Street, Sidewalk, Curb, and Alley Assessment

Transcription

1 Street, Sidewalk, Curb, and Alley Assessment Contributing Organizations: Department of Public Works (DPW) School of Public and Environmental Affairs (SPEA) (Indiana University Purdue University, Indianapolis) Southeast Neighborhood Development, Inc (SEND) Great Indy Neighborhoods Initiatives (GINI) 1

2 Table of Contents I. Introduction..3 II. Street Assessment...6 III. Curb and Sidewalk Assessment IV. Alley Assessment V. References Appendix 1: Interview Template

3 I. Introduction Public infrastructure has commonly been identified as a catalyst in spurring economic development. As access to a neighborhood and surrounding business centers is improved, quality of life and increased employment opportunities for residents should follow. As part of the execution of the 2007 Southeast Side Strategic Plan, the Southeast Neighborhood Development Corporation (SEND) requested graduate students in a Public Affairs capstone course in the School of Public and Environmental Affairs (SPEA) at Indiana University-Purdue University Indianapolis (IUPUI) conduct an assessment of streets, curbs and sidewalks, and alleys in the Southeast Community Organization (SECO) neighborhood. This project was done in the spring semester of 2008 by four students from the Master-level SPEA capstone course and was coordinated by the Jennifer Rice, the Great Indy Neighborhoods Initiatives (GINI) representative for the Southeast side. After completion of the project, the SEND Public Space Committee chairperson, Jeff Miller, made the information available so that neighborhoods across the city could use it to better communicate to the city their infrastructure needs. For any questions, please contact Jeff at jeff030167@indy.rr.com. In order to accomplish this goal, the assessment uses the Indianapolis Department of Public Works (DPW) methodologies as closely as possible. The SPEA students who piloted the study identified Infrastructure Assessment Tools by conducting research and contacting public works professionals to identify industry standards. They determined the appropriateness and feasibility of industry accepted techniques and applied them to the assessment. Where the industry standard was not feasible the team developed new assessment scales, relating as closely as possible to the scales used by the DPW. For street assessment, DPW uses the Pavement Condition Index (PCI) to assess seven major distresses. The distresses are rated depending on the identified severity. A slight alternative to PCI was necessary due to the difficulty in acquiring and operating the DPW MicroPaver software program. 3

4 To assess the condition of sidewalks and curbs, DPW recommends the Present Serviceability Rating (PSR). This rating system grades each block and assesses priority levels using the following scale: 1 is a high priority, 2 is a medium priority, and 3 is a low priority level. There are also guidelines for assessing the alleys, but these are not as defined and alleyways in general are considered lower in priority over streets and sidewalks. Methodology Identification of the Area: It is first necessary to break the area to be assessed into segments. Each segment is a city block such as Keystone Ave from Pleasant Run Parkway to Woodlawn Ave. Each segment is given a numeric ID. Entering segments in the spreadsheets: Each segment is entered into the Street Assessment.xls and Curb and Sidewalk Assessment.xls spreadsheets. In the Curb and Sidewalk Assessment.xls spreadsheet, each segment is entered twice, to capture the section of the sidewalk on each side of the segment (such as North and South, for an East/West running road). Training: If possible, it is always helpful to meet with a neighborhood that has done the assessment before. However, the information provided in this document is thorough enough that training is not necessary. Field Assessment. The team canvasses the area, segment by segment on foot to visually review the curbs, sidewalks and streets. Primary tools used for the assessment include a pen and printout of the spreadsheets above for recording assessment and location information, a tape measure to determine the depth, length and width of distress types to properly grade severity and a camera for visually documenting each distress type. Data Entry: The assessments are entered into the spreadsheets and the appropriate ratings are generated, as well as graphs and pie charts. Additionally, pictures of the area are helpful to serve as a reference. Community Interviews: If desired, community leaders can be interviewed, to get more perspective on the overall needs of the area. Appendix 1 has a sample interview to use. Final Presentation: The results of the assessment should first be shared with the neighborhood organization for feedback. After it is agreed upon that the assessment 4

5 reflects the needs of the area, the results of the areas in most need of repair should be shared with the city county councilor for the district as well as DPW. Additional Data: It is also helpful to note any other items that hurt the walkability or drivability of the streets and sidewalks. o o o o o o o o o Collapsed or blocked sewer drains. Street Signs missing Regulatory Signs missing (such as a missing stop sign or dead end sign) Potholes ADA Ramps missing or not compliant Stop lights or Cross walk lights out Street Lights out Utility cuts in the street Overgrown alleys or street curbs (technically the owner s responsibility). As an example of why these items are important, deterioration along the edges of the streets can be a result of water erosion from poor drainage. This impacts the quality of the curbs, sidewalks, and alleys. Before major resurfacing of the roads should take place, an assessment of the drainage is recommended so that lingering problems could be addressed to prevent any threat to the integrity of new pavement. These items can also be turned in to DPW and can be addressed fairly quickly in most cases. The following sections of the document cover in depth how to perform the street, curb and sidewalk, and alley assessments. Performing this assessment should give a neighborhood the tools to be able to communicate with residents what the current situation is in the neighborhood and allow for reaching consensus on which areas need the most attention. Then, the assessment can be used to communicate with the city what those priority areas are and it can be done using the language that the DPW uses. Conducting this assessment shows that a neighborhood is being proactive and systematic in their attempts to address their infrastructure needs. 5

6 II. Street Assessment A. Background The Indianapolis Department of Public Works (DPW) generally selects pavement repair projects based on two main factors, the Pavement Condition Index (PCI) rating and the International Roughness Index (IRI) rating (DPW, 2008). The PCI is a measure of pavement condition developed by the Army Corp of Engineers and is the standard tool employed in the evaluation of pavement distresses. Implementing PCI requires MicroPAVER software to convert inspection data from field assessments into the numerical PCI rating of zero (fail) to 100 (excellent). The IRI is the accepted measure of pavement rideability or smoothness developed by the World Bank (American Concrete Pavement Association, 2007). The IRI measures pavement roughness in terms of the number of inches per mile that a laser, mounted in a specialized van, jumps as it is driven across pavement (Pennsylvania Department of Transportation, 2008). According to the DPW, $90 million is needed to repair all roads and sidewalks within the city of Indianapolis. Unfortunately, only $2 million is budgeted by the City of Indianapolis for the repair of streets. The street selection process is difficult and an assessment provided by the neighborhoods provides very valuable information to DPW. Due to the costs and limitations of obtaining MicroPAVER software and the equipment necessary to measure pavement rideability using IRI, this assessment created an alternative index to measure the condition of pavement for this project. The index and methodology used are based on methodology recommendations from the DPW and the Pavement Management Distress Identification Guide used in accordance with PCI and MicroPAVER (Powell, Sherry. correspondence, 2/26/08). Distress Identification. Specific distresses found in the pavement should be identified and noted. Seven of the nine common distress types identified in the PCI index can be utilized. The PCI definition of each distress should be maintained for consistency, but the grading scale has been modified for better evaluation of collected data. The PCI grading of L=low, 6

7 M=Medium, or H=High severity has been translated to 0=Absent or no distress, 1=Low, 2=Medium, and 3=High severity of the present distress type. The distress types are listed in Table 2. The two distress types that are not measured by the current study are detailed below. Table 1: PCI and Project Ratings PCI Standard Distress Types Bumps Joint reflection cracking PCI Definition PCI Rating Project Rating Localized upward displacement of pavement surface. Measured by ride quality. Only exists in asphalt surfaces laid over PCC slabs. Severity L, M, H N/A N/A Condition Assessment. The average condition of the block is assessed. Team members walk the length of each block assessing the pavement condition in the ordinary path of vehicular travel and the condition along the curb where street parking and drainage occur. Each individual makes an independent judgment based on the quality of the average or representative condition of approximately ten percent of the block s length. Finally, the two team members compare their decisions and assign a score for the block. Photos are taken of each distress and severity type with a digital camera to document visually an example for future assessment. Distress types are defined and identified in Table 2. 7

8 Table 2: Distress Identification Alligator Cracking Interconnecting cracks form sharp angled pieces; Occur in wheel paths. Measured in sq. ft. Low: Rating = 1 Fine, longitudinal hairline cracks running parallel to each other with none or few interconnecting cracks. Medium: Rating = 2 Further development of light alligator cracks into a pattern or network of cracks. High: Rating = 3 Network or pattern cracking has progressed; pieces are well defined breaking down along the edges. 8

9 Block Cracking Interconnecting cracks divide pavement into rectangular pieces caused by asphalt shrinking & daily temp. cycling- not traffic. Measured in sq. ft. Low: Rating = 1 Blocks are defined by low severity cracks Medium: Rating = 2 Blocks are defined by medium severity cracks High: Rating = 3 Blocks are defined by high severity cracks 9

10 Longitudinal & Transverse Cracking Cracks parallel to pavement's centerline from poor construction, temp. cycles & cracks beneath surface. Transverse cracks extend at right angles to centerline. Measured in linear feet. Low: Rating = 1 Nonfilled crack width is less than 3/8 inches, or filled crack of any width Medium: Rating = 2 Nonfilled crack width is 3/8 to 3 inches High: Rating = 3 Nonfilled crack over 3 inches. 10

11 Patching & Utility Cut Patching Area of pavement which has been replaced with new material to repair existing pavement. Measured in sq. ft. Low: Rating = 1 Patch is in good condition and satisfactory Medium: Rating = 2 Patch is moderately deteriorated High: Rating = 3 Patch is badly deteriorated 11

12 Pothole Potholes are small, bowl shaped depressions in the pavement surface, growth is accelerated by moisture collection inside the hole Low: Rating = 1 Size is 4-18 inches in diameter & depth is 1/2-2 inches Medium: Rating = 2 Size is 4-18 inches in diameter & depth is greater than 2 inches High: Rating = 3 Size is inches in diameter & depth is greater than 2 inches 12

13 Rutting Surface depression in wheel path due to traffic loads. Measured in sq. ft. Severity is measured by mean depth of rut. Low: Rating = 1 Mean rut depth of 1/4-1/2 inch Medium: Rating = 2 Mean rut depth of 1/2-1 inch High: Rating = 3 Mean rut depth of greater than 1 inch 13

14 Weathering Weathered pavement surface caused by asphalt or tar loss binder, dislodged aggregate particles. Measured in sq. ft. Low: Rating = 1 Aggregate or binder has started to wear away Medium: Rating = 2 Aggregate or binder is rough and has worn away High: Rating = 3 Aggregate or binder has been considerably worn away, is rough and severely pitted. Pitted areas > 4 in. are potholes 14

15 Data. Data for the field assessment, including the distress types present and the severity level of each distress, is recorded for each city block. The data set is entered into Microsoft Excel. The index rating for each block is automatically calculated to reveal the city blocks with the most damage and therefore in most need of repair. A priority level rating of one (red), two (yellow), and three (green) is assigned to each block. A priority level rating of one (red) represents an index rating of 8-21; a priority level rating of two (yellow) represents an index rating of 5-7; and a priority level rating of three (green) represents an index rating of 0-4. Based upon the data, recommendations for pavement repairs are formulated. If a road is composed of something other than asphalt (examples include concrete, brick, cement, etc), it is marked as such in the non-asphalt column and it is removed from the rating system of one, two or three because it would not be part of the standard repaving program. C. Street Findings There are several recommended ways to display the results of the assessment. They include: Color Coded Map: Create a map of the streets by priority level rating. This can be done by capturing a screen print from mapquest and then using Microsoft Word to lay down red, yellow and green lines indicating the priority level. This can then be printed out on posterboard. See the Street and Alley Map.doc file for an example. Distresses: This pie chart shows the most common distress type found. This chart can be generated directly out of the Excel spreadsheets. Priority Rating: This pie chart shows the breakdown by priority rating, giving a visual aid indicating how many blocks are in each condition. This chart can be generated directly out of the Excel spreadsheets. Block Rating: For the blocks assigned a priority level rating of 1, shows the index rating of each of the worst blocks. This chart can be generated directly out of the Excel spreadsheets. 15

16 III. Curb and Sidewalk Assessment A. Background Based upon an interview conducted with Rick MeKeon of the Indianapolis DPW Engineering Division, the DPW typically selects sidewalk repair projects based upon the number of complaints received by the Mayor Action Center (McKeon, Rick. Interview 2/19/08). Residents call the Mayors Action Center (MAC) to report curb and sidewalk problems, and the Customer Service Department creates work orders to substantiate claims. Small service jobs, up to three panels of curb and sidewalk repair or replacement, are typically completed by the DPW Operations Division. Larger projects are given to the Engineering Division to prioritize and recommend during the annual budget. Present Serviceability Rating (PSR) is the main factor used by the DPW when grading curbs and sidewalks. PSR is an index of the sidewalk condition ranging from zero to five. A score of zero indicates the curb and sidewalk are completely deteriorated or do not exist; five indicates the curb and sidewalk are or appear to be brand new. A score of two and a half is the average rating for all curbs and sidewalks assessed by the DPW (McKeon, Rick. Interview 2/19/08). Every observed sidewalk distress is assigned a priority level based on the observation of the Service Technician (Powell, Sherry. correspondence, 2/26/08). The DPW acknowledges the method of assigning a priority level is a subjective method of rating infrastructure and is not a functional relationship to distress occurrence. However, this is the method used consistently by the City of Indianapolis. Sidewalk priority levels are: 1- High Priority 2- Medium Priority 3- Low Priority Based on the priority level designated by Customer Service, the location is put on a waiting list for work to be completed (Powell, Sherry. correspondence, 2/26/08). 16

17 The selection of sidewalks for repair is not only determined by PSR and priority level, but other factors including: High pedestrian areas, such as schools, churches, hospitals, public facilities, and main thoroughfares ADA ramps and sidewalks IndyGo bus connectivity Balancing the repair needs across City-County Council Districts, and need areas Economic development or other commitments made To date, outstanding sidewalk repair or replacement projects total $90 million. In the last five years, Larry Jones, DPW Engineer, has recorded $25 million in inventoried requests to be completed from citizen complaints and DPW field observations (DPW, 2007). Unfortunately, only $1 to $3 million is budgeted by the City of Indianapolis for curb and sidewalk repairs each year, which includes design, inspection, labor, materials, and associated costs (McKeon, Rick. Interview 2/19/08). Positively, the Department of Public Works does ask for input from neighborhood groups to assist them in street selection by providing a neighborhood priority list of street segments in need of repair. This assessment will assist in creating requests to the DPW (Powell, Sherry. correspondence, 2/26/08). B. Curb and Sidewalk Methodology The established method of grading the quality of the curbs and sidewalks was based on information provided by the DPW. Primary tools used for the assessment included a pen and notebook for noting all assessment and location information and a digital camera for visually documenting each block. Location Identification. Block-long segments were used as the distance unit of measurement. The DPW inventories curb and sidewalk condition and repairs curbs and sidewalks in one block sections regardless of the length of the block. Each block has two sections: an east and a west, or a north and a south side. Special consideration is given if there 17

18 are diagonal streets in the area. As a result, a block entry might be listed as: Spruce Street, west side, from Spann Avenue to Fletcher Avenue. Refer to Table 4 for an example of how this was documented. Table 4: Sample Block Entry Street Side Cross St 1 Cross St 2 Spruce St W Spann Ave Fletcher Ave Distress Identification. Specific curb and sidewalk distresses are identified and noted. Five curb distresses are utilized, as well as six sidewalk distresses. These distress identifiers were provided by the DPW, designed by the Army Corp of Engineers, and used as standard industry-used terminology. The DPW is available to train the team on how to identify distresses, and utilize the scale and rate conditions. Table 5: Curb and Sidewalk Distress Descriptions and Examples Curb (C) Distresses Description Example C1 No curb distress found 18

19 C2 Low fault/heave/crack on curb C3 High fault/heave/crack on curb 19

20 C4 Loss of curb face from asphalt overlay C5 Surface distress (scale or deterioration on curb) 20

21 Sidewalk (S) Description Distresses S1 No sidewalk distress found Example S2 Narrow sidewalk cracks 21

22 S3 Wide sidewalk cracks S4 Small vertical sidewalk displacement 22

23 S5 Large vertical sidewalk displacement S6 Surface defects 23

24 Table 6 demonstrates how distresses were documented. The following explains main points within the data set and how certain conditions were indicated: No distress found: If the sidewalk is present and no distresses are found, the C1 and S1 columns are marked, and an appropriate PSR and Priority Level is determined. Marking a distress as present: A 1 indicates that the distress indicated at the top of the column is present at any point in the block. All distress fields blank: If all distress fields are blank, the sidewalk is missing, and the block receives a PSR rating of 0 (PSR Rating is explained in the section Condition Assessment immediately following). Table 6: Sample Distress Entry Street Side Cross St 1 Cross St 2 C1 C2 C3 C4 C5 S1 S2 S3 S4 S5 S6 Woodlawn Ave N St. Paul St St. Peter St Condition Assessment. The average condition of the block is assessed. This is based on looking at the ratings assigned based on the distresses. A PSR rating is then assigned, which is a condition-related scale the DPW uses. PSR range is 0-5. Typically only blocks with PSR ratings of 0 to 2.5 are addressed by the DPW. 24

25 Table 7: Present Serviceability Rating (PSR) Description and Example PSR Rating Description Example 0 Totally deteriorated or nonexistent 1 Poor condition 25

26 PSR Rating Description Example 2 Below average to average condition. 2.5 is considered average 3 Good to above average condition 26

27 PSR Rating Description Example 4 Very good condition 5 Brand new or excellent condition 27

28 Due to the subjective nature of condition assessment, it is recommended that the team independently rates each curb and sidewalk, and then reveals and explains their rating to each other. After negotiating a rating, the PSR rating is assigned and recorded. Priority Rating. The priority rating is indicated through the priority level scale, explaining the urgency of repairs. The DPW utilizes a scale ranging from one to three. A priority level one indicates an immediate need for repair; priority level two indicates a moderate need for repair; priority level three indicates little to no need for repair. This rating considers the distresses identified, the PSR rating, and also the geographic location proximity to a church or school, for example. Priority assessment is a subjective function of PSR; PSR is only one of several factors considered when assigning a priority rating. Similar to assigning a PSR rating, it is recommended that the team independently assigns a priority level to each block section, reveals and explains their rating, negotiates a final rating, and records the final determination. Location Notes. Location notes should be made to provide insight into the surroundings of each block segment. These notes should include reference to residential, retail/business, churches, schools, and vacant buildings or properties. These notes will supplement the priority assessments given. Recommendations. Condition, not related to curb and sidewalk distresses, should be surveyed for each block segment. This results in a recommended action. Examples of recommendations include: weed or litter removal, scraping debris or dirt and leaf buildup, cleaning overgrown bushes and vines, or mending a fence that obstructs the sidewalk. If negative conditions were not prominent on the block section, no recommendations may be given. Pictures. Pictures should be taken to document each block s condition. The primary focus should be placed on blocks with one or more distresses present, or blocks with a priority level of one or two. These photographs will supplement the assessments by providing visual support for the recommendations. 28

29 C. Curb and Sidewalk Findings There are several recommended ways to display the results of the assessment. They include: Color Coded Map: Create a map of the streets by priority level rating. This can be done by capturing a screen print from mapquest and then using Microsoft Word to lay down red, yellow and green lines indicating the priority level. This can then be printed out on posterboard. See the Curb and Sidewalk Map.doc file for an example. Distresses: The Curb and Sidewalk distress charts are pie charts showing the most common distress type found. These charts can be generated directly out of the Excel spreadsheets. PSR Rating: This graph chart shows the breakdown of the PSR rating. This chart can be generated directly out of the Excel spreadsheets. Priority Rating: This pie chart shows the breakdown by priority level, giving a visual aid indicating how many blocks are in each condition. This chart can be generated directly out of the Excel spreadsheets. Block Rating: For the worst rated blocks, these two graph charts break down the curb and sidewalk assessments for these blocks. These charts can be generated directly out of the Excel spreadsheets. 29

30 IV. Alley Assessment A. Background With its limited budget, the Indianapolis Department of Public Works (DPW) is unable to fully support the maintenance of alleys in the city. In collaboration with the Department of Metropolitan Development, Animal Care & Control, and the Marion County Health Department, the DPW has recently taken steps to improve the condition of the area in impoverished and highcrime areas by hosting blitzes to clean alleys, reducing debris, removing trash and graffiti, patching potholes, and replacing signs (Smith-Simmons 2007). In 2006, twenty such blitzes occurred, and in 2007, seventeen occurred (Smith-Simmons 2007). B. Alley Methodology In order to assess the alleys, the team should conduct a general observation of all alleys in the entire area under review. It is admittedly a highly subjective assessment, but the goal is to identify the most problematic areas. Instead of assessing every alley with a rating, it is probably best to highlight the alleys that the team judges to be in the most disrepair. Alleys are defined as throughways that connected two streets and run behind homes or businesses. The team s evaluation of the alleys should be based on the following conditions: Accessibility Pavement condition Trash Weeds Overgrowth General observations should be conducted by driving through the area to select the worst alleys. By driving through alleys and observing the overall condition, select the worst alley. The team should walk the worst alleys to conduct a more detailed assessment. The observations from the walking assessment result in recommendations to improve the condition of each alley. Table 8 shows examples of how these observations can be recorded. 30

31 Table 8: Examples of Alley Priorities in Detail Quadrant/Area Quadrant Condition Northwest Good conditions overall Minimal trash, overgrowth, and weeds Quadrant/Area s Highest Priority Location Between Hoyt and Lexington, running from Spruce Street east to State Avenue Quadrant/Area s Highest Priority Condition Poor pavement condition, thus limiting drivability Quadrant/Area s Highest Priority Example Southwest Good conditions overall Most alleys well-kept Minimal trash, weeds, and overgrowth Northeast Varied conditions, ranging from good to poor Northeast Highest Priority Alley Between Woodlawn Avenue and Prospect Street, running from Spruce Street East to State Avenue Between Hoyt Avenue and the railroad tracks, running from St. Paul Street east to Keystone Avenue Between English and Spann Avenues and St. Paul Street and Keystone Avenue; two alleys running north and south, connected by one running east and west in a H pattern Numerous surface distresses, limiting drivability and accessibility Has a number of surface distresses, as well as natural debris that impede accessibility and drivability All characteristics were present, including substantial amount of trash on the east to west portion. Trash included a television, mattress, discarded containers, and carpet. Accessibility was limited, 31

32 Southeast Fair conditions Many alleys had large surface distresses in the pavement Most alleys were free of trash, weeds, and overgrowth Between Woodlawn Avenue and Prospect Street, from St. Peter Street east to Keystone Avenue particularly on the southwest end of this section, where the alley was not paved, narrow, and had overgrowth. Pavement condition was poor, and in some areas, individuals had filled in potholes and other surface distresses with broken concrete and brick chips Pavement condition was poor, making drivability and access difficult. Debris, including fallen branches and leaf buildup, as well as trash were present in this alley 32

33 C. Alley Findings Rather than creating new graphs and charts, it is recommended that the street assessment color coded map be updated as described below: Color Coded Map: Update the street map to show blue areas which indicate the alleys in most need of repair. This can be done by capturing a screen print from mapquest and then using Microsoft Word to lay down red, yellow and green lines indicating the priority level. This can then be printed out on posterboard. See the Street and Alley Map.doc file for an example. 33

34 V. References American Concrete Pavement Association, (2007), Current perspectives on pavement surface characteristics, retrieved January 16, 2008 from City of Indianapolis Department of Public Works, (2008) Sidewalk Repairs, retrieved January 26, 2008 from City of Indianapolis Department of Public Works, (2007), 2007 Resurfacing and Curb and Sidewalk Program, retrieved January 26, 2008 from C49B/0/ResurfacingCurbSidewalkEvaluationProcedure.doc. Pennsylvania Department of Transportation, (2008), International Rideability Index, retrieved January 16, 2008 from Smith-Simmons, M., (2007), City crews to clean-up SECO neighborhood area during neighborhood blitz. retrieved April 22, from Southeast Neighborhood Development, (2007), SEND Strategic Plan. Southeast Neighborhood Development, (2008) About SEND, retrieved January, 13, 2008 from 34

35 Appendix I Infrastructure Assessment Interview 1. Sidewalks a. Do you regularly use the sidewalks in the SECO area (define area if needed)? i. If yes, for what purpose? b. What do you think of the general condition of the sidewalks in SECO? c. What sidewalk/area of SECO do you think most needs repair? d. In the sidewalk/area you identified, do you think the condition creates a safety hazard? i. If yes, how? 2. Streets a. Do you drive in the SECO area? i. If not, do you ride the bus or have an alternate form of transportation? b. What do you think of the general condition of the streets in SECO? c. What street/area in SECO do you think most needs repair? d. In the street/area you identified, do you think the condition creates a safety hazard? i. If yes, how? 3. Alleys 35

36 a. Do you utilize alleys in your daily routine? b. What do you think of the general condition of the alleys? 4. Action a. Have you ever taken action to improve the condition of the sidewalks, streets, or alleys in this area? i. If so, what action have you taken? 36