Click here to skip to main content.
scenic picture from Washington state
SUBJECTS › PUBLIC WORKS › Sidewalk Repair and Maintenance
Updated 02/07

Sidewalk Construction, Maintenance and Repair

Contents

About Sidewalk Repair and Maintenance

When a jurisdiction fails to keep its sidewalks in a reasonable state of repair, free of dangerous and unsafe conditions, the results can be costly in terms of  injury claims.  Many cities and towns have ordinances that impose the cost of sidewalk repair upon abutting property owners.  If a sidewalk needs repair, the jurisdiction requests the abutting property owner to make the repair.  If the repair is not made, the jurisdiction will make the repair and bill the property owner.  While these ordinances provide a means to repair and maintain sidewalks, they do not relieve the jurisdiction from liability. 

Statutory Authority for Sidewalk Construction. 

  • Chapter 35.68 RCW - Sidewalks, Gutters, Curbs, and Driveways -- All Cities and Towns
  • Chapter 35.68 RCW - Sidewalks, Gutters, Curbs, and Driveways -- All Cities and Towns (construction of sidewalks)
  • Chapter 35.69 RCW - Sidewalks -- Construction, Reconstruction in First and Second Class Cities
  • Chapter 35.70 RCW - Sidewalks -- Construction in Second Class Cities and Towns
  • RCW 35A.47.020 - Streets -- Acquisition, standards of design, use, vacation and abandonment -- Funds (Authority of code city to use chapters 35.68 through 35.79 RCW )
  • RCW 36.75.240 - Sidewalks and pedestrian paths or walks -- Bicycle paths, lanes, routes, and roadways -- Standards.
City and Town Sidewalk Statute Summary

Statute >>

Chapter 35.68 RCW

Chapter 35.69 RCW

Chapter 35.70 RCW

Applicability

All cities or towns Code cities,1st & 2nd class cities, or charter cities of equal population Code cities or 2nd class cities and towns

Improvement Type

Construct, reconstruct & repair sidewalks, curbs and gutters Sidewalk construction & reconstruction less than one block long Any form of sidewalk construction

Remarks

City may require improvements to be made or accomplish them through contract City requires improvements to be made and, if not, then accomplishes them through contract City requires improvements to be made and, if not, then accomplishes them through contract
All three statutes refer to limitations in RCW 35.69.020:
  • An abutting property owner cannot be charged more than 50% of the valuation of the property, exclusive of improvements;
  • An abutting property owner cannot be charged if action by city caused deterioration or damage or if the deterioration or damage was caused by failure of the city to enforce its ordinances.

Jurisdictions must comply with the requirements of chapters 35.68 through 35.70 RCW.    However, the jurisdiction may not transfer liability for damages caused by defective sidewalks to abutting landowners, regardless of fault (Rivett v. Tacoma, 123 Wn.2d 573 (1994)). 

Liability (Rivett v. Tacoma, 123 Wn.2d 573 (1994)).  In the Rivett v. Tacoma decision, the state supreme court invalidated Tacoma ordinance provisions that imposed liability upon abutting property owners for damages caused by defective sidewalks, regardless of fault.  Tacoma's ordinance was not based upon the statutory provisions of chapters 35.68 through 35.70 RCW.  It was based upon the city's authority as a first class city to regulate public rights of way, including sidewalks, and upon its nuisance authority.   

If your jurisdiction has a provision that imposes liability upon property owners for injuries caused by sidewalk conditions, particularly where there is no requirement of a finding that the property owner caused the hazardous sidewalk conditions, it is advisable to remove that provision.  If you have questions about the validity of your sidewalk ordinance in light of Rivett, we suggest you contact legal counsel.