Lansing Sidewalks August 2012

August 2012
Jessica Yorko, Chair
Public Services Committee
Lansing City Council

1

Presentation and Ballot Language
available online at
www.lansingsfourthward.com

“News and Events”

Or contact our -office at
517-483-4177
2

Why Care About Sidewalks

3

Sidewalks Increase Property Values
“Walkability [including
sidewalks] adds anywhere
from $4,000 to $34,000 to
home values, according to
the [CEOs for Cities 2009]
study.” www.houselogic.com/home-advice/green-
living/does-walkability-raise-property-values

www.ceosforcities.org/pagefiles/WalkingTheWalk_CEOsforCities.pdf

4

Many People Do Not Drive

This includes:
• Many of the 21% of Americans who are over 65
• All children under 16
• Many low income Americans who cannot afford
automobiles More than 50% of non-drivers
stay at home on a given day
because they lack
transportation options.
Sources:
Surface Transportation Policy Project. “Americans’ Attitudes Toward Walking and Creating Better Walking Communities.” 2003.
American Public Transportation Association. 2009 Public Transportation Fact Book.
2008 National Household Travel Survey. Non-drivers represent 29.8% of Americans. Of those over 65, non-drivers represent 20.79%.
Steven Raphael and Alan Berube. “Socioeconomic Differences in Household Automobile Ownership Rates: Implications for Evacuation Policy,” paper prepared 5
for the Berkeley Symposium on “Real Estate, Catastrophic Risk, and Public Policy,” March 23, 2006, http://urbanpolicy.berkeley.edu/pdf/raphael.pdf

More Americans will be Non-
Drivers by 2030
Aging Population:

50% of Americans
will be over 55 in
2030.
Photo: Michael Ronkin, ODOT

6
August 2012 Presentation from Jessica Yorko, Chair, Public Services Committee, Lansing City Council

Americans Want to Walk and Bike
More

55% of Americans would prefer to
drive less and walk more. STPP Poll
photos: Dan Burden, pedbikeimages.org
8

Sidewalks Encourage Walking

Residents are 65% more
likely to walk in a
neighborhood with
sidewalks.

STPP Poll
9

Top Pedestrian Complaints Are
Incomplete Streets
Percentage of Pedestrians Experiencing Problematic Streets

30
25
20
Nondisabled
15
Disabled
10
5
0
Too Few Insensitive Poor Surface
Sidewalks Drivers
2002 National Transportation
Availability & Use Survey
10

Lansing Has Many Non-Drivers
Lansing:
• 11,132 seniors over age 65
• 9,594 people with two or more disabilities
• 20,657 children between age 5 and 16
(Nearly 40% of our total population)

Ingham County:
• 8,713 Ingham County households do not
have a vehicle
Source: 2000 Census
11

Safety
Of the 13 pedestrians and bicyclists killed by cars in Lansing
between 2001 and 2005, most were children and seniors.

12

•MLK
•Cedar
•Penn
•Kalamazoo
•Malcom X/St
Joe
•Michigan
•Saginaw
•Oakland
•Willow
•Mt. Hope
•Jolly
•Miller
13

Cost-Savings for Individuals and
Government
Non-motorized travel options allow people to
save money on gas by making fewer car
trips. Building walk and bike friendly
features leads to more walking and
bicycling.

Creating non-motorized travel options helps
manage traffic demand, saves money on
road and parking facilities, reduces
congestion.

Sources: Igor Vojnovic’s study reported in Engaged Scholar Magazine, 2007 backs up a 2005 study by John Pucher and Ralph Buehler, reported in
14
Transport Policy 13 (2006).. American Journal of Health Promotion, 2003

Health
20% of Ingham County adults are obese and 1 in
3 is overweight.

The leading cause of death in Michigan is heart
disease. 1/3 of all deaths in the United States
attributable to coronary heart disease could
have been prevented if all persons were
highly active. Research continues to show a
strong relationship between walkability and
bikeability and residents’ overall physical
health.
Sources. Michigan Department of Community Health-MDCH, 2000. Centers for Disease Control, 2007. n 2004, Robert Wood Johnson Foundation
reported that in Marin, CA, 64% more kids were walking to school within two years of a Safe Routes to School effort that included infrastructure changes
and encouragement. In 2007, a RWJF study showed that people living in neighborhoods with a mix of shops and businesses within easy walking
distance have a 35% lower risk of obesity.Two studies by Lawrence Frank, published in 2006 in the Winter 2005/2006 Journal of the American Planning
Association show the relationship between walkability, physical activity, and physical health (taking into account other variables such as
age, income, education, and ethnicity), summarized online at www.planning.org/newsreleases/2006/ftp020706.htm. Capital Area Behavior Risk Factor 15
Survey.

Obesity and Active Transportation
Obesity is lower in places where people use bicycles, public
transportation, and their feet.
Percent of Obesity

Percent Walk, Bike,Transit
30 60
25 50
20 40
15 30
10 20
5 10
0 0

Obesity Walk, Bike, Transit

16
Pucher, “Walking and Cycling: Path to Improved Public Health,” Fit City Conference, NYC, June 2009

Diabetes and Active Transportation

States with the highest
levels of biking and
walking have, on
average, the lowest rates
of obesity, diabetes, and
high blood pressure.

Source:Bicycling and Walking in
the United States: 2010
Benchmarking Report, Alliance for
Biking and Walking
17

Financial Benefits for Business
Businesses that provide opportunities for employees to
walk and bicycle during the workday report a 28%
reduction in sick-leave absenteeism, 26% reduction in
use of health care benefits, and 30% reduction in
worker’s compensation claims and disability
management.

If just 1 in 20 sedentary Michigan adults became physically
active, Michigan employers would save $575 million per
year in healthcare costs and insurance premiums.

Walkability features in downtown Lodi, CA have led to a
30% overall increase in sales for downtown businesses, a
drop in the vacancy rate from 18% to 6%, and the
addition of 60 new businesses.
Sources: Quantifying the benefits of non-motorized travel for achieving TDM Goals by Todd Litman, published in Transportation Research
Record, No. 1441 (“Nonmotorized Transportation Around the World”), 1994, pp. 134-140 and online at www.vtpi.org/nmt-tdm.pdf.
Also, Economic Value of Walkability by Todd Litman, published in Transportation Research Record 1828, Transportation Research Board
(www.trb.org), 2003, pp. 3-11, and available online at www.vtpi.org/walkability.pdf. The Economic Benefits of Walkable Communities, by the18
Local Government Commission. Online at www.lgc.org/freepub/PDF/Land_Use/focus/walk_to_money.pdf

Environment and Climate Change
In Michigan, vehicles create 30% of
Michigan’s ozone-forming pollutants.
The more walkable a community, the
lower the vehicle emissions.

Between 1960 and 2001, Michigan’s CO2
emissions from fossil fuels increased
by 46%— primarily as a result of oil
combustion for transportation.

Sources. United States Environmental Protection Agency. Asthma Initiative of Michigan, 2007. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate
Change, www.ipcc.ch. U.S. Public Interest Research Group Education Fund. 2006. The Carbon Boom: National and State Trends in
Carbon Dioxide Emissions since 1960. Washington, DC.

19

Quality of Life
The May/June 2012 edition of the Michigan
Municipal League magazine cover article is
about Place Making: “Research shows that
placemaking matters more than ever.” MML
lists 8 placemaking assets, the first one is
Physical Design and Walkability.

79% of Americans rate “sidewalks and places to
take walks” as a top consideration in
choosing where to live. Recent college
graduates from Michigan schools say that
safe streets and neighborhoods, walk-able
streets, and affordable living are their top
factors in choosing where to live.
Complete Streets: Improve Mobility for Older Americans, 2007., American’s Current Attitudes toward Walking and Creating More
Walkable Communities., The Surface Transportation Policy Project www.transact.org/library/reports_pdfs/pedpoll.pdf Michigan
Economic Development Corporation, 2004 “Cool Cities” Survey.

20

Sidewalks in Lansing
540-590 miles of sidewalk

Some are great! Some are missing. Some are broken.

Photos from http://lmb.org/Lansing/Sidewalks.html
21

What Residents Said About
Sidewalks During 2009
Non-Motorized Planning Sessions

22

Waverly Road
Most comments were about Waverly Road:
• Glasgow to Old Lansing: bridge over river is too tight and sidewalk is
closed; needs sidewalks north to Grand River Park; no sidewalk or bike
lane at bridge on Waverly at the River.

• Jolly to Old Lansing: need bike lane & sidewalk

• Miller to Grand River: needs sidewalks, bike trails

• Jolly to Saginaw: need regional cooperation on sidewalk maintenance and
keeping bridge open in winter (3 comments)

23

Waverly and Cooley

24

East and Northeast
• Michigan: Capitol to Clippert: Michigan Ave at
sidewalks need improvement, floods in US 127
winter and spring. Has sidewalks but
they’re in bad shape.
• Michigan: sidewalks between Foster
and Frandor are unlevel, broken, dirty
• Marshall and Saginaw: sidewalk ends
at this point
• Clippert and Kalamazoo: bad
sidewalks, narrow
• Saginaw and Grand River: no sidewalks
on Northside
• Wood: needs sidewalks in Lansing
section (3 comments)
25

Kalamazoo

26

Wood Street

27

Kalamazoo and Hosmer

28

Kalamazoo & Jones

29

Homer and Sellers

30

Northeast and Northwest

• Old Town/ Pine and Willow: sidewalks are disconnected. Improve
sidewalks and links to Old Town, connect sidewalks around the river.

• Saginaw: Cedar to Penn and Stanley to Waverly: no sidewalks

• Oakland: Cedar: sidewalk does not go through all sections

• Cedar: Oakland to Saginaw: spotty sidewalks

• Cedar: Downtown to Old Town: sidewalks should be continuous to
Stadium District

31

Southeast and Southwest

• Mt Hope: Harrison to Moores River Drive: needs complete sidewalks

• Mt Hope and Washington: needs sidewalks

• Cedar: Cavanaugh to Holmes: complete sidewalks

• Cedar: Cavanaugh to Jolly: needs sidewalks

• Edgewood: Cedar to Washington: needs sidewalks, senior housing, worn
footpaths (several comments about Edgewood)

• Pleasant Grove: Edgewood to Jolly: no sidewalks

32

Pleasant Grove near Hill Center

33

Mt Hope at Cemetery

34

Mt. Hope at Lindbergh

35

Southeast and Southwest
• Miller: Cedar to Wash: sidewalks are bumpy and uneven

• Mt. Hope: needs sidewalk to River Trail on north side of Mt. Hope

• Aurelius and Jolly: sidewalks need to be continuous in this area

• Aurelius and Mt. Hope: sidewalks needed by Fenner

• Ben Davis Park: sidewalks needed

• Frances Park to Moores Park: connect with River Trail

• Rosedale: Hilliard & Sawyer: no sidewalks

36

Jolly & Dunckel

37

Jolly

38

Jolly at Pennsylvania

39

Neighborhoods
• Grand Oak and Spanish Oak: needs sidewalks

• Everett and Jenison: bad sidewalks, make repairs

• Michigan and MLK: some sidewalks are broken

• Massachusetts and North: North Lansing, sidewalks need improvement

• North of Frandor, very poor sidewalks

• Cleo and Willow: no walk/bike facilities

• Northrup: MLK to Wash: sidewalks are bumpy and too skinny

• Viking: Holmes to Victor: no sidewalks

40

Major Street Sidewalk Network
Completion Analysis
• AKA “Gap Closure”

• Requested by Council in 2005
after death of 7-year old Chantell
Buckner on Saginaw near Cedar

• Analyzed 76.1 miles of sidewalk
gaps on major roads.
Roadside Memorial for Chantell
Buckner, Age 7
• Recommended construction of
39.5 miles@ $8.76M Total

42

Missing Sidewalks: Gap Closure
Gaps filled on:
• 8.1 miles completed b/w 2004 and Larch
2007 @ $1.58M total MLK
Douglas
Cost of 8.1 miles of sidewalk gap completed Grand River Ave
2004-2007 Edgewood
Marshall
Miller
Pennsylvania
Assessable Saginaw
Share City Share Washington
$685,000 $896,000
43%
City share was 57% of total because city
57% pays for intersections and areas that
border parks and other public
facilities, and because of 2006 city
ordinance.
43

• In 2006, City Council lowered the amount that the city
can assess property owners for new sidewalks
adjacent to their home from 100% to 50%, via city
ordinance.
For comparison: cost-share ratio for same 8.1
miles under 50% assessment formula

Assessable
Share
$342,000
22%

City Share
$1,238,000
78%

44

• Net effect = $1.8M+ additional cost to city
and 13+ additional years to complete gap
closure

Assessable
Share
$1.9M
22%

City Share
$6.8M
78%

45

• This city was spending approximately $200,000 per
year on sidewalk construction, to fill about 2 miles of
sidewalk gaps per year.

• At this pace, the recommended gaps would have been
filled by about 2024.

• After 2006, choice was for city to begin spending
approx. $290,000 per year to continue at the same
pace, or to continue spending $200k/year and extend
plan completion to 2037.

46

• 2008 and 2009 Construction
– M. L. King Jr. Blvd – Miller to Edgewood
– Edgewood – MLK to Georgetown Blvd
– Miller Road – Pennsylvania to Beechfield
– N Larch – Douglas to Thomas
• 2010 Construction
– N Grand River Ave
• 2012 Construction
– Waverly Road Non-motorized pathway

City Share
$210,918.70

Assessment
$ 69,158.63

Project
$280,077.33
Square feet of sidewalk
Constructed = 41,785

City Share
$175,131.98

Assessment
$107,839.90

Project
$282,971.88
Square feet of
sidewalk
Constructed = 41,284

Waverly Road
Non-Motorized
Path
2012 Construction
Federal CMAQ Project
Work Holmes Road
Area
City Share
$106,480
Federal Share
Cross Walk $425,920
Installation
Assessments $0
Jolly Road Project
$532,400

• Current estimate by Public Service
Department to construct the remaining 31.4
miles = $9.7M

• Cost has gone up from original estimates
because of increases in material and labor
costs and because of new ADA requirements
for intersections (grading, pads with
truncated domes)
51

Broken Sidewalks:
• Need some facts here
from PSD about how
we handle sidewalk
repair
• Amt fixed/year, and
where
• Cost to fix
Photos from
• Who pays http://lmb.org/Lansing/Sidewalks.html

53

City Share
$235,491.23

Assessment
$ 50,614.63

Project
$286,105.86
Square feet of
sidewalk
Replacement =
52,811

Walkability Audits
• Started in 2010 by AARP and Mid-Michigan
Environmental Action Council
• So far approximately 75% streets audited for
sidewalk condition and availability
• More volunteers needed to complete
• Details at www.midmeac.org or call
517-292-9078
• Public Service Department estimates cost of
repairing sidewalks at $1M/year
55

Next Steps
(The $9.7 million dollar question)

56

Step 1
1. Allow voters to decide on dedicating .5 mills to
sidewalk repair and replacement for 2013-2016
(approximately $2.4 million total).

Projected Proposed .5
Fiscal Projected Percent Levy 19.44 Mill Sidewalk
Year Taxable Value Change Mills Amt Per Mill Revenue
FY2014 $ 1,958,944,700 -9% $ 33,790,804 $ 1,738,210 $ 869,105
FY2015 $ 1,841,408,000 -6% $ 31,763,356 $ 1,633,917 $ 816,959
FY2016 $ 1,786,165,800 -3% $ 30,810,456 $ 1,584,900 $ 792,450
$ 2,478,514

57

Annual Cost Per Household
FY2014-FY2016
House Value $100,000 $70,000 $50,000
Projected
increase of
.5 Sidewalk
Mill $25 $17.50 $12.50
This amount can fund approximately16.2 miles of new sidewalks (nearly
half of remaining portion of gap closure) if Step 2 is also implemented.

Without Step 2, this amount can fund approximately 8.1 miles of gap
closure. 58

Steps 2 & 3
2. Restore 100% assessment to property owners
for new sidewalks in developed areas to
equalize city-property owner shares for
remaining gap closure plan (approximately
$4.85 million if applied to the entire 31.5
remaining miles of gap closure).

3. Continue offering flexible payment plans and
schedules and CDBG assistance in eligible
low-income areas.
59

Step 4 & 5
4. Codify requirements for sidewalk installation
with land development or redevelopment
(currently handled administratively through
site plan review)

5. Develop a program requiring property owners
to handle sidewalk repair on sidewalks
adjacent to their homes and dedicated funds
for the city to handle sidewalk repair on
sidewalks adjacent to city property.
60

Steps 6 & 7
6. Long-term (in 6-8 years): Revisit “Point of
Sale” ordinance requiring property owners to
make repairs upon sale of property. (Based
on assumption of equity accumulation
between the purchase and sale of property.)
7. Work with state and federal decision makers
to improve funding sources for sidewalk
installation, repair and maintenance,
especially along state trunklines.
61

Federal Funding Disconnect
Bicyclists and Pedestrians

14
12
10
8
6
4
2
0
Represent 12% of Suffer 13% of Receive 1% of
trips fatalities federal funding
Sources:
Funding: Federal Highway Administration’s Fiscal Management Information System
Trips: 2008 National Household Travel Survey
Fatalities: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration’s Fatality Analysis Reporting
System
62

Sidewalks Repair in Other Cities
• Property Owners Responsible:
– In Cincinnatti, CMC §721-163 makes owners of abutting property
responsible for funding construction and maintenance relating to
sidewalks
– In Seattle, property owners are responsible for maintaining the
sidewalks adjacent to their property. They must make sure snow and
ice does not pose a hazard to pedestrians. They must also repair
cracks and other damage
– www.tippcityohio.gov/sidewalk_replacement.cfm

• Point of Sale Program:
www.uctc.net/access/36/access-36brokensidewalks.pdf

63

Presentation and Ballot Language
available online at
www.lansingsfourthward.com

“News and Events”

Or contact our -office at
517-483-4177
64

Lansing Sidewalks August 2012

Recomendados

Recomendados

Mais conteúdo relacionado

Destaque

Destaque (7)

Semelhante a Lansing Sidewalks August 2012

Semelhante a Lansing Sidewalks August 2012 (20)

Lansing Sidewalks August 2012