Memorandum

City of Lawrence

Engineering

TO:	Chuck Soules
FROM:	Terese Gorman
CC:	Tammy Bennett, David Woosley
Date:	September 18, 2006
RE:	Sidewalk Inventory

The sidewalk inventory was completed this summer by two interns, Libby Ross and Mikael Elliott.  Additional help was provided by Walt Ward and the inspectors as their workload permitted.  The information collected was entered into a database created by Micah Seybold, the Public Works GIS Analyst.  The database is tied to the GIS System so maps may be produced reflecting information contained in the database.

Information was collected on sidewalks by each side of the block between the intersecting streets.  In each block the documentation includes whether the sidewalk is present and continuous from end to end on each side of the block, the construction material (concrete, brick, asphalt), width of sidewalk, and whether sidewalk ramps (or stairs) are in place at each end of the block.  Also, the condition of the sidewalk was evaluated as good, fair, poor, or critical.  The determination of these ratings are as follows:

Good	minimum cracking, no wide gaps in surface, no deflections > 1/2”
Fair	some cracking present, deflections of 1/2” or less, minimal gaps in surface < 1/2” wide, minimal weed growth
Poor	sidewalk cracking may be extensive, deflections between 1/2” and 2”; surface gaps present at 1/2”; may be some overgrowth of grass and weeds in surface of walk (up to 25% of area)
Critical	deflections greater than 2”, overgrowth of grass and weeds such > 25% of surface could not be evaluated

Many sidewalks in a single block are not a single rating; they consist of portions that are different ratings.  However, it was decided that for the purposes of this inventory that the rating that covers the majority of the block would be used with an added note about another rating in the comments.  So, for example, we have the ability to search the data base for blocks of sidewalks that have an overall rating of good but an area of critical sidewalk was identified.  And, for example, we have the ability to search the database to determine where there is missing sidewalk in otherwise continuous blocks of sidewalk.

Some of the data collected during the inventory is summarized below:

Total Miles of Existing Sidewalk

Arterials	76.1
Collectors	67.5
Residential	178.3
	321.9	miles

Total Miles of Missing Sidewalk

Arterials	23.3
Collectors	18.5
Residential	65.5	(assumed sidewalks only on one side of the street)
	107.1	miles

Arterial Streets
Good	42.2
Fair	22.6
Poor	9.9
Critical	1.4
	76.1	miles

Condition of Sidewalks

Residential Streets
Good	88.6
Fair	56.8
Poor	25.7
Critical	7.2
	178.3	miles

Collector Streets
Good	36.5
Fair	22.8
Poor	6.6
Critical	1.6
	67.5	miles

The estimated construction cost to construct new sidewalks along arterial and collector streets where sidewalk is missing among otherwise existing sidewalk is $11,035,200.  The estimated construction cost to remove and replace existing sidewalk that is in poor or critical condition along arterial and collector streets is $5,148,000.

The plan below was submitted to the City Commission during the 2007 budget process.  The second item on this plan has been completed on schedule.

Plan for sidewalk programming and pedestrian transportation
Winter 2006	Study Session with City Commission regarding sidewalk programming and pedestrian transportation issues.
Summer 2006	Develop sidewalk inventory protocols and data collection systems. Use engineering interns for data collection.
Fall 2006	Analyze options and alternative programs to provide assistance to low-income property owners required to make repairs to sidewalks on their properties.  Develop plan and alternatives to present to the City Commission.  Review options and alternatives with the Pedestrian Advisory Sub-Committee of the Traffic Safety Committee.
Winter 2007	Study session with City Commission regarding options and alternatives for assisting low-income property owners with sidewalk repairs.  Gain direction from the City Commission for inclusion of request in the budget process.
Spring 2007	Budget request submittal for appropriate programming alternatives.
Fall 2007	Development of education and outreach materials implementing programming, as appropriate and approved by the city governing body.
Winter 2008	Implementation of sidewalk assistance program (if authorized).

In 2007 there has been $250,000 budgeted for sidewalks and traffic calming projects.  In the near future, David Woosley and I will meet with the Pedestrian Advisory Sub-Committee of the Traffic Safety Commission to receive input on how to best spend the $125,000 that is available for 2007, and to receive their input on developing a plan to prioritize the construction of sidewalk where there are missing segments or the repair of existing sidewalks.

Direction will be needed from the City Commission regarding the current practice of sidewalk repair.  Currently we follow Kansas Statutes Annotated Chapter 12, Article 18 which states the property owner is responsible for maintaining the sidewalk adjacent to their property.  So, for example, should letters be sent to the property owners where the sidewalk has an overall rating of good but a critical section of sidewalk has been identified on this property, asking the property owner to repair their sidewalk within 90 days.  There are approximately 50 locations scattered throughout the City that meet this condition.  Does the City wish to continue the practice of having the property owner responsible for repairs?  If so, options will be developed regarding where repairs should be made and whether funding from the City could be provided.