Proposal would add 8.5 miles of sidewalk
JANESVILLE — The Janesville City Council is scheduled Monday to consider a unanimous recommendation by the city’s sidewalk task force to build about 8.5 miles of sidewalk in 2013.
A public hearing for those property owners is scheduled during Monday’s council meeting, which begins at 7 p.m. in City Hall, 18 N. Jackson St.
The council created the task force earlier this year after angry residents on the 2012 sidewalk plan contacted council members.
Building sidewalks is controversial because many residents do not want to pay to install them or to maintain them.
The city was in its second year of a seven-year sidewalk plan to build about 60 miles of sidewalk to improve safety and connectively between neighborhoods, schools and other public facilities.
The council approved the seven-year program in 2008 but delayed implementation until 2011 because of the economy. By that time, a different council was seated, and some of those members were not as supportive of sidewalks as the former council.
The task force has been meeting since spring and analyzed sidewalks scheduled for construction in 2012 and 2013.
The council agreed with the task force that residents who live along designated local streets with lower traffic counts should be allowed to defer sidewalks for 10 years or until the owners moved.
About 4.6 miles of the proposed 8.5 miles qualifies for the deferment.
The council Monday night will consider only the task force recommendations that were unanimous.
The task force could not reach agreement on several segments of sidewalk, such as along one side of Wuthering Hills Drive. The council will discuss those sidewalks in March.
The task force has another meeting scheduled Tuesday, Jan. 15, to begin work on the 2014 program.
A total of about 7.6 miles of sidewalk were built in 2011 and 2012 affecting 240 property owners.
MORE ONLINE
To read the city memo on sidewalks and see a list of sidewalks proposed, go online to gazettextra.com/sidewalk/
ON THE AGENDA
The Janesville City Council will meet at 7 p.m. Monday in City Hall, 18 N. Jackson St. An informal listening session with some or all council members is scheduled at 6:30 p.m.
Items on the agenda include:
- A public hearing on a proposal to raise garbage collection fees $16 in 2013.
- A public hearing on a wastewater rate decrease of about 0.71 percent. Residential bills would not change in 2013 and would be $70.65 per quarter.
- A motion to change the name of Joseph Street located between Hamilton and Burns avenues to Ice Age Way. Only one resident lives along Joseph Street, and he supports the request, city staff said.
- Action on a resolution to contract with both the Rock County and Dane County humane societies to serve the city’s stray and otherwise homeless animals.
- Authorization to sell property at 808 Holmes St. through the Neighborhood Stabilization Program for $85,000. The property was purchased by the city in 2010 for $43,875. Improvements cost $121,033, of which about $50,000 was spent for lead reduction. The house appraises for $95,000. Improvements included new wiring, energy-efficient doors and windows, new plumbing, furnace and water heater, a remodeled bathroom, added insulation and new and refinished floors. The program requires that all people employed on the project be paid Davis Bacon fair wage rates.
“This federal requirement can inflate the cost of construction projects,” said Kelly Mack, neighborhood development specialist.
n A motion to cancel the second regularly scheduled city council meeting of the month, which would fall on Dec. 24.
Dec 10, 2012 at 10:54 a.m.
Suggest removal
Bought the house for $125k
Invested $5k in the house/sidewalk
Having to invest another $3k this spring.
I might be able to sell it for $90k today.
But...
We've lived here for 6 years.
$5k previous expense + $3k upcoming expense + $35k price depreciation = $597/mos over those 6 years.
Still cheaper then renting 2,100 quiet and safe finished sq ft.
Dec 10, 2012 at 10:11 a.m.
Suggest removal
I agree with your comments Badgerlvr.
Funny thing is, (NOT funny really) when the high speed rail was being pushed it was the same comments being made: It's federal monies so let's burn it up. I just don't understand how using money from one pocket or the other isn't still the same thing. It's OUR money being spent on projects that we don't all agree on.
.
AND, I know what comment is coming next from certain people: "If we don't spend it someone else will" Well, I guess that makes it alright then?
Dec 10, 2012 at 9:53 a.m.
Suggest removal
janesvillian: I figured someone would point out that it was a "grant" but I think you missed the point. The point being that the government is always spending MORE than they are able to take in, (grant or no grant). The money has to come from some place. It may not be from Janesville but just the same, someone is responsible. This is the type of spending that seems prevalent in our society. How long could your family continue to survive if you spend more than you take in?
Dec 9, 2012 at 7:45 p.m.
Suggest removal
Badgerlvr, this comes from a revolving community development block grant which is intended to provide monies for redevelopment. The city would incur costs if they just razed it; this way they are able to recover some of those costs and use them for other blighted sites.
.
TroubleMaker, the city, county, and sheriff have no real authority to stop foreclosures.
Dec 9, 2012 at 5:21 p.m.
Suggest removal
The Gazette should have links to the previous articles concerning this venture. I'd like to see what was said then and compare to what the situation is now.
-
In general, the Government at all levels needs to stop foreclosures. Our elected officials should have put a stop to "Sheriff Sales" four years ago until the economic mess gets sorted out. The only entities doing well have been the "banksters" (rhymes with gangsters on purpose).
Dec 9, 2012 at 4:41 p.m.
Suggest removal
Janesville, the city of parks, trees, and sidewalks.
Dec 9, 2012 at 9 a.m.
Suggest removal
Bought the house for $43,875.
Invested in the house for $121,033.
Selling the house for $85,000.
Is it any wonder the city is always broke and asking for more taxpayer dollars?
Before you post a comment, consider this:
Note: GazetteXtra.com does not condone or review every comment. Read more in our User Policy AgreementPost Comment
Commenting requires registration.