|
Sidewalks To Nowhere. It seems that for the past 10-15 years whenever City development has been on the table, there are cries for Ketchum to build sidewalks where they don't exist. The Walkability Plan approved in August 2012 specifically calls for sidewalks everywhere in the core, along with signs and lighting. Money for the work is, of course, hard to come by, especially in a recession.
Sidewalks came into particular focus last spring, however, when Ketchum threatened a business owner with criminal (and civil) action because he "refused" to build a sidewalk in front of his newly renovated one-story office. The brouhaha, reported in the Mt. Express, came after the owner had been told yes and no by various staff and an elected official at various times. A further complication was a lovely old shade tree where the sidewalk would go - a situation for which the City can make an exemption. Handcuffs, an orange jumpsuit? How did the situation get so out-of-whack? And wasn't the reaction a bit exaggerated by the City's often over-zealous attorneys? Simplot, it seems, has been in default of constructing a sidewalk alongside its lot but has not been labeled criminal.
When two other property owners recently told me that changes to their property would require them also to build a sidewalk, I immediately thought the City had taken to passing the buck (literally). Wasn't the City responsible for such infrastructure? Research showed otherwise. Turns out that City Code - written in 1974 - requires property owners to construct sidewalks if they spend more than $20,000 changing the exterior of their building.
And there's the rub. If a buyer's realtor doesn't disclose City requirements and the buyer neglects to do his own homework, he might awake one day to an unexpected cost crimp to renovation plans. One property owner with a tricky location was quoted $100,000 for a sidewalk and retaining wall, more than the cost of her proposed renovation. Even if it were possible to renovate today for as little as $20,000+ (which it's not), the owner's costs would be $120,000+ right off the bat.
In other words, the 40-year-old code written in Ketchum's earlier days reflects a very different economy. Some of the buildings covered by current Code never had sidewalks to begin with, are older, smaller properties whose repair will benefit the City's profile, and which, with repairs, will increase the City's tax base. Surely it's in the City's interests to find a system tilted toward win-win rather than punishment for these property owners.
Others with experience in this area should be able to design a plan (and revise Code) based on today's construction costs and property values. Options include:
a). City participation in the costs of the sidewalk for the remaining properties without one.
b). A percentage payment by the owner to the City based on the cost of the proposed renovation.
c). A percentage payment by the owner to the City based on the proposed square footage of the site or
of the renovation.
d). A combination of the above.
The good news for some Ketchum property owners is that the City won grants this past summer to install a few new sidewalks in the core. $178,000 will go toward installing 18 missing sidewalk links around town in 2017. Presumably those property owners will be able to renovate after that without the sidewalk penalty. Earlier, in 2016, Transit Hub sidewalks will be built for $52,000. Two questions come to mind:
1. Is the Transit Hub necessary?
2. What about property owners not in the "missing sidewalk link" category. Are they just out of luck
when they want to renovate?
Note: Ketchum Planning and Zoning plans to address sidewalk Code in 2015 when new staff are in place. Let's be sure this actually happens and offer our input.
| 
Science Nook: Is The Internet Addictive? 
