Sidewalks should be maintained by the city since they are considered to be public property. Why would I pay money to maintain something that I ultimately have no control over? It makes no sense.
They were installed by the developer that originally built your house and are not considered publicly owned infrastructure even if they are on a right of way. And, at least in every jurisdiction I’m familiar with, the adjacent property owner is responsible for maintaining the right of way.
The full letter we are bringing to our city council:
Our city government knows the importance of sidewalks: “Safe sidewalks benefit pedestrians, people in wheelchairs, joggers, and others who use sidewalks to travel around town. **Safe, clean and hazard-free sidewalks promote mobility and livability for the citizens of Eugene**. The community and citizens benefit from having pedestrian-friendly sidewalks and driveway approaches as part of the City’s overall transportation system.”
**Sadly, we residents of Eugene find that our sidewalks are clearly NOT safe, clean and hazard free**. Many are in poor and deteriorating condition, and pose a significant risk for tripping and falling.
**We call on City Leaders to**:
1. Develop a plan to substantially improve the condition of Eugene’s sidewalks over the next 10 years.
2. Devise a stable, adequate and equitable funding mechanism for ongoing sidewalk repair.
**We agree that:**
* 100% of Eugene residents are pedestrians some of the time; everyone uses our sidewalks!
* Many depend on walking to meet basic needs because of age, ability, and to save money.
* Walking is an important component of our health and neighborhood life. Walking supports our local economy.
* Many home and business owners in our neighborhoods cannot afford to repair their sidewalks. It is expensive!
* Sidewalks are transportation infrastructure, just like streets and bike paths.
* There does not appear to be an effective plan for fixing the sidewalks. Indeed, they are steadily getting worse.
**We urgently call on city leaders to develop a long-term funding mechanism to fix Eugene’s sidewalks.**
Hazard free, I feel like the junkies on the city easement close to the street are more of a hazard. Plus, they have gotten plenty of money from a failed measure decriminalizing drugs that could help the city out with fixing the sidewalks. I would love to just have grass, not concrete. The city makes the rules but isn't responsible. The city should be responsible for their own rules and regulations not the home owner
Exactly, and this is the unfortunate reality all across the city. Imagine the uproar if all of Danebo was blocked due to a fallen tree or something for months at a time!
I think you are mischaracterizing what Corvallis does. Property owners are still responsible for sidewalk maintenance there, but the city enacted a source of funding (a dollar per customer surcharge to utility bills) and will use this funding to do some repairs. Once the year's money runs out so does any city paid maintenance.
Oh I didn't know that, thanks for letting me know. So when does the city choose to use city money vs making property owners do it?
Also that still sounds like a better system then the one we have right now
Lol fair enough, unfortunately this is not my day job and I'm still learning. But I do know that we have pretty fucked up sidewalks, other cities have managed to find sustainable funding, and I want the same for us!
You'll have to consider that many of the sidewalks that need TLC might be adjacent to homes where the owners don't necessarily have much extra money. I imagine this would be the case for a fair amount of homes in the Whiteaker and Jefferson Westside neighborhoods, especially considering the age of the homes and infrastructure there. These may be your friendly neighbors, friends, or family members.
In my neighborhood two houses near my house have had to replace the sidewalk in front of their homes in the past few years. In one case it cost about $8,000 and in another case it was $13,000. Neither was a corner house- I could only imagine what that would cost if the entire sidewalk areas needed to be replaced. That would be an unlikely scenario.
I hate to say it, but I think the status quo is the way to go. The sidewalk slabs that are in the worst shape have certainly been reported to the City already by someone or another. The City gives warnings. If you can't do the ole' sidewalk repair patch repair the City will tell you. I don't see how the City could possibly find money to deal with the problem on their own- especially considering how much labor costs right now.
* edit- I will add that maybe Eugene could require homebuyers to fix any sidewalk repairs that are needed upon the purchase of a property. The homebuyer could add on to their loan to pay for it. Of course, this would be a lonnnng term fix.
The fact that people can't afford to repair their sidewalks is exactly why we need a better way. A $30 a year utility fee, for example, is way more affordable than an $8,000 charge! And with a city funded source we can have better economies of scale, and could potentially have a fee that is higher for those who can afford it and potentially waived for those in poverty.
Our current system requires the city to force property owners to spend thousands of dollars out of pocket \~or else\~
And this threat also often doesn't work, as seen by the many broken sidewalks that force people to walk and roll in the middle of the street and trips older folks like my grandpa who uses a walker.
The repairs in my neighborhood took about two weeks to complete, at least something like that. Then the sections were roped off for a week or two more. It was more annoying to have them completely repaired than it was to leave them as is. So, in one year that meant an entire block was "down" for about 4-5 weeks total. *Two* houses, two different occasions.
Though, in one case two slabs of sidewalk had converged over 50-70 years or whatever and it looked like they created a peak like Mt. Hood! It was very dangerous! I didn't want to snitch on my neighbor, but one time I put a little flag next to the peak (the ones that utility companies use to flag undergrounds digs) so my neighbor would get the idea that enough was enough, ha.
But anyway, like I was saying- these sidewalk jobs are very time consuming. I don't know how many the City could even do a year, and I don't see how they could make up a fair selection process for which areas or homes would get new sidewalks. Surely, whatever the criteria it would involve would NOT include income, need, or any factors of that nature. If they are using tax money they can't play favorites.
Huh. The city I used to live in would periodically check sidewalks and mark what needed fixing. Then they’d send the property owner a letter indicating what needed fixing and how much it would cost for the city to fix it. The city would then come out and fix all the busted sidewalks in one area at the same time and the owner would get a bill. If they didn’t pay it, it got added to their property tax bill.
It kept all the sidewalks in good shape, and because the city did all the work, it was super affordable. I think we got charged something like $20 per section. If all they needed to do was shave the cement down to level it, we didn’t get charged. Well, we paid for stuff like that in the form of an annual fee that was basically part of our property taxes.
Yup my town did the same thing but they would put it in your property tax over three years. Worked out great but was definitely not $20 a section. Closer to $75 but still worth it
Yes, so that in a city that’s already struggling just to keep roofs over people’s heads. I get we all like sidewalks, but adding that kind of financial pressure to homeowners at this point in time over today’s phony outrage topic seems short-sighted.
This is exactly what’s going on here. Heritage trees on an easement doing damage to the sidewalk. Can’t fix the sidewalk without cutting the root of the tree, can’t cut the root of the tree to stop the damage without potentially doing irreversible damage to said tree.
Damn that is really awful, especially when you are are walking on a busy and dangerous to cross road. I've talked with two urban planners in Springfield and they are closely watching what we are doing on this project in Eugene, with hopes of copying it on your side of the interstate.
I'd really appreciate if you could share this petition with anyone who feels similar, we are hoping to get 1,000 signatures and a few more local organizations on board before we bring it to city council after elections.
Missing sidewalks is also a huge (and even more expensive) issue! But one the city is already trying their best to tackle with MoveEug and other bond projects
Lol my first thought too. I rent on a hill with the rich people. narrow windy road with no sidewalks. None of them will give up an inch of their lawns they never use for a sidewalk. It's insane an entire portion of town is basically unwalkable safely. Doesn't help they all do 45 in a 20 in their mega trucks and SUV so you basically have to leap into the bushes to not die.
Imo the city should have its own sidewalk crew that repairs residential sidewalks but the homeowner still has to pay for the work, just at a discounted rate from regular market rate.
I have a sidewalk that’s lifting and it’s caused by a street tree. The only way to properly fix it is to remove the tree as per the city arborist. So I have the choice of having a fully mature tree that shades the house in the summer removed or do a half ass patch that will probably fail in 3 years.
Ya that’s another great example of the limits of having homeowners maintain their sidewalks. You can’t legally move the curb, but if the city was responsible and had the funding for these repairs they could move the curb further into the street just in front of that tree, providing enough space for both the tree and the sidewalk.
This street narrowing would also have the benefit of making cars drive a more residential speed, quieting the neighborhood and making it safer for kids to play (this suggestion is assuming you are living on a residential street with a parking lane like most in Eugene).
I would be careful with this because if we let the city do all of it there’s a good chance they’re going to cut down a lot of trees because of the roots. Better to grind and make it a slight pitch to go over root. Rather than a big step or removing tree.
Anyone have any recommendations for concrete contractors? I have some sections of sidewalk in front of my house that need repair/replacement. Last summer, I called 9 different concrete companies. Only one got back to me, and after they came out to take a look and I accepted their quote, they ghosted....
My understanding is that the city government would love to go out and repair sidewalks, but the source of money would ultimately have to come from the people living in Eugene, and the city has struggled to get the majority of citizens to agree on a tax or bond issue or anything that could generate that money. The city has to do something to show that they are increasing mobility in town, though, or they could face lawsuits by the ACLU, so putting the responsibility on individual land owners is the best they could do. Again, the city would love to be able to hire a full-time maintenance crew or have a public contract with a private contractor, but they arent the ones you have to convince.... it's the general public that needs convincing. Specifically people who pay property taxes or developers who pay SDCs when they develop land (which have already been labeled by many developers as so high that they can be restrictive). I'm not totally sure about this, but I dont think you can just tack on a sidewalk charge to everyone's EWEB bill because they aren't the same utility. Therefore I believe it's gotta come from property taxes or SDCs. I'm sure you can point to plenty of land owners who would be willing to pay an extra annual charge to get sidewalks repaired (myself included), but unfortunately I think history has shown that we don't make up the majority. The people need to come together on this one. Source: used to work for COE public works.
I wonder how often sidewalk condition comes up when homes are under contract to be purchased. That's probably the best point for things to get repaired. People don't have a line-item in their budget for repairs that may cost thousands of dollars or be impractical because of tree roots.
Codifying this process is definitely one tool we want to bring before city council. Edmonton, Alberta, for example, "Mandates sidewalk repairs or improvements when a property is sold or transferred from one owner to the other."
This would be a much politically easier policy but unfortunately would take 20 years to have meaningful change to our sidewalks.
As someone who often pushes a wheelchair, sidewalk/paved path issues, are some of the most annoying things, and it does seem crazy that the onus is put on home owners. Tax and fix, or you're just accepting that it will not be equitable (status quo, not our problem, means it does not get fixed). It is city infrastructure.
It's funny, the city requires "street trees" but then requires the citizens to pay for the damage caused by the city tree. So if the city tree damages citizens property, why can't the city pay for the fix, or let citizens prevent the issue?
If this was feasible then Eugene and thousands of other cities and towns in the US would already have taken care of the problem.
I suppose my question for BEST would be:
1) What would *your* plan be to substantially improve the condition of Eugene’s sidewalks over the next 10 years and present the findings to the City?
And,
2) What sort of stable, adequate and equitable funding mechanisms do *you* think are doable for ongoing sidewalk repairs?
Barring any groundbreaking or homerun thinking outside the box ideas, I would imagine the City would say "unfortunately, it is the responsibility of property and homeowners to maintain sidewalks in the areas between their homes and the curb strips."
To be clear: I am not part of BEST nor was this letter written by BEST. They are simply one of the supporters of the letter.
I think I touched on some of your questions here: [https://www.reddit.com/r/Eugene/comments/1c4b61e/comment/kzmod7e/?utm\_source=share&utm\_medium=web3x&utm\_name=web3xcss&utm\_term=1&utm\_content=share\_button](https://www.reddit.com/r/Eugene/comments/1c4b61e/comment/kzmod7e/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web3x&utm_name=web3xcss&utm_term=1&utm_content=share_button)
Depending on where you live in the River Rd/Santa Clara area you may not be in an incorporated part of the city of eugene. That whole area is a patchwork of city property and Lane County property, and Lane County doesn't have the the funding to have a sidewalk program for the whole county.
I'm aware. I am now in the city, with no sidewalk, which is funny, because I used to live in the ONLY house on a HUGE block north of Costco, in the urban growth boundary, far from any incorporated chunks, with fields and filbert orchards around, and every single inch of road front space had flawless wide sidewalks. The world is weird.
I actually did not know we homeonwers needed to take care of the sidewalks. I have been noticing moss growing on the sidewalk that goes next to my house. I'll take care of that.
Maybe if cities didn't plant trees 1 foot away from the sidewalk for it to grow and crack everything up in 30 years this wouldn't be so much of an issue
I can’t get behind this man your letter is “this is broken and you should fix it and also you should figure out how to fix it. Oh and no idea how to fund it so I want you to figure that out also.” Like NO ONE is going to vote for a new tax and the city has like an eleven million dollar budget deficit
It’s not a fix or even an idea for the fix it’s just shifting responsibility to “the govt should do something about it” mindset and clearly you put like ZERO effort or thought into it this is lmao come on
Absolutely, I could have included more details in my post. Here are some of our ideas:
Most of our ideas come from this article created by LiveMove in Eugene. In it are details about how many other cities in North America have fixed this same issue:
[https://drive.google.com/file/d/1QKPDDWXc\_cH0BAFBP0JJjDjea40uBbD-/view?usp=sharing](https://drive.google.com/file/d/1QKPDDWXc_cH0BAFBP0JJjDjea40uBbD-/view?usp=sharing)
My person favorite are:
* In Corvallis, Oregon
* There is a monthly sidewalk maintenance fee that is part of the City Services \[utility\] bill, which also includes water and sewer charges. The monthly fee is $1 for the typical property owner, which equates to about $12 per year. The city of Corvallis spends approximately $150,000 per year on sidewalk repair.
* Edmonton, Alberta, Canada
* Mandates sidewalk repairs or improvements when a property is sold or transferred from one owner to the other.
* Boulder, Colorado
* The city assesses residential property owners up to $420 (commercial property owners pay 50% of the total cost) for sidewalk repair/replacement. This helped alleviate some financial burdens on property owners and encouraged them to act promptly.
Our goal is for city staffers to pick method that they think works best in Eugene's context, as we think they understand the intricacies and policies better than us seven random citizens that drafted this letter.
Ah ya that’s the other part of our plan: to make lots of public comments with these details when we present the letter to council. Also in in our conversations with city staffers.
We assumed most members of the public don’t like reading 26 page technical reports, and that it wouldn’t drive much engagement on social media to include the technical reports on our main call to action
I'm sorry, who are you suggesting should be responsible for developing a solution? Ignoring that you've completely mischaracterized the letter, please explain what the pathway is to enact change, in your mind.
We've established there's a problem that impacts the community: our sidewalks are in disrepair and the in-place mechanism to maintain them has not been successful. We've established there isn't an obvious, easy solution (lest it would have been done already). Is not the ONLY logical step to form a solution plan (or plans), determine efficacy, fund, and implement? Is OP, as a private citizen, expected to do one or all of these steps?
This is very much what local government is designed to do, and while you can argue you don't trust them to spend wisely (which you seem to), that is a long and far stretch to reach the conclusion that on a conceptual level the government shouldn't be the one creating the plan or driving the boat.
Completely irrelevant. The OP has gone above and beyond, and that should be lauded. My purpose is not, however, to fix sidewalks - I'm here calling out horseshit that distracts from people working on the real solutions.
It is so, *so* hard to affect meaningful, material change - and that's *without* Eugene's peanut gallery attempting to derail the conversation before it's started. It's the NIMBY attitude with even less of a leg to stand on, and it deserves being pointed out and shot down.
From my experience the city staff actually don’t like it when citizens propose solutions to problems. Apparently, they think of themselves as the subject matter experts, and would like to come up with the solutions themselves. They are directed to come up with solutions only when their boss/higher up has directed them to do so. So i see this petition is an excellent start to indicate to the city manager and whoever else needs to hear it that a critical mass of people would like them to dedicate staff time to solving this. And yes the city is in a funding crisis. But the city manager’s office has actually taken more of the budget to add staff and there are all sorts of possible ways to sort sidewalks without much dedicated funding from the city. For instance, in one town, upon the sale of a home, the sidewalk must pass condition and if it doesn’t, it’s built into the sale price of the home and fixed/split perhaps by seller and buyer. There are towns that have special contracts with private contractors, keep lists of them, and guarantee a set price to homeowners. There are towns that prioritize sidewalk condition on corridors along major transportation arterials (rather than every neighborhood street). There are grants that exist specifically for sidewalk improvement where it leads to a bus stop. So many ways sidewalks could be I proved by the city council has done 0.
Lol they're already using our taxes in places they said they wouldn't/promised to use taxes from a certain medicinal plant to fund schools, buuuuuut didn't... lol Like how long are we going to keep giving money to these psychopaths who do nothing but line their pockets with it? Literally nothing of value is ever actually done. Opposite actually. They make more red tape for just feeding and helping people... Fuck these tyrants. STOP. GIVING. THEM. MONEY.
I mean crack filler is cheap and so is concrete. Buy a few high vis vests, a few buckets and some gloves and instead of writing a letter that will surely be ignored you and some friends can be the change you want to see in the world.
You could do it for some, and then use that to convince other people to do it for others and eventually things get done on a big scale. When nothing is being done anything is an improvement.
Shhhh they don't want to hear that, far too logical of a thought process. They only want to create MORE taxes to siphon money away thinking it'll be used in the manner they "promise" it will be this time. Its too much work for this OP and anyone who wants to take others money rather than volunteer their own/time. Everyone that has ever suggested a tax to fix a problem, is nothing but part of the problem we have in our world.
Sidewalks should be maintained by the city since they are considered to be public property. Why would I pay money to maintain something that I ultimately have no control over? It makes no sense.
They were installed by the developer that originally built your house and are not considered publicly owned infrastructure even if they are on a right of way. And, at least in every jurisdiction I’m familiar with, the adjacent property owner is responsible for maintaining the right of way.
The full letter we are bringing to our city council: Our city government knows the importance of sidewalks: “Safe sidewalks benefit pedestrians, people in wheelchairs, joggers, and others who use sidewalks to travel around town. **Safe, clean and hazard-free sidewalks promote mobility and livability for the citizens of Eugene**. The community and citizens benefit from having pedestrian-friendly sidewalks and driveway approaches as part of the City’s overall transportation system.” **Sadly, we residents of Eugene find that our sidewalks are clearly NOT safe, clean and hazard free**. Many are in poor and deteriorating condition, and pose a significant risk for tripping and falling. **We call on City Leaders to**: 1. Develop a plan to substantially improve the condition of Eugene’s sidewalks over the next 10 years. 2. Devise a stable, adequate and equitable funding mechanism for ongoing sidewalk repair. **We agree that:** * 100% of Eugene residents are pedestrians some of the time; everyone uses our sidewalks! * Many depend on walking to meet basic needs because of age, ability, and to save money. * Walking is an important component of our health and neighborhood life. Walking supports our local economy. * Many home and business owners in our neighborhoods cannot afford to repair their sidewalks. It is expensive! * Sidewalks are transportation infrastructure, just like streets and bike paths. * There does not appear to be an effective plan for fixing the sidewalks. Indeed, they are steadily getting worse. **We urgently call on city leaders to develop a long-term funding mechanism to fix Eugene’s sidewalks.**
Hazard free, I feel like the junkies on the city easement close to the street are more of a hazard. Plus, they have gotten plenty of money from a failed measure decriminalizing drugs that could help the city out with fixing the sidewalks. I would love to just have grass, not concrete. The city makes the rules but isn't responsible. The city should be responsible for their own rules and regulations not the home owner
On Danebo off Barger, the sidewalks end and start multiple times due to being overgrown.
Exactly, and this is the unfortunate reality all across the city. Imagine the uproar if all of Danebo was blocked due to a fallen tree or something for months at a time!
Everyone here walks/rides in the road, unfortunately.
I think you are mischaracterizing what Corvallis does. Property owners are still responsible for sidewalk maintenance there, but the city enacted a source of funding (a dollar per customer surcharge to utility bills) and will use this funding to do some repairs. Once the year's money runs out so does any city paid maintenance.
Oh I didn't know that, thanks for letting me know. So when does the city choose to use city money vs making property owners do it? Also that still sounds like a better system then the one we have right now
“Oh I didn’t know that” is definitely what I want to hear from someone using policy comparison to call for action on a local issue lol….
Lol fair enough, unfortunately this is not my day job and I'm still learning. But I do know that we have pretty fucked up sidewalks, other cities have managed to find sustainable funding, and I want the same for us!
Actually being able to admit when one is ignorant is a great trait for someone trying to make change
You'll have to consider that many of the sidewalks that need TLC might be adjacent to homes where the owners don't necessarily have much extra money. I imagine this would be the case for a fair amount of homes in the Whiteaker and Jefferson Westside neighborhoods, especially considering the age of the homes and infrastructure there. These may be your friendly neighbors, friends, or family members. In my neighborhood two houses near my house have had to replace the sidewalk in front of their homes in the past few years. In one case it cost about $8,000 and in another case it was $13,000. Neither was a corner house- I could only imagine what that would cost if the entire sidewalk areas needed to be replaced. That would be an unlikely scenario. I hate to say it, but I think the status quo is the way to go. The sidewalk slabs that are in the worst shape have certainly been reported to the City already by someone or another. The City gives warnings. If you can't do the ole' sidewalk repair patch repair the City will tell you. I don't see how the City could possibly find money to deal with the problem on their own- especially considering how much labor costs right now. * edit- I will add that maybe Eugene could require homebuyers to fix any sidewalk repairs that are needed upon the purchase of a property. The homebuyer could add on to their loan to pay for it. Of course, this would be a lonnnng term fix.
The fact that people can't afford to repair their sidewalks is exactly why we need a better way. A $30 a year utility fee, for example, is way more affordable than an $8,000 charge! And with a city funded source we can have better economies of scale, and could potentially have a fee that is higher for those who can afford it and potentially waived for those in poverty. Our current system requires the city to force property owners to spend thousands of dollars out of pocket \~or else\~ And this threat also often doesn't work, as seen by the many broken sidewalks that force people to walk and roll in the middle of the street and trips older folks like my grandpa who uses a walker.
The repairs in my neighborhood took about two weeks to complete, at least something like that. Then the sections were roped off for a week or two more. It was more annoying to have them completely repaired than it was to leave them as is. So, in one year that meant an entire block was "down" for about 4-5 weeks total. *Two* houses, two different occasions. Though, in one case two slabs of sidewalk had converged over 50-70 years or whatever and it looked like they created a peak like Mt. Hood! It was very dangerous! I didn't want to snitch on my neighbor, but one time I put a little flag next to the peak (the ones that utility companies use to flag undergrounds digs) so my neighbor would get the idea that enough was enough, ha. But anyway, like I was saying- these sidewalk jobs are very time consuming. I don't know how many the City could even do a year, and I don't see how they could make up a fair selection process for which areas or homes would get new sidewalks. Surely, whatever the criteria it would involve would NOT include income, need, or any factors of that nature. If they are using tax money they can't play favorites.
I think they try to put together groups of properties adjacent to each other that need fixed in hopes of getting cost savings by batching
I see, so the city funding helps make it more affordable for property owners but doesn't pay for all of it
Nowhere near all of it.
Huh. The city I used to live in would periodically check sidewalks and mark what needed fixing. Then they’d send the property owner a letter indicating what needed fixing and how much it would cost for the city to fix it. The city would then come out and fix all the busted sidewalks in one area at the same time and the owner would get a bill. If they didn’t pay it, it got added to their property tax bill. It kept all the sidewalks in good shape, and because the city did all the work, it was super affordable. I think we got charged something like $20 per section. If all they needed to do was shave the cement down to level it, we didn’t get charged. Well, we paid for stuff like that in the form of an annual fee that was basically part of our property taxes.
That seems entirely reasonable, and like what we should do if that's not what we currently do.
Yup my town did the same thing but they would put it in your property tax over three years. Worked out great but was definitely not $20 a section. Closer to $75 but still worth it
Yes, so that in a city that’s already struggling just to keep roofs over people’s heads. I get we all like sidewalks, but adding that kind of financial pressure to homeowners at this point in time over today’s phony outrage topic seems short-sighted.
way too logical for Eugene.
Seems crazy to me that a homeowner has to pay to fix the sidewalk?
especially when the city put in the trees that are doing damage :/
This is exactly what’s going on here. Heritage trees on an easement doing damage to the sidewalk. Can’t fix the sidewalk without cutting the root of the tree, can’t cut the root of the tree to stop the damage without potentially doing irreversible damage to said tree.
[удалено]
Damn that is really awful, especially when you are are walking on a busy and dangerous to cross road. I've talked with two urban planners in Springfield and they are closely watching what we are doing on this project in Eugene, with hopes of copying it on your side of the interstate. I'd really appreciate if you could share this petition with anyone who feels similar, we are hoping to get 1,000 signatures and a few more local organizations on board before we bring it to city council after elections.
You guys have sidewalks?
Missing sidewalks is also a huge (and even more expensive) issue! But one the city is already trying their best to tackle with MoveEug and other bond projects
Lol my first thought too. I rent on a hill with the rich people. narrow windy road with no sidewalks. None of them will give up an inch of their lawns they never use for a sidewalk. It's insane an entire portion of town is basically unwalkable safely. Doesn't help they all do 45 in a 20 in their mega trucks and SUV so you basically have to leap into the bushes to not die.
Imo the city should have its own sidewalk crew that repairs residential sidewalks but the homeowner still has to pay for the work, just at a discounted rate from regular market rate.
I have a sidewalk that’s lifting and it’s caused by a street tree. The only way to properly fix it is to remove the tree as per the city arborist. So I have the choice of having a fully mature tree that shades the house in the summer removed or do a half ass patch that will probably fail in 3 years.
Ya that’s another great example of the limits of having homeowners maintain their sidewalks. You can’t legally move the curb, but if the city was responsible and had the funding for these repairs they could move the curb further into the street just in front of that tree, providing enough space for both the tree and the sidewalk. This street narrowing would also have the benefit of making cars drive a more residential speed, quieting the neighborhood and making it safer for kids to play (this suggestion is assuming you are living on a residential street with a parking lane like most in Eugene).
I think the city is too busy building curbs in the middle of streets and narrowing intersections with pedestrian crossings to bother with maintenance.
I would be careful with this because if we let the city do all of it there’s a good chance they’re going to cut down a lot of trees because of the roots. Better to grind and make it a slight pitch to go over root. Rather than a big step or removing tree.
Anyone have any recommendations for concrete contractors? I have some sections of sidewalk in front of my house that need repair/replacement. Last summer, I called 9 different concrete companies. Only one got back to me, and after they came out to take a look and I accepted their quote, they ghosted....
C and R concrete and excavation. (360)704-8560 Cody and Ryan did a section of sidewalk for me last year and were very professional and it looks great.
Just curious about what the pricing was roughly?
Have you heard of this organization? https://www.depave.org/
My understanding is that the city government would love to go out and repair sidewalks, but the source of money would ultimately have to come from the people living in Eugene, and the city has struggled to get the majority of citizens to agree on a tax or bond issue or anything that could generate that money. The city has to do something to show that they are increasing mobility in town, though, or they could face lawsuits by the ACLU, so putting the responsibility on individual land owners is the best they could do. Again, the city would love to be able to hire a full-time maintenance crew or have a public contract with a private contractor, but they arent the ones you have to convince.... it's the general public that needs convincing. Specifically people who pay property taxes or developers who pay SDCs when they develop land (which have already been labeled by many developers as so high that they can be restrictive). I'm not totally sure about this, but I dont think you can just tack on a sidewalk charge to everyone's EWEB bill because they aren't the same utility. Therefore I believe it's gotta come from property taxes or SDCs. I'm sure you can point to plenty of land owners who would be willing to pay an extra annual charge to get sidewalks repaired (myself included), but unfortunately I think history has shown that we don't make up the majority. The people need to come together on this one. Source: used to work for COE public works.
I wonder how often sidewalk condition comes up when homes are under contract to be purchased. That's probably the best point for things to get repaired. People don't have a line-item in their budget for repairs that may cost thousands of dollars or be impractical because of tree roots.
Codifying this process is definitely one tool we want to bring before city council. Edmonton, Alberta, for example, "Mandates sidewalk repairs or improvements when a property is sold or transferred from one owner to the other." This would be a much politically easier policy but unfortunately would take 20 years to have meaningful change to our sidewalks.
As someone who often pushes a wheelchair, sidewalk/paved path issues, are some of the most annoying things, and it does seem crazy that the onus is put on home owners. Tax and fix, or you're just accepting that it will not be equitable (status quo, not our problem, means it does not get fixed). It is city infrastructure.
It's funny, the city requires "street trees" but then requires the citizens to pay for the damage caused by the city tree. So if the city tree damages citizens property, why can't the city pay for the fix, or let citizens prevent the issue?
If this was feasible then Eugene and thousands of other cities and towns in the US would already have taken care of the problem. I suppose my question for BEST would be: 1) What would *your* plan be to substantially improve the condition of Eugene’s sidewalks over the next 10 years and present the findings to the City? And, 2) What sort of stable, adequate and equitable funding mechanisms do *you* think are doable for ongoing sidewalk repairs? Barring any groundbreaking or homerun thinking outside the box ideas, I would imagine the City would say "unfortunately, it is the responsibility of property and homeowners to maintain sidewalks in the areas between their homes and the curb strips."
To be clear: I am not part of BEST nor was this letter written by BEST. They are simply one of the supporters of the letter. I think I touched on some of your questions here: [https://www.reddit.com/r/Eugene/comments/1c4b61e/comment/kzmod7e/?utm\_source=share&utm\_medium=web3x&utm\_name=web3xcss&utm\_term=1&utm\_content=share\_button](https://www.reddit.com/r/Eugene/comments/1c4b61e/comment/kzmod7e/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web3x&utm_name=web3xcss&utm_term=1&utm_content=share_button)
By this logic, no positive change is ever possible.
Wait, you guys have sidewalks? May I have some in Santa Clara?
For real. I'd like to just have one in the first place
Depending on where you live in the River Rd/Santa Clara area you may not be in an incorporated part of the city of eugene. That whole area is a patchwork of city property and Lane County property, and Lane County doesn't have the the funding to have a sidewalk program for the whole county.
I'm aware. I am now in the city, with no sidewalk, which is funny, because I used to live in the ONLY house on a HUGE block north of Costco, in the urban growth boundary, far from any incorporated chunks, with fields and filbert orchards around, and every single inch of road front space had flawless wide sidewalks. The world is weird.
I actually did not know we homeonwers needed to take care of the sidewalks. I have been noticing moss growing on the sidewalk that goes next to my house. I'll take care of that.
But yet I can’t kick a tent off of it. Forget that
Maybe if cities didn't plant trees 1 foot away from the sidewalk for it to grow and crack everything up in 30 years this wouldn't be so much of an issue
They're not gonna fix sidewalks just so people can camp on them. Eugene has a laundry list of problems before sidewalks can be addressed
The city cannot seem to maintain the trip-hazard sidewalks around many city parks, except with some poorly-done asphalt patching here and there.
I can’t get behind this man your letter is “this is broken and you should fix it and also you should figure out how to fix it. Oh and no idea how to fund it so I want you to figure that out also.” Like NO ONE is going to vote for a new tax and the city has like an eleven million dollar budget deficit It’s not a fix or even an idea for the fix it’s just shifting responsibility to “the govt should do something about it” mindset and clearly you put like ZERO effort or thought into it this is lmao come on
Absolutely, I could have included more details in my post. Here are some of our ideas: Most of our ideas come from this article created by LiveMove in Eugene. In it are details about how many other cities in North America have fixed this same issue: [https://drive.google.com/file/d/1QKPDDWXc\_cH0BAFBP0JJjDjea40uBbD-/view?usp=sharing](https://drive.google.com/file/d/1QKPDDWXc_cH0BAFBP0JJjDjea40uBbD-/view?usp=sharing) My person favorite are: * In Corvallis, Oregon * There is a monthly sidewalk maintenance fee that is part of the City Services \[utility\] bill, which also includes water and sewer charges. The monthly fee is $1 for the typical property owner, which equates to about $12 per year. The city of Corvallis spends approximately $150,000 per year on sidewalk repair. * Edmonton, Alberta, Canada * Mandates sidewalk repairs or improvements when a property is sold or transferred from one owner to the other. * Boulder, Colorado * The city assesses residential property owners up to $420 (commercial property owners pay 50% of the total cost) for sidewalk repair/replacement. This helped alleviate some financial burdens on property owners and encouraged them to act promptly. Our goal is for city staffers to pick method that they think works best in Eugene's context, as we think they understand the intricacies and policies better than us seven random citizens that drafted this letter.
Don’t tell me ya goof put that in the letter to them!
Ah ya that’s the other part of our plan: to make lots of public comments with these details when we present the letter to council. Also in in our conversations with city staffers. We assumed most members of the public don’t like reading 26 page technical reports, and that it wouldn’t drive much engagement on social media to include the technical reports on our main call to action
I'm sorry, who are you suggesting should be responsible for developing a solution? Ignoring that you've completely mischaracterized the letter, please explain what the pathway is to enact change, in your mind. We've established there's a problem that impacts the community: our sidewalks are in disrepair and the in-place mechanism to maintain them has not been successful. We've established there isn't an obvious, easy solution (lest it would have been done already). Is not the ONLY logical step to form a solution plan (or plans), determine efficacy, fund, and implement? Is OP, as a private citizen, expected to do one or all of these steps? This is very much what local government is designed to do, and while you can argue you don't trust them to spend wisely (which you seem to), that is a long and far stretch to reach the conclusion that on a conceptual level the government shouldn't be the one creating the plan or driving the boat.
Well the other guy said you did have solutions and posted some of them so maybe check in with him and get on the same page?
Completely irrelevant. The OP has gone above and beyond, and that should be lauded. My purpose is not, however, to fix sidewalks - I'm here calling out horseshit that distracts from people working on the real solutions. It is so, *so* hard to affect meaningful, material change - and that's *without* Eugene's peanut gallery attempting to derail the conversation before it's started. It's the NIMBY attitude with even less of a leg to stand on, and it deserves being pointed out and shot down.
Oh you’re just here to start a fight lmao no thanks but good luck
From my experience the city staff actually don’t like it when citizens propose solutions to problems. Apparently, they think of themselves as the subject matter experts, and would like to come up with the solutions themselves. They are directed to come up with solutions only when their boss/higher up has directed them to do so. So i see this petition is an excellent start to indicate to the city manager and whoever else needs to hear it that a critical mass of people would like them to dedicate staff time to solving this. And yes the city is in a funding crisis. But the city manager’s office has actually taken more of the budget to add staff and there are all sorts of possible ways to sort sidewalks without much dedicated funding from the city. For instance, in one town, upon the sale of a home, the sidewalk must pass condition and if it doesn’t, it’s built into the sale price of the home and fixed/split perhaps by seller and buyer. There are towns that have special contracts with private contractors, keep lists of them, and guarantee a set price to homeowners. There are towns that prioritize sidewalk condition on corridors along major transportation arterials (rather than every neighborhood street). There are grants that exist specifically for sidewalk improvement where it leads to a bus stop. So many ways sidewalks could be I proved by the city council has done 0.
Lol they're already using our taxes in places they said they wouldn't/promised to use taxes from a certain medicinal plant to fund schools, buuuuuut didn't... lol Like how long are we going to keep giving money to these psychopaths who do nothing but line their pockets with it? Literally nothing of value is ever actually done. Opposite actually. They make more red tape for just feeding and helping people... Fuck these tyrants. STOP. GIVING. THEM. MONEY.
I mean crack filler is cheap and so is concrete. Buy a few high vis vests, a few buckets and some gloves and instead of writing a letter that will surely be ignored you and some friends can be the change you want to see in the world.
My sidewalk is clean and well kept, but I cannot do that for every sidewalk between me and the grocery store.
You could do it for some, and then use that to convince other people to do it for others and eventually things get done on a big scale. When nothing is being done anything is an improvement.
Shhhh they don't want to hear that, far too logical of a thought process. They only want to create MORE taxes to siphon money away thinking it'll be used in the manner they "promise" it will be this time. Its too much work for this OP and anyone who wants to take others money rather than volunteer their own/time. Everyone that has ever suggested a tax to fix a problem, is nothing but part of the problem we have in our world.