Who's responsible for the sidewalk?

In California the property owner is responsible for the sidewalk, it's in the streets and highways code.

If someone is injured in a trip and fall on the sidewalk the property owner is liable although the sidewalk is in the street R/W.

This is the very kind of law I detest the most. In other circles this would be called an unfunded mandate.

Anyone else familiar with the Safe Routes to School projects? These are fairly significant projects to construct or replace sidewalks along specific routes connecting schools and high traffic areas for school kids. Of course, ADA ramps and improved signage are involved as well. I'm thinking its Federal dollars passing through the State DOT to lucky grant recipients (schools/cities). The adjacent landowners have nothing to do with it. You would think it was a superhighway project based on the survey specs involved.

Thank goodness Allstate was there to tell her if the sidewalk was on her property...

I have only heard of these laws form washashores. These are the folks who think it's a good idea to retire here, then because they know better they try to change things to how they were back home.

Not that my town is the most cutting edge of places, we do have programs where seniors on fixed incomes can make arrangements for real estate taxes. Most of the people have to work for their taxes (like at the information booth or whatnot). One would think that in such a progressive area of the country, someone would come up with some idea about helping those old folks who can't afford to follow this law. The lien is such a lazy way to go.

Dave do you happen to have a reference for that?

I'm curious because our local city bought a grinder to profile grind all of the areas where the sidewalk is heaved. Government resources are also spent shoveling snow and removing ice.

There must be exceptions. Maybe it makes a difference if its fee title or easement?

Streets and Highways Code Section 5600 to 5630.

http://leginfo.ca.gov/cgi-bin/displaycode?section=shc&group=05001-06000&file=5600-5602

http://leginfo.ca.gov/cgi-bin/displaycode?section=shc&group=05001-06000&file=5610-5618

http://leginfo.ca.gov/cgi-bin/displaycode?section=shc&group=05001-06000&file=5625-5630

The small city I worked for would require property owners to fix the sidewalks at their expense. Often, however, it is a political issue so a lot of agencies fix the sidewalk at taxpayer's expense. The sidewalk is in the R/W so it appears to be optional. Some Cities feel that the taxpayers should not have to foot the cost of what is legally the obligation of the property owners, others are sensitive to the complaints from older, sympathetic, folks on small incomes who can't afford to have the work done.

Personally when I was a Construction Inspector it wasn't fun telling someone's Grandma you can't have your young relative building the walk with fence post concrete over wet clay. It needs to meet City standards (not easy for the weekend warrior with compaction requirements, etc). Grandma doesn't have thousands of dollars to give some contractor to do it right.

The code's definition of a sidewalk and parking strip is confusing to me. I think it stems from an earlier time when Buildings were built right on the street line and a sidewalk was attached to the front of the building as in the typical Gold Rush Town. But nonetheless I know Cities do enforce repair of suburban sidewalks.

It is the same in rural New Hampshire. they come up from CT to get away from that way of life, and the first thing they want is a street light in front of the house and a police patrol by the property x number of times a day.

All I can say is WOW!
Thanks for reminding me why I don't live in the city.

You would think they would have a tax that covered maintenance of the sidewalks.

I do know the city tries to get as much sidewalk installed as possible because the owner has to pay to have it installed, I didn't realize they were responsible/ liable for maintenance for the traveling public.
Thanks for the links.

I have an Aunt who purchased some country property with her husband back in the 1960's. The city has been steadily moving toward her. A few years back they decided to build a new school in her area. The school needed water and sewer service. They planned the project and presented my Aunt with an invoice for $750,000. That was supposedly the cost of installing the lines across her property.

The city's logic was that the value of her property would be increased by more than that amount and that she had to pay at least the cost. Of course, being an elderly widow with 1) no plans to sell the land and 2) little regular income was unimportant to the city.

In the end they forced her to sell the land to the city for the school at a greatly reduced price. I advised her to retain a really good legal team but she didn't want to spend at least a decade fighting the corrupt system.

Larry P

Anyone else familiar with the Safe Routes to School projects?

Yes, had a number of those projects.

As far as I can tell it's mostly federal grant money. And no I don't think they were all that well done (at least the ones I've seen) usually see everyone still walking in the street.

They planned the project and presented my Aunt with an invoice for $750,000.

????? Larry that makes so sense, I've worked on so many projects like that and they always pay the landowners for crossing their land not the other way around.

Corrupt hardly even touches that story.

I know one law firm in NC that would have jumped on that one for sure, probably taken it pro bono or for a percentage of damages

squeezin' Ma and Pa out

A number of years ago at least one of the major municipalities developed what they termed as a "certificate of non-development". Basically as long as Ma and Pa didn't develop their pasture, they were immune to the zoning, development and the get-sent-a-million-buck-invoice-for-water-and-sewer (yes, it does happen).

The fly in the buttermilk was that when the estate sold, then all that money was due. So basically the municipal wolves played the waiting game for the prey to die off...then they pick the bones.

The legal saying "The Needs of Many Outweigh Needs of a Few" has been used time and time again to pillage private ownership. It's a gawdam shame.

"I even had Allstate come out here. They said it's not my property," said Lambert.

Thank god for insurance agents.... Here at the Borough of State College our ROW is from back of sidewalk to back of sidewalk on the other side of the street. It is the residents responsibility to clean/fix the sidewalks. It's actually one of my jobs here. To go out and walk a different area each year and mark which ones need replaced. We comply to ADA standards to the maximum.

I think the Counties can do this too but I haven't worked for a County.

I live in the unincorporated area of Sacramento County but we have no sidewalks, just curb and gutter.

The same cities that charge the homeowner to fix the sidewalks that are buckling are the same ones that plant trees in the parkways. The same trees' roots are the cause of the buckling.

I believe the repairs are done this way because it is the developers that build these improvements. Even thought they are mandated by conditions placed on projects by city staff. Generally the improvements are rarely initially built by the City.

Here in Portland Oregon the latest news story is someone has filed 300 (yes that's right) sidewalk complaints in the last month, all in the same area. City goes out and looks, then notifies the home owner they have 60 days to repair. Contractor or concerned citizen? No one knows for sure.

I'm not sure if we have any sidewalks along our roads...have to think about that one.

Here in the municipality that I work in, the public is responsible for the maintenance of their sidewalk according to our Code of Ordinances.

If the public wants a sidewalk, they can pay for it.

I live within the town limits, and let me just say that after reading this thread that I'm happy as can be that my street/subdivision has neither sidewalks OR curb and gutter.

Carl