(03-14-2015, 10:12 AM)Canard Wrote: [ -> ]Re: Ploughing of Sidewalks...
1. This might be a good solution for clearing trails like Iron Horse and Laurel but it's too wide for most of our sidewalks.
2. Also note how little snow there is, (1) to plow and (2) in windrows along the side of the road/trail. I wonder how this solution would work in this region during the past couple of winters.
3. The dude's driving speeds and skidding style is likely to induce heart attacks in anyone on the trails when the plow arrives.
I understand now that the reason why Mayor of Waterloo Dave Jaworsky is against snow plowing is political. He seem to be one of those conservatives who believe less government is always better and facts are not very relevant to that belief. This is why he opposed the program even before looking at the numbers and it's also why he remains opposed to it, even though it would save taxpayers hundreds of dollars.
(03-14-2015, 12:41 PM)BuildingScout Wrote: [ -> ]I understand now that the reason why Mayor of Waterloo Dave Jaworsky is against snow plowing is political. He seem to be one of those conservatives who believe less government is always better and facts are not very relevant to that belief. This is why he opposed the program even before looking at the numbers and it's also why he remains opposed to it, even though it would save taxpayers hundreds of dollars.
Source?
(03-14-2015, 01:26 PM)panamaniac Wrote: [ -> ] (03-14-2015, 12:41 PM)BuildingScout Wrote: [ -> ]I understand now that the reason why Mayor of Waterloo Dave Jaworsky is against snow plowing is political. He seem to be one of those conservatives who believe less government is always better and facts are not very relevant to that belief. This is why he opposed the program even before looking at the numbers and it's also why he remains opposed to it, even though it would save taxpayers hundreds of dollars.
Source?
The combination of statements from him to newspapers, emails, TV interviews on the subject as well as others.
How would it save me hundreds of dollars when I shovel my own sidewalk?
You're spending time shovelling instead of being at work earning money doing something you're skilled at.
(03-14-2015, 02:16 PM)Canard Wrote: [ -> ]You're spending time shovelling instead of being at work earning money doing something you're skilled at.
That doesn't count for everyone. If you're able to clear your sidewalk in the allotted time window without missing out on income, it doesn't save you any money.
Sidewalk clearing is good for having clear pathways, but
it doesn't save everyone money.
(03-15-2015, 07:09 PM)kwliving Wrote: [ -> ]That doesn't count for everyone. If you're able to clear your sidewalk in the allotted time window without missing out on income, it doesn't save you any money.
But you always miss out on income. If you went to the local Tim Hortons and applied for a part time position and sold coffee instead of shoveling snow for the same number of hours you would be about $200-400 dollars richer and that's assuming minimum wage. If instead you log extra hours in the office of almost any profession we are talking double that.
Only someone with a medical condition that made it impossible for them to work wouldn't miss out on income, but then again, they wouldn't be able to shovel the sidewalk to begin with.
Remember just because money didn't explicitly trade hands it doesn't mean you did not lose money.
Addendum:
Recent work by psychologists has charted a set of predictable cognitive errors that lead us to mistakes like eating too much junk food, or saving too little for retirement. These quirks lead us to make similarly predictable errors when deciding where to live, how to live, how to move, and even how to build our cities. The Vancouver transit vote is likely to prove psychologists correct again. By most measures, a “No” result in the plebiscite will make the average person poorer, sicker, less free, more frustrated and, yes, less happy in the long run. Yet this is exactly where the polls show the city is headed.
[...]
This is what psychologists call the focus illusion. We put all our attention on one glaring element and ignore details that are harder to grasp or remember. So most people remember the annual tax they’ll have to pay, and place less value on the thousands of moments where their life will become easier. Most of us have trouble putting fair value on future benefits. If you were stuck in traffic right now and I offered to get you moving for 35¢ you would probably pay up. But [if] you are asked to pay a tax now for benefits that will take years to take shape [they will say no].
http://news.nationalpost.com/2015/03/13/...happiness/
From CBC KW:
Kitchener woman in critical condition after being hit by truck
Text of article:
"A 53-year-old Kitchener woman is in hospital in critical condition after being struck by a truck in Kitchener on Monday morning.
The woman was at the corner of Victoria Street South and Weichel Street around 6:29 a.m. and attempted to cross the street in front of a pick-up truck heading north on Victoria when she was struck. She was taken to Hamilton General Hospital.
The truck was driven by a 37-year-old Kitchener man. Police say the investigation is ongoing and so far, no charges have been laid. "
I have no experience with that corner; I've crossed at Westmount a block further on a number of times, and further to the east/north on Victoria outside of a crosswalk from time to time. It's a little more than 600 meters between the lights at Westmount, and those at Lawrence; but only a hundred meters or so between Westmount and Weichel. I can say that it is very common, however, to see people crossing Victoria just east of the Westmount intersection, using the median as a refuge island.
Sunrise was just before 6:00 yesterday morning, so at 6:29 there was light. The pickup truck was heading north (east), so we could go out on a limb and suggest that bright sun could have effected the driver's visibility. I wonder if we'll ever hear anything more.
There was a suggestion on the CTV news that the woman could be charged.
Really? Did they say with what?
From the CTV report:
....Police say charges could be laid against the woman.
“Charges against the pedestrian are possible, for not crossing at the crosswalk or using caution when crossing the street,” Lederman said....
Hmm. I didn't know there was a crosswalk at Weichel. Interesting- thanks!
(07-14-2015, 09:18 AM)MidTowner Wrote: [ -> ]Hmm. I didn't know there was a crosswalk at Weichel. Interesting- thanks!
There isn't a crosswalk there.
Street View.
Likely, she was coming from Weichel St, and her destination is to the east ("north"), on the south ("east") side of Victoria. The next crosswalk to the east is 480m to the east at Lawrence, a distance of 600m between official crossings.
At the very least, a crosswalk should be installed at Paulander Dr if they don't want people crossing the road elsewhere. There is also a bus stop at Paulander.
Bus stops and crosswalks make no sense, at times, in Waterloo. Take King and the 7, near Conestoga Mall. There is a stop at Blue Springs Drive, and a stop at Manulife, when going North. Between the two, there are no crosswalks on the road, and everything on the other side of the sidewalk is blocked by a guardrail and steep ravine, so there is zero safe reason for the stop between these two.
Yet, there it is, the "Waterloo Inn" stop, implying deliberately in its name that we are intended to jaywalk at this point. I am not sure of the liabilities involved, but this stop, as many others, can only be used as a jaywalking point.