CCAgenda_94Oct26 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Exceptions to the practice 1. In 1993 the city undertook a major street project in the Grove neighborhood. As part of that project the city replaced most of the sidewalk in the older sections of the Grove, with the property owners being assessed for some of the cost. However, the city covered the cost of sidewalk removal and replacement of driveway areas. This combined with the size of the project reduced the sidewalk replacement cost. As the project proceeded it seemed prudent to ask the contractor to replace some broken slabs along Folwell Avenue east of Coffman Street, where the sidewalk was not being replaced. About 20 blocks of sidewalk were replaced throughout this area with no charge to the adjacent property owners because the conditions were determined on site and after the project was well underway. It permitted the city to put in the appropriate strength and textured concrete as well as improve the barrier free curbs on an as- needed, on -site basis. 2. The city replaced three hazardous sidewalk panels along Hamline Avenue to the north of Larpenteur Avenue in 1994 because this is a public pathway, not technically a sidewalk, and is maintained by the city. The city will continue to do this along the other public pathways including Coffman Street and Cleveland Avenue. II. ANALYSIS OF PAST APPROACH Advantages. 1. Many property owners replaced the slabs after receiving the letters from the city without cost to the city for the work or additional staff time in questions or follow -up necessary. Disadvantages. 1. Many property owners ignore the letter or patch the sidewalk which doesn't solve the problem in the Tong -term. This means that the city continues to be liable to hazardous sidewalk areas. 2. The city has no control over the surface used (smooth and slippery when wet) or the strength of the sidewalk material. This creates inconsistencies and may cause for earlier break -up than if it was done to city specifications under a city contract. 3. The city can only require replacement of the yellow -lined blocks. If a block is removed and it is more practical to replace some adjacent blocks to solve the problem, the property owner is not required to do this. 4. It is staff intensive. Following the survey, letters must go out and telephone calls answered. And more follow -up should occur to make sure the job is done. 5. The current approach doesn't take care of the problem.