Waterloo Region Connected

Full Version: Walking in Waterloo Region
You're currently viewing a stripped down version of our content. View the full version with proper formatting.
(12-10-2016, 01:31 PM)panamaniac Wrote: [ -> ]I see that the Record had an editorial the other day, supporting council in not deciding not to do sidewalk snow removal, putting the (modest) tax cost in the context of other cost increases coming taxpayers' way.  I don't know that I agree with their conclusion, but it does add a little something to the conversation, istm.

Not anything useful. City responsibility is a tax decrease, not increase, so it’s not appropriate to frame it as an increase.

Except for those who currently shirk their responsibility.

That is why I was musing about reporting everybody. But of course that only works if most reports turn into enforcement actions.
My favourite from that editorial was "To begin, that $26-a-year hit is only the bill for the average household assessed at $280,000. Residents in pricier homes would pay more."

Homes assessed above the average would pay more than the average. Genius. Maybe they think readers wouldn't have understood that. Then they should have pointed out that residents in less pricey homes would pay less.

It might have been worth saying that the resident of a suburban home with 50' of sidewalk assessed at $350,000 would pay less than a resident of a condo assessed at $400,000 who shares an eighty foot frontage between dozens of units. I don't want to get off topic, but we need a frontage levy. Other cities have them.

I think you're right, ijmorlan, that reporting everybody who does not fulfill their obligation is a step in the right direction. The City may not be able to act on all reports, but at least it will have a log of just how many property owners are not clearing their walks. Additionally, there's a cost to enforcing the bylaw as it's written now, and even in simply taking reports. As that cost grows, the case for using municipal funds to clear sidewalks becomes clearer.
(12-10-2016, 01:37 PM)ijmorlan Wrote: [ -> ]
(12-10-2016, 01:31 PM)panamaniac Wrote: [ -> ]I see that the Record had an editorial the other day, supporting council in not deciding not to do sidewalk snow removal, putting the (modest) tax cost in the context of other cost increases coming taxpayers' way.  I don't know that I agree with their conclusion, but it does add a little something to the conversation, istm.

Not anything useful. City responsibility is a tax decrease, not increase, so it’s not appropriate to frame it as an increase.

Except for those who currently shirk their responsibility.

That is why I was musing about reporting everybody. But of course that only works if most reports turn into enforcement actions.

I don't think I follow.
(12-10-2016, 02:17 PM)panamaniac Wrote: [ -> ]
(12-10-2016, 01:37 PM)ijmorlan Wrote: [ -> ]Not anything useful. City responsibility is a tax decrease, not increase, so it’s not appropriate to frame it as an increase.

Except for those who currently shirk their responsibility.

That is why I was musing about reporting everybody. But of course that only works if most reports turn into enforcement actions.

I don't think I follow.

Your obligation to the City as a property owner consists of the requirement to pay taxes, and the requirement to clear snow from the sidewalk (and some other stuff but let’s leave that aside as we’re not discussing changing it). The requirement to clear snow has a higher value (how much you would have to pay somebody to do it, or how much you would demand to do it for somebody else) than the amount of tax it would take to cover an equivalent service. Therefore, replacing the snow-clearing requirement with a slight increase in the tax requirement is a decrease in the total obligation.

The only possible counterargument is that in fact the value of the requirement to clear snow is lower than the tax increase. But the proposed tax increase is so small that this is really unbelievable, unless it is assumed that the property owner simply shirks the requirement but couldn’t shirk the tax increase. One could also argue that a property owner counts snow clearing as part of their exercise program or some such but at a certain point we’re getting into crazy town and I just can’t take it seriously.

This isn’t like other cases where the choice is whether or not to raise taxes to pay for a new or improved program. Nobody is proposing that sidewalks not be cleared as a matter of policy; the only question is whether to do it efficiently at a low cost or inefficiently at a high cost. I can’t help but point out that in fact those in favour of the status quo actually are proposing that sidewalks not be cleared (reliably) as a matter of practical reality. That’s why I found one politician’s comments that they didn’t want to “raise taxes” so grating. As if a low tax rate in and of itself matters even one bit. What are the taxes buying? That’s what determines whether the levels are appropriate, not the taxation levels themselves. It’s like looking at a price tag in a store and complaining it’s high without even looking at the item for which it is the price tag.
(12-10-2016, 04:26 PM)ijmorlan Wrote: [ -> ]...The requirement to clear snow has a higher value (how much you would have to pay somebody to do it, or how much you would demand to do it for somebody else) than the amount of tax it would take to cover an equivalent service. Therefore, replacing the snow-clearing requirement with a slight increase in the tax requirement is a decrease in the total obligation....

This is true technically, however, perception is what matters. People don't perceive the requirement to clear the sidewalk (even if they do it), as an expense to them, given they already have to clear their driveway. Even more, in reality for most people, they wouldn't otherwise earn money with that time anyway, so it's even more incomparable.

Frankly, our society as a whole doesn't seem to value time nearly as much as money and materials.

The perception of the vast majority of homeowners will be of an increase in cost.

Of course, it doesn't mean we shouldn't do it. And it's not that we shouldn't push this as a point of view. Just be aware that it's an uphill battle in convincing people, and requires clear and concise explanations with real world examples (you'll get to spend more time with your kids, isn't that worth 30 bucks a year).
(12-10-2016, 04:36 PM)danbrotherston Wrote: [ -> ]
(12-10-2016, 04:26 PM)ijmorlan Wrote: [ -> ]...The requirement to clear snow has a higher value (how much you would have to pay somebody to do it, or how much you would demand to do it for somebody else) than the amount of tax it would take to cover an equivalent service. Therefore, replacing the snow-clearing requirement with a slight increase in the tax requirement is a decrease in the total obligation....

This is true technically, however, perception is what matters.  People don't perceive the requirement to clear the sidewalk (even if they do it), as an expense to them, given they already have to clear their driveway.  Even more, in reality for most people, they wouldn't otherwise earn money with that time anyway, so it's even more incomparable.

Frankly, our society as a whole doesn't seem to value time nearly as much as money and materials.

The perception of the vast majority of homeowners will be of an increase in cost.

Of course, it doesn't mean we shouldn't do it.  And it's not that we shouldn't push this as a point of view.  Just be aware that it's an uphill battle in convincing people, and requires clear and concise explanations with real world examples (you'll get to spend more time with your kids, isn't that worth 30 bucks a year).

Unfortunately I think you’re exactly right.

I wonder if something can be done with the road/sidewalk distinction. Why does the City clear the road? But I don’t think anybody is suggesting to make everybody clear the bit of road in front of their house. In the past, for that matter, some property owners were responsible for construction and maintenance of their bit of road. Now, I’m going back to pioneer times for that, when construction pretty much meant clearing the trees and maintenance probably meant throwing sticks on muddy bits, but these things have changed significantly over time.
I think a few things that the cities could help with is ensuring sidewalk clearing by-laws are the same across all municipalities (if they aren't already) and making it obvious when a snowfall triggering event is officially "OVER" and the clock to clear your walk starts ticking down complete with a huge countdown on their webpages, Twitter, FaceBook, The Cube projection on Kitchener city hall's Berlin Tower, etc.

Or maybe just bring back Wendel and Lloyd's ad:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7rvLZr-ZJg4
(12-11-2016, 10:19 PM)Pheidippides Wrote: [ -> ]I think a few things that the cities could help with is ensuring sidewalk clearing by-laws are the same across all municipalities (if they aren't already) and making it obvious when a snowfall triggering event is officially "OVER" and the clock to clear your walk starts ticking down complete with a huge countdown on their webpages, Twitter, FaceBook, The Cube projection on Kitchener city hall's Berlin Tower, etc.

Or maybe just bring back Wendel and Lloyd's ad:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7rvLZr-ZJg4

This actually highlights another problem with the sidewalk clearing policies.  Since that timer restarts any time there is more snow, in many winters, we have a week at a time or more, when we have snow every 36 hours.  By that metric, there is no requirement to clear snow any time during that period.  (I know the bylaw says 24 hours, but the city's policy is to consider a 36 hour time frame).
Yesterday our condo cleared the snow in the morning ... and then in the afternoon the city snowplow dumped a bunch of snow on there again, so technically we were in violation of the bylaw again. (No boulevards for snow storage in downtown.)
The Pingstreeters must be having a field day.
Who are the Pingstreeters?

The people making reports about uncleared sidewalks? I don't think you can do that with pingstreet. Additionally, no one could be in violation of the bylaw- the snow stopped early this morning.
Pingstreet has never been able to report snowy sidewalks, and that is still the case.

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">Nearly two years later, <a href="https://twitter.com/CityKitchener">@CityKitchener</a> <a href="https://twitter.com/PingStreetCA">@PingStreetCA</a> app still doesn't have an option to report sidewalk clearing issues.</p>&mdash; Mike Boos (@mikeboos) <a href="https://twitter.com/mikeboos/status/808359540450361344">December 12, 2016</a></blockquote>

And yeah, the snow started on Friday, continued (lightly) through the weekend, and we're getting some snow every day until the end of the week.

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">With this forecast, <a href="https://twitter.com/CityKitchener">@CityKitchener</a>, <a href="https://twitter.com/citywaterloo">@citywaterloo</a>, and <a href="https://twitter.com/cityofcambridge">@cityofcambridge</a> won't be able to enforce sidewalk shoveling bylaws for a week. <a href="https://t.co/ysUphesL2q">pic.twitter.com/ysUphesL2q</a></p>&mdash; TriTAG (@TriTAG) <a href="https://twitter.com/TriTAG/status/808329564413800448">December 12, 2016</a></blockquote>

When exactly is the opening for bylaw complaints that won't be thrown out on technicality?
(12-12-2016, 02:01 PM)Markster Wrote: [ -> ]When exactly is the opening for bylaw complaints that won't be thrown out on technicality?

The forecast shows a 40%-60% chance of up to a centimetre of snow each of Tuesday and Wednesday. The snow by and large stopped in the early hours of this morning, so I am supposing that, if sidewalks aren't cleared by this time tomorrow, those property owners will be offside on the bylaw.

We'll see what Kitchener call centre staff say. Applying common sense, though, you will be able to tell when a sidewalk has not been cleared at all since Saturday. Most of my neighbours were clearing their sidewalks from time to time throughout Saturday and Sunday- some of them may not have been able to this morning. But their sidewalks will be in better shape than those who give no attention to it, which is where municipal resources should be directed.
It's funny how we get the 'everything works fine in the current system' rhetoric right at the end of autumn, and then get hat proven so very wrong on our first major snowfall...
City staff have told me explicitly, they don't enforce the bylaw until 36 hours after the last snow.  So actually you're looking at Wednesday before bylaw will even consider complaints.  So long as there is no more snow before then.  If there is snow every 36 hours, then timer resets........

So yes, the system is totally broken, but apparently that isn't obvious to people who matter.

Another thing broken about it, is major routes aren't priority cleared as they are with roads (not that any sidewalk is EVER 100% cleared), so walking to the bus is impossible even after you get off your road.  I especially loved walking down the middle of Victoria St. in the morning.