Night Beat: Ain't No Mountain High Enough... for Madison Pedestrians

I'm sure glad the City of Madison is requiring everyone to install sidewalks...



DSU's back in session—happy hiking, fellow students!

Tree-Sidewalk Update: Trees Pretty Close... Just Like City and Contractors?

On my way to class, I swung by 721 N. Catherine, site of six mighty firs threatened by the city's proposed round of sidewalk installation for the coming year. I was curious: just how close are the trees to the proposed walkway?

Darn close.

View east, toward intersection of 7th St. and Catherine Ave., Madison, SD (Click photo to enlarge)

I can see the Gwynnes' problem: we'd need to strip a lot of branches just to make room for a paving stone walkway, like what Ms. Schave recommends, right next to the curb.

Big fir trees on north side of 721 N. Catherine, Madison, SD (Click photo to enlarge)

The trees do form a good windbreak, protecting the house from the stiff north winds on the western edge of Madison. Given the electric rate increases in town, I'd want to keep any energy-saving advantage I had.

In other news from the street, I checked out Mr. Gilbert's complaint that a sidewalk on his West Avenue property (which is east of Catherine Ave.) "will lead to a dead end as 7th Street does not continue through." It's not quite a "dead end": to the east, 7th Steeet makes a T with Chicago Ave., which heads straight north to the elementary school.

But here's where I sympathize completely with Mr. Gilbert: He notes that the city ordinance requires "All work to be constructed by licensed contractors in accordance with standard City of Madison specifications..." (clause 8 in each of the City's sidewalk ordinances).

Last year, my brother and his hired man installed a sidewalk all by themselves. Is there any reason the city should prohibit a couple enterprising fellas with a skid steer and some forms from doing their own work? I can understand the requirement to build sidewalks for public safety, but the requirement to hire an expensive contractor when a homeowner is perfectly capable of doing the work himself sounds like more favoritism for the city's chosen business buddies.

Also on tonight's City Commission agenda, on the very last page of the packet: Craig Williams' application for a Sidewalk Builder's license. Fee $20; required bond, $500. Brad, consider submitting your application!

Save the Trees! Madison Sidewalk Rule Threatens Catherine Ave. Firs

Tucked away in tonight's Madison City Commission agenda packet (page 42 of the PDF), after all the alcohol license requests, a letter from Arthur and June Gwynne of 721 North Catherine Avenue, seeking relief from deforestation:

We recently received notification of Resolution of Necessity #2730. Our main concern is the welfare and preservation of 6 magnificent, 30 ft. plus, fir trees that would perish in accordance with requirements of SDCL 9-46-3.

We have spent over $200.00 per year to have these trees treated to resist damaging diseases and pestilence. Therefore, we are proposing a concession that would satisfy the "Resolution of necessity", and save 4 of the 6 trees in question.

We would appreciate an opportunity to have a City Representative visit us in order for us to present our "Tree Saving Plan." [Arthur and June Gwynne, letter to Madison Sidewalk Committee, 2009.12.02]

The Gwynnes sound pretty level-headed in this letter. They're even willing to compromise, offering a plan that would still sacrifice two trees. But heck, I'd rather keep all six. Catherine Ave. is a nice quiet street. If it keeps that shade and windbreak there, let's run that sidewalk right along the curb, or just skip it all together.

The Gwynnes aren't the only unhappy residents facing sidewalk expense. See complaining missives from Mr. Brad Gilbert of 722 N. West Ave., on page 46 of the agenda packet, as well as K. Hein, Marlene Oldre (who would lose a crab tree and a safety rail), Ed Swanson (who thinks the city should put a sidewalk along the highway east from the Dairy Queen first), Roger Southmayd, Tom Halverson (who expresses the grouchiness of a lot of Madisonites when he says, "I assume this 'discussion & review' process is a mere formality and the decision has already been made"), and Omar El-Gayar.

Notes from Tonight's City Commission Agenda: LAIC Handout, Vote Question, Sidewalks, Beavers, and Bugs!

I'm perusing the Madison City Commission agenda packet for tonight's meeting, at which Dwaine Chapel will ask the city for yet another zero-accountability handout for the Lake Area Improvement Corporation. The agenda packet doesn't even include a letter from the LAIC indicating how much of our tax dollars they might ask for, or for what purposes. Wouldn't want to much information getting out to the public, would we, LAIC?

I notice a slight discrepancy in the minutes from last week's meeting: the minutes report (on page 16 of the 36-page agenda packet) that the vote to hand out $125K to cover James River Equipment's Highway 34 turning lane was unanimous. However, the Madison Daily Leader reported the vote was 4–1, with Nick Abraham dissenting (perhaps on faulty geographic reasoning, but so be it).

So which is it? Nick, did you vote no or not?

Also of interest are the packet of letters from residents requesting extensions on their sidewalk installation deadlines. Most refer to complications with lining up a contractor. One handwritten note, however, makes a rather more pointed argument. I transcribe verbatim from page 32 of the agena packet:

To whoever it may concern:

Could we please get an extension on our sidewalk? I am employed by Gehl Co.—only working 6 days per month. Our funds can't handle it now. Such a project right now with the economy and Gehl employees.

David Anderson

Perhaps the city will be as generous with Mr. Anderson as they are with the LAIC and big business.

Randy Schaefer is also among the folks requesting a little more time to install that darn sidewalk. He appears indirectly a second time in the minutes: his Silver Creek Circle development is among five miscreant properties listed in the mayor's report (page 36) as having tall grass and weeds. Great Scotts! Cut the guy a break—he's boning up on all those messy Regents issues.

Someone also complained to the mayor about the need for some more mowing along the bike trail. Good work, kids! A while back, I did see what appeared to be a private citizen taking matters into his own hands and mowing along the trail towards its eatern terminus. He even had the courtesy to go back over the trail with his rider mower and blow the grass off the pavement. Nice!

Also in the mayor's report: complaints about a horse in the yard on Northwest 6th Street, beaver activity on Silver Creek, and (today's piéce de resistance) bug bites at a motel. It must be fun to be mayor.

Curb-Gutter Assessments Unconstitutional; Sidewalks Next?

Dakota War College provides plentiful ponder fodder this morning. Mr. Powers points toward a KCCR story (which dang it, those radio guys haven't learned to permalink yet! Memo to management: Fix it! and see also the CapJournal coverage) which says that Circuit Judge Kathleen Trandahl ruled last week that the city of Pierre violated the U.S. and state constitutions by imposing special assessments for curb and gutter work. The court found that "Evidence showed conclusively that replacing curb and gutter provided no physical, material or quantifiable special benefits to the property but did provide significant benefits to the city and community as a whole." The special assessments were therefore a taking of private property without just compensation or due process.

Hear hear for the Fifth Amendment! West River landowners, take note: when TransCanada comes knocking on your door with backhoes and condemnation papers, file your suit in Judge Trandahl's court if you can.

So I wonder: are sidewalks next? I've previously suggested that perhaps sidewalks should be built with municipal funds rather than saddling homeowners with the entire cost. We need sidewalks just like we need curb and gutter, but homeowners give up valuable turf for a public good. And unlike with curb and gutter, homeowners (at least here in Madison) are expected to handle hiring a contractor or installing the sidewalk themselves.

Judge Trandahl's ruling, if it withstands possible appeal, could result in thousands of dollars of refunds for 55–60 Pierre residents who paid the special assessment. Hmmm... might the court's reasoning here form the basis for Madison residents to sue the city for a refund on the work they've done to install sidewalks at the city's behest?

Local Stimulus: Citywide TIF for Sidewalks!

Your tax dollars at work: the first completed garage in Madison's TIF district at South Grant Avenue and soon-to-be-named Silver Street. Includes attached house out back.

Stick with me on this one; it all leads to a darn good idea!

An eager reader forwards an invitation from the Madison Chamber of Commerce to an open house Thursday (tomorrow!) from 4 to 6:30 p.m. at the first completed home in Madison's tax increment finance (TIF) district. I would imagine developer Randy Schaefer will be there, along with the Lake Area Improvement Corporation officials who have been instrumental in moving the TIF project forward.

I don't know how open the open house is*, but I would think that Schaefer and the LAIC would be happy to have you all drop by, whether you are Chamber members or not, so they could thank you personally for making this successful project possible. After all, without Madison's willingness as a community to take on the debt burden to cover the infrastructure costs for this development, and without your collective willingness to forego the increased tax revenues from the development to pay off that debt rather than to fund other public projects, the Silver Creek Circle development would still be just a pile of dirt. Instead we have two nice garages (with houses out back) and more surely to come.

So with our first TIF district already showing signs of paying off, I got to wondering if another TIF might be good for the city. Should we wangle another TIF to reduce costs for another developer and boost more housing? Or is there some other critical public need that a TIF might serve?

SE 4^th Street, south side: no continuous sidewalk!

And then it hit me: sidewalks. The TIF district doesn't have them yet (got to get all the other work done first). But neither does the south side of Southeast 4^th Street, the main thoroughfare Silver Creek Circle residents will proudly stroll every day on their way to pick up a pizza at Casey's. Neither do a number of streets all over Madison.

The city commission has a timetable for getting sidewalks implemented one street and neighborhood at a time. They did a little along Division Avenue last year; I think some streets between campus and the high school are due this year.

But why dink around? Why not get every street in Madison sidewalked up right now, this summer, right when there are a lot of unemployed folks who could use some work?

Declare the whole darn town a Sidewalk Tax Increment Finance district—a STIF!

No, really, I'm serious. Have the city float the loan for building every inch of sidewalk that remains to be built in Madison. The city makes the funds available to homeowners, with STIF money covering the full cost if you hire locally or do it yourself and half the cost if you hire out-of-towners (those figures are negotiable). The construction guys in town go ape hiring workers to dig and pour and trowel all summer long. Unemployment drops to 1%, at least for a few months. We pay off the STIF loan with the increased property tax revenue that will come from those newly sidewalked and thus more valuable properties all over town.

Plus, everyone in Madison walks more, lives longer... and works up a bigger appetite for DQ Blizzards!

STIF Districts: local economic stimulus, long-term infrastructure, lower costs for homeowners... this is the best dang plan I've come up with this year! Someone call Commissioner-Elect Abraham! He'll eat this up!

------------
Update 18:50 CDT: Sure enough, it's open to the public, or so I'd assume from Elisa Sand's article in tonight's MDL. 4:00–6:30 p.m., Thursday, April 23, 530 "Silver Creek Circle"—drop in, shake hands, and tell Jason and Corey good work on the building!

Madison Sidewalk Ramps: Long Way to Go for ADA

The Madison City Commission comes back from its hiatus (no meeting last week due to lack of agenda items—always nice when there aren't enough problems to warrant governing) to discuss, among other things, sidewalks. Tonight's agenda packet includes (pp. 11–13) City Engineer Chad Comes's evaluation of our compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act. Specifically, the city will look at our progress in getting our sidewalks up to ADA snuff.

We've been doing all right, installing about 36 new sidewalk ramps a year. Comes says the city has some money available outside the planned sidewalk budget to respond to special requests for ramps (so if you're on pedestrian wheels and there's a curb you've been bumping over, give Chad a call!).

But even if we put in ramps at better than the expected 36 per year, we have a ways to go in rampifying our sidewalks. (Statistic of the day!): Comes reports that Madison currently has 1061 locations where sidewalk meets road. 74 for them fulfill ADA standards. 620 of those intersections have ramps but fail to meet all the standards. 367 are just plain not accessible.

Now 131 of those sidewalk-road intersections are along state highway, where the city says the state should bear the cost of the any ramp installation or upgrade. (Maybe the stimulus striping crew can bring jackhammers and bust out the curbs on their way by.) But we're also requiring homeowners to put in more sidewalks around town, which will require more ramps. So at current rates, it could take 10 years just to upgrade the non-accessible intersections. Lots of work to do!