Troutdale council weighs changes to sidewalk maintenance code; staff proposes city repairs and assessments when owners do not comply

Travis (Public Works) presented a staff report and opened a public hearing on proposed amendments to Chapter 12 (public works) and Chapter 12.05 (sidewalk maintenance). Travis explained the existing system is complaint driven: the city investigates after a complaint and gives owners time to repair sidewalks. Under the current code, enforcement for noncompliance can escalate to a summons to municipal court, a process staff described as slow, resource intensive and frequently ineffective because owners sometimes fail to appear in court.

The proposed amendments would keep the complaint-driven approach up to the compliance deadline but would change the enforcement step for persistent noncompliance. If a property owner fails to repair after notice and the compliance period, staff would have authority to contract for the repair work, perform or arrange for repairs in the public right-of-way, and then assess the actual cost plus administrative fees against the property. If unpaid, that assessment could become a lien recorded against the property rather than immediate criminal citation and court proceedings. Staff said the change would allow sidewalks to be fixed in a timely way, reduce reliance on sheriff or police officers to serve court summonses, and offer owners alternatives other than immediate court.

Councilors and members of the public voiced concerns and asked questions on multiple points: whether homeowners would be able to afford repairs and whether the city would overcharge; whether a 30-day extension beyond the initial 60-day compliance window should be retained; how tree roots and street-tree rules interact with sidewalk repairs; whether the city would set unit prices or maintain a list of contractors for price transparency; how replacement trees would be handled; and whether liens would carry statutory interest. Members of the public urged the city to be proactive in addressing blocked sidewalks and routine parking across sidewalks because those conditions affect elderly and mobility-impaired residents.

Staff said the typical city approach would be to use standing or small public-works contracts with standard unit prices for common flatwork and to offer a menu of options: property owners may do the work themselves to city standards, hire a contractor before the compliance deadline, or allow the city to perform the work and assess the cost. Staff confirmed an appeal process would be available and that appeals would be free to file under the proposed draft language. The code update would also align construction standard references (e.g., ODOT specifications) and clarify other public-works administrative provisions.

The hearing drew extensive council discussion; staff said they will return with cost-estimate examples and further operational detail at the second reading, scheduled for October 28.

Ending: Council collected public testimony and asked staff for more data (past repair counts, average unit costs, timeline/contracting approach and options for payment plans or administrative agreements). The council did not adopt the ordinance at first reading; the public hearing was continued to the second reading on October 28.