewhere that the city's sidewalk repair program would soon be inspecting and marking in my neighborhood. At the time I had several squares that clearly would not pass inspection. There are several lots in the area that don't have sidewalks at all, and what I had was almost never used. So I found and hired a contractor who removed the whole works, brought in soil to fill, and we planted grass instead. That was the lesser cost solution and today it remains without sidewalk.
MyOpinion
Mon, Aug 30, 2010 : 3:20 p.m.
@Let's Get Real Interestingly, the city has been replacing some of the curb cuts for handicap access. Some of the folks who live near those have gotten lots of slabs leading up to the curb cuts replaced for free. However, if you just spent $500 or $1,000 replacing them the year before wouldn't you be absolutely frustrated at the "Dept A" does not know what "Dept B" is doing. I think the city got in trouble for not having the ramps be quite ADA compliant and is having to fix them all. But, of course any random homeowner knows how to make the slabs in front of his/her house ADA compliant as do the random city employees who mark/inspect (or not) the sidewalks.
Corey
Mon, Aug 30, 2010 : 3:17 p.m.
@ let's get real - I don't think it could be summed up any better than that.
AAJoker
Mon, Aug 30, 2010 : 3:11 p.m.
I can understand why I should maintain the city sidewalk as it crosses my property (though the auditing and marking were 100% messed up), however this sidewalk is clearly not within the property lines of the house and instead falls within the park system. It's simple enough, if I cannot sell the piece of property touching the sidewalk, then I am not responsible for it. BTW I had to appeal to the city twice to review the walks in front of my house as they were clearly mismarked according to their auditing rules, in the end they crossed out their marks but never updated their records!!! An inverse is badly heaved slabs in the neighborhood that were never even marked... another great job by the government.
Lets Get Real
Mon, Aug 30, 2010 : 3:05 p.m.
Let's get real about sidewalks. First, where has the city been for 4 years (2006 when they marked these sidewalks). It took them 4 years to check on approvals, permits, and sign-off on work completed? How's that for incompetence. Second, the markings are inconsistent and arbitrary - although the field staff will gladly waive a line drawing in front of your face to show you the rules. I.e., my neighbor has a slab with 1 crack completely across, as do I. Mine must be replaced; not hers. She has a heaved slab - not cracks - which could easily be leveled, as do I. Hers must be replaced, mine was leveled. Third, the field staff don't check property lines. In my case they signed off on the neighboring property as complete. Two of the slabs I am to replace are not adjacent to my property! I had to fight to get that changed - and I mean fight. Fourth, the field staff - given a little bit of authority - become God-like. I explained I am 68 years old and on a fixed income. Asked for an application for assistance and was informed by the field staff that appearances suggest I don't qualify! Asking what in the world he was talking about, he said, "You told one of our staff you just came back from Europe." I've never been to Europe!! Who is he to suggest he can make decisions for which we have a Community Development Office who can help people determine if they qualify for assistance. My $1200 sidewalk repair, for which the city gave me 2 weeks - by Aug 31 - to complete, came less than 1 week after I scrimped and saved to pay my $6000 summer tax bill. Let's get real - the city is running a deficeit and they need to drum up funds. So, they are going back 4 years to penalize citizens for their own poor performance in executing the sidewalk replacement program back then. At $225 administrative fee per property, they'll drum up funds, get a kick-back from their hand selected vendors and of course, justify their important existance to the city's already gorged staff.
Corey
Mon, Aug 30, 2010 : 3 p.m.
@Candy - That's the spirit...sounds like you're ready to join the fight!
gwncb
Mon, Aug 30, 2010 : 2:56 p.m.
Two years ago our neighborhood was,unfairly,intimidated by this sidewalk maintenance program. The staff was unresponsive, two faced, did nothing to resolve conflicts in opinion and a GIANT WASTE OF TIME AND MONEY. All under the heading of "safety". Someone advised us to "do nothing" because "The City" will never get around to enforcing the "ordinance". Establishment of the "ordinance" was done under the table without public comment, as well. It will take a stand up Council Member to change this behavior and intimidation. Do not bother to argue this issue with City Staff! Good Luck to all Ann Arbor residents, currently facing this problem.
Thick Candy Shell
Mon, Aug 30, 2010 : 2:45 p.m.
@Bababooey, Well no other people with those paths get this "service" so why should they? there are hundreds of them all over the City! I think the City should stop mowing and snow removal unless they want to start maintaining both sides of my sidewalk/extension to the same standard!
beth06
Mon, Aug 30, 2010 : 2:42 p.m.
@Tex Treeder Actually, we were told the exact opposite when we bought our home. The previous homeowners had JUST replaced the actual sidewalk found in front of our property. That was considered a 'perk'... We were told this pathway was maintained by the city as it lead to Cloverdale Park...yet another 'perk'. I guess shame on us for not looking into the legality of it all...oh wait, there is none. The city can't even figure it out. (Thats the point of this article)
MyOpinion
Mon, Aug 30, 2010 : 2:41 p.m.
@Think Candy Shell Frankly the sidewalk repair program is poorly run by the city. What else is new. The city goes through and marks sidewalks to be repaired but does not do a consistent job of following through to see that the repairs are made (despite the comments above). A homeowner can make the repair himself/herself. Some of these repairs are good for about a year using a self-mixed patch kit that won't last one season. At least these homeowners made an attempt. Others have done nothing and nothing has happened to them. Second, there are some sidewalks that are more important than others. For instance, the sidewalk along Stadium Blvd is pretty important as there is no way a pedestrian or bicyclist should be walking/using a wheel chair/or riding on Stadium. Thus, these sidewalks and any of those on a trunk route ought to be jointly maintained by the owner and the city. As it is, these have been marked (and not repaired). I can make a complaint/report to the city, but isn't this what the city sidewalk repair system is supposed to be doing? I am all for having good sidewalks but as a homeowner I would much rather the city coordinate the repair. It would be more efficient for a contractor to come in and repair 100 slabs a day for a month than little dribs and drabs all over the city. It would cost the homeowner far less per slab - again if they used private contracters as opposed to city workers.
Bababooey
Mon, Aug 30, 2010 : 2:40 p.m.
@Candy - It sounds like the city has always maintained these pathways (they've always been in the budget). So they are trying to create new revenue at the expense of many unsuspecting people...not just the people in this article but up to 30 other pathways and whomever might be next to them.
Corey
Mon, Aug 30, 2010 : 2:25 p.m.
@Tex - We didn't know that when we bought the house, nor did our realtor, nor did any of the other three residences, one of which has lived there for 27 years.
bluehoo
Mon, Aug 30, 2010 : 2:21 p.m.
We're in another city and we do not have to pay for repairs--I do not think this is as common as at least one commenter indicated. Every time it comes up to Council as a suggestion, it gets wide disapproval from citizens. We do have to maintain easement landscaping and remove snow. But these are largely labor/time issues and it's much easier to have everyone chip in a little bit of time vs the huge cost to citizens to have staff. Sidewalk repair is totally different. There are specific codes (the ADA items being one) that have to be followed. There's expertise in putting down concrete properly (because I don't see that you have to contract it out). Not to mention that I rarely use most of my own sidewalk, though I regularly use other sidewalks in town. And what constitutes a repair (example, uneven sections due to tree roots--which the city has come through to grind down and even out recently, or only when most of the surface is cracked and chipping, how much chipping before a repair?) Since the main benefit is to the many other people who walk down the sidewalk in front of my house, why should I be paying for it? This is clearly a joint taxpayer issue & city-wide mgmt issue.
Thick Candy Shell
Mon, Aug 30, 2010 : 2:19 p.m.
OK, so it is the City's according to some. Who comes up with the money from the General fund to pay for the maintenance of all of these paths? I know, lay off a police man and a fire man!
MyOpinion
Mon, Aug 30, 2010 : 2:19 p.m.
There are neighborhood pathways to almost all the elementary schools as well. These typically abut private property. The one in my neighborhood - and luckily I don't quite abut it - is plowed by the school district. Does anyone know whether the two homeowners are really responsible for this? Interestingly, the sidewalks are in excellent shape and have the dates of their installation (50 years ago). And yet, the new sidewalks on the school property lasted about 10 years before they fell apart.
Tex Treeder
Mon, Aug 30, 2010 : 2:15 p.m.
You bought the house, you pay for the sidewalk next to it. Sorry, it's a package deal and you knew it when you bought the house. No sympathy from me.
samshoe
Mon, Aug 30, 2010 : 2:13 p.m.
It isn't a sidewalk. It appears to be a pathway through the neighborhood. Clearly it is the responsibility of the city, not the four residents that live next to it.
Barb
Mon, Aug 30, 2010 : 2:12 p.m.
Yes, @Ed but I don't see how that pertains to the bridge work - as I understand it, resolving the Chaucer/Village Oaks flooding is a separate issue.
treetowncartel
Mon, Aug 30, 2010 : 1:51 p.m.
This certainly seems like a dedicated city pathway to a park and not a sidewalk. I think it should come out of the parks and recreation budget. How about this for an idea, just put down some wood chips, or maybe go for the stone chipping method utilized by the WCRC.
Barb
Mon, Aug 30, 2010 : 1:42 p.m.
Oh, we have: http://www.annarbor.com/neighborhoods/ann-arbor-west/residents-launch-campaign-to-save-lansdowne-bridge/
Corey
Mon, Aug 30, 2010 : 1:17 p.m.
@ Barb - Sounds like this might be a good time to rally your affected neighbors and try to get some real answers like we are. You don't have to just accept it.
Barb
Mon, Aug 30, 2010 : 1:10 p.m.
@Corey - I see. We have a similar issue in our 'hood. Some things the City saw as important at one time are no longer something they want to take care of. Pardon my cynicism but *sigh*... Typical.
beth06
Mon, Aug 30, 2010 : 1:06 p.m.
I am also one of the property owners along this pathway. I've made four separate calls to the City for clarification on what's happening with the path, in relation to our property, and I still am unable to get any kind of answer (this has been going on for over a month now) Our home was never notified by the City of Ann Arbor as being responsible for any part of this pathway. Instead, our back neighbors brought the issue to our attention and shared the email correspondence he had with the city- which clearly names our property as being responsible for sections of the walkway that need repair. This simple fact is incredibly unacceptable and is symbolic of the cities attitude for this entire situation.
Corey
Mon, Aug 30, 2010 : 12:57 p.m.
@Barb - The article is correct, the pathway lies between four residences. However, the pathway is perpendicular to Cloverdale which on the otherside lies a neighboorhood park. The pathway makes a very direct/convenient connection to the park for all residents of the neighborhood or those visiting from other areas nearby.
Barb
Mon, Aug 30, 2010 : 12:43 p.m.
@Corey, a park? I thought the path the article was describing was in the middle of a residential block. Where's this park you're referring to?
Corey
Mon, Aug 30, 2010 : 11:48 a.m.
@candy shell - Maybe you know something I don't, but if I walk out of my house and down that path I run smack dab into a park. I guess you're speaking legalise.
bunnyabbot
Mon, Aug 30, 2010 : 11:39 a.m.
@ brad, the same thing happened with 2 slabs in front of my parents property. The estimate to pay someone to cut the roots out was over $500, instead my dad did it, it took him three days to cut 3 roots out that were over 8" in diameter each, not including the many smaller ones, back breaking work that nearly made the man cry!
Bababooey
Mon, Aug 30, 2010 : 11:37 a.m.
@candy shell - Nothing wrong with being an obedient civil servant. What's the big deal, a fee here, a new fee there...and don't forget to read the fine print...but who cares "they" know better than us.
Brad
Mon, Aug 30, 2010 : 11:27 a.m.
In my neighborhood, a large portion of the sidewalk damage is caused by roots from the city trees in the extension. My neighbor on the corner got hammered to the tune of 12 squares, almost entirely from the trees. Why should that be his problem? And why again can the city mandate that I have to maintain and repair something not even on my property? Can I elect to get rid of the sidewalk entirely if I want to?
Barb
Mon, Aug 30, 2010 : 11:22 a.m.
Oh geez - if the City maintained it, it is theirs. Although the City will deny it without proof. If you can get any letter or *anything* where the City takes responsibility for that section it will help.
karma06
Mon, Aug 30, 2010 : 11:16 a.m.
@Thick Candy Shell This is not like a corner lot. This is an area that the city has maintained and allocated as its own until real costs are involved. Now they are expecting 4 different homeowners (that probably don't event use the path) to take ownership and coordinate responsibilities (including liability). How do you respond to the fact that the city has clearly been setting a precedent by removing snow and mowing the pathways for over 27 years?
Thick Candy Shell
Mon, Aug 30, 2010 : 10:50 a.m.
This is the same as a corner property but in a way not as bad. It is a public sidewalk that you split the maintenance with your neighbor. It has been this way for at least 50 years that the property owner has the responsibility. I know many friends who have replaced the slabs at least twice. That is the price to live in A2. Most Cities have an ordinance to make homeowners responsible so A2 is not special. Removing the sidewalk is absolutely not an option! The path is definitely not a route to a park and never has been. It is a safe route to school for kids who walk and it is also an Accessible Route per the ADA. Check the Center for Independent Living for more info. http://www.aacil.org/
Rasputin
Mon, Aug 30, 2010 : 10:41 a.m.
@ EyeHeartA2, I know, wishful thinking.;) Seriously, property owners are responsible for keeping easements and sidewalks in good repair and the flora trimmed. In addition, a neighbor of mine was fined because her bushes and trees on her easement "obstructed" the view of the sidewalk. This caused a bit of ruckus, but she did have to end up cutting down her bushes.
Jay Thomas
Mon, Aug 30, 2010 : 10:39 a.m.
More consistency in government. Is the city going to require the residents to keep the sidewalk if they don't want it?
Sherry Coleman
Mon, Aug 30, 2010 : 10:39 a.m.
@JohnQ Noone is complaining about a sidewalk in front of their homes.
grans716
Mon, Aug 30, 2010 : 10:37 a.m.
I don't LIVE in Ann Arbor and I'm appalled at what I am reading. When does this "responsibility" end, for the homeowners? Saying they are responsible for the repairs on a sidewalk that is used by the community on property they DON'T own, just because it abutts their property, leaves them open to the responsibility of plowing the street in front of their house too. I can understand the sidewalk in front of your house, but this is not a sidewalk per se. This sounds like a pathway to a park. What about driveways that enter parks...will the neighbors be responsible for that too? This is ridiculous. Take the sidewalks out and leave a dirt path. Repair done.
ChunkyPastaSauce
Mon, Aug 30, 2010 : 10:32 a.m.
In the article "According to city code, the maintenance of sidewalks, paths, or any concrete or bituminous walkway, or walkway of other materials constructed in the public right-of-way is the responsibility of the adjacent property owner. That includes snow and ice removal from the sidewalk and mowing the grass near the path." I dont think this is correct because the city code for sidewalks (chapter 49) doesn't speak anywhere about grass mowing. Most people in the city happen to mow sidewalk areas because of chapter 40 which says that property owners are responsible for mowing lawn extension next to streets (which usually happens to include a sidewalk). However in this case there is no street so the owners are not responsible for mowing so the city does it. Snow and ice removal from chapter 49 says "the owner or occupant of every residentially zoned property shall remove the accumulation from the adjacent public sidewalk and walks and ramps leading to a crosswalk." - but this sidewalk doesn't lead to a crosswalk (it just intersects another sidewalk) so the city does it. The wording is a bit ambiguous to me though and I maybe wrong (crosswalk maybe referring to ramps only). The maintenance/repair of the sidewalk itself does appear to be the property owners responsibility though and not the cities from what I can tell.
Corey
Mon, Aug 30, 2010 : 9:59 a.m.
@pair-o-legal - I wouldn't mind paying a little more in taxes for property I owned as opposed to paying for repairs on something I don't.
bunnyabbot
Mon, Aug 30, 2010 : 9:56 a.m.
oops, I just looked at the bill, we only paid $41.73 per slab repair :)
bunnyabbot
Mon, Aug 30, 2010 : 9:50 a.m.
if the city has done maintence on this walkway (and several others around the city) then they should foot the cost I also feel that if they temporarily patch it that is taking responsibility for it and claiming it. At least if I were a juror in court I would think that. I also feel that the mass letters requiring sidewalks fixed and a $225 administration fee is extortion. If you walk through the neighorhood they select some sidewalk slabs that don't need repaired and then not some of the ones that common sense would tell you did. We called someone to come back out and remark ours and neighbors, the guy from the city said whoever did the marking before didn't know what they were doing! I recommend whoever has to get the work done, contact a bunch of your neighbors about getting a bid for the work together, we got ours done for about $60 a slab by splitting it up between 3 homeowners, its the only way to do it.
Corey
Mon, Aug 30, 2010 : 9:49 a.m.
@JohnQ - I'm one of the residents on the Manor side of this issue. When I moved in I was well aware I was responsible for the sidewalk in front of my house, let's not confuse this...it was actually a selling point because it was recently repaired. The issue is with a pedestrian walkway that leads to a park on the East side of our neighborhood. It's twenty feet wide with six foot slabs. Any suggestions on how to split up this responsibility? I would also be interested to hear a realtor's perspective on this. How are you going to sell houses in these predicaments? Do you survey all involved residents to get a feel for who has the snowblower, who has the riding mower, etc? Do you explain that Joe Blow across the walkway has a bad ankle so he can't shovel snow 90% of the time. It's complicated and annoying on so many levels...not to mention a financial burden out of the blue.
Rasputin
Mon, Aug 30, 2010 : 9:46 a.m.
Gibson is right, the whole sidewalk repair program is a bit arbitrary and, I'm afraid, out of synch with the sidewalk ramp improvements mandated by the latest ADA (Americans with Disabilities Act) rules. Case in point, our sidewalk repair bill came to 810 dollars in 2008. The following year, in 2009, more than 6 of the 8 new slaps that we paid for were removed and replaced by workers when they created the new ramp (yes, we have a corner lot). If the timing had been better, we would have saved 600 dollars in unnecessary sidewalk repair bills! As of now, no refund offered by the city.
Ron Torrella
Mon, Aug 30, 2010 : 9:36 a.m.
Why is the sidewalk even there? Why not just remove it? Think of the added benefit of more exercise if it were removed. Plus the improved psychological well-being of the residents whose properties abutt the sidewalk. Their taxes will probably go up just a tad since they'd all be acquiring a little extra footage in their yards but at least most of the ambiguity will have been removed. Less administrative work for the city, too, so less time/money wasted on the problem.
John Q
Mon, Aug 30, 2010 : 9:34 a.m.
I can't think of a city in Michigan where homeowners aren't responsible for the sidewalks in front of their homes. If Ann Arbor wants to change how those costs are distributed, that's something that voters will decide. But Ann Arbor's current policy is consistent with almost every other city.
karma06
Mon, Aug 30, 2010 : 9:30 a.m.
My husband and I have lived in Ann Arbor for only a couple years and we were shocked to learn that Ann Arbor requires their residence to foot the bill on sidewalks, esp. considering how much we pay into property taxes! Council Member Briere hit the nail on the head by suggesting sidewalks to be included with the upcoming roads millage. The entire sidewalk issue is arbitrary and completely unfair for so many reasons! The City of Ann Arbor is completely taking advantage of its residence with this vague code and Im happy to see this group speak out on this. This group of neighbors should at least have a say in what happens to the pathway if they are now considered responsible for its upkeep going forward.