Winter Walking and Cycling

[tomh009]

I threw in my two cents in favour of doing this for the entire city, every year. And that's in spite of the fact that condo dwellers would significantly overpay under this scheme. (We spend about $180/unit for the entire snow removal budget, and sidewalks are only a small part of that.)

[JoeKW]

I was surveyed via phone a few weeks ago about this topic, it was on behalf of the city of Kitchener and they mainly asked my opinion on four scenarios:

Status Quo
All sidewalks cleared by the city after every snowfall
All sidewalks cleared by the city only after snow events
Priority sidewalks cleared after every snowfall (main arteries/near schools/etc).

[danbrotherston]

Do you have a source for the sidewalks being cleared at a LOS above the standard LOS, or is that only your impression? I don't believe they were achieving a standard higher than the standard LOS applied to all existing city cleared sidewalks.

Sorry, should have been more clear, that was just my impression. But it definitely felt like a level of service far beyond what homeowners would do, even if they followed the bylaw perfectly.

You're not wrong about that either.

Something certain politicians refuse to even talk about is that homeowners requirement to act is triggered by the end of snowfall, where as the city's cause to act is triggered by the beginning.

[danbrotherston]

I threw in my two cents in favour of doing this for the entire city, every year. And that's in spite of the fact that condo dwellers would significantly overpay under this scheme. (We spend about $180/unit for the entire snow removal budget, and sidewalks are only a small part of that.)

"overpay" is relative, and again implies that the benefit is that you don't do the clearing.

I too would "overpay". Right now, I actually pay the city to clear the sidewalks around the building I live in. Every tax bill has a separate line item for snow clearing, and we get a very high level of service. It's 5 dollars a year. That's cheap mainly because of the efficiency of a dense downtown core, the wasteful suburbs is what would drive that cost to 50 or 100 dollars a year.

But that's not what I'm want to pay for. Right now, I pay 5 dollars a year to save some money on our snow clearing. But I would gladly pay 100 dollars a year in order to have safe clear sidewalks to walk on all winter. The benefit to me is not that the sidewalks around my building are clear, they'd be clear whether the city did it or not, the benefit is that I can walk safely and freely in the winter.  For basically the price of a pair of shoes..seems like a good deal.

[danbrotherston]

Well, looks like its the end of the fucking road for sidewalk clearing in KW.

https://www.therecord.com/news/waterloo-...lling.html

I'm so done with this fucking city. One step forward, two steps back. The study clearly showed that city cleared sidwalks were vastly more effective than proactive bylaw enforcement, but they've twisted the numbers on bylaw enforcement enough to try and justify it. Fucking fuck...I'm so fucking done...

[ijmorlan]

Well, looks like its the end of the fucking road for sidewalk clearing in KW.

https://www.therecord.com/news/waterloo-...lling.html

I'm so done with this fucking city.  One step forward, two steps back.  The study clearly showed that city cleared sidwalks were vastly more effective than proactive bylaw enforcement, but they've twisted the numbers on bylaw enforcement enough to try and justify it.  Fucking fuck...I'm so fucking done...

The headline conclusion (“Kitchener residents don’t want to pay for snow shovelling”) is not believable, if we correct for options that are actually officially on the table. By this I mean that officially the idea of not shovelling sidewalks is not on the table, even if that is what the chosen outcome effectively means in some areas.

The decision should be done by first identifying all properties which rigorously and fully shovel their walks all winter long. Then get only those properties to vote on whether they would like a tiny tax increase in order to be released from their obligation. The opinion of somebody who doesn’t currently shovel their walk isn’t relevant; the only difference for them would be the increased tax payment which of course nobody wants, separately from its associated benefit.

I also note that the high-quality pilot in Victoria park actually came out in favour. Why not do a bigger pilot based on that pilot? It seems more than questionable to base a city-wide decision on a survey of a hypothetical when those who have actually experienced the hypothetical come out strongly in favour. Or try the new way city-wide for a year; I predict going back would be a political 3rd rail.

[tomh009]

Well ... it's not a council decision yet, only a staff recommendation. There is time to lobby the councilors and/or present to the council at the meeting.

[danbrotherston]

Well, looks like its the end of the fucking road for sidewalk clearing in KW.

https://www.therecord.com/news/waterloo-...lling.html

I'm so done with this fucking city.  One step forward, two steps back.  The study clearly showed that city cleared sidwalks were vastly more effective than proactive bylaw enforcement, but they've twisted the numbers on bylaw enforcement enough to try and justify it.  Fucking fuck...I'm so fucking done...

The headline conclusion (“Kitchener residents don’t want to pay for snow shovelling”) is not believable, if we correct for options that are actually officially on the table. By this I mean that officially the idea of not shovelling sidewalks is not on the table, even if that is what the chosen outcome effectively means in some areas.

The decision should be done by first identifying all properties which rigorously and fully shovel their walks all winter long. Then get only those properties to vote on whether they would like a tiny tax increase in order to be released from their obligation. The opinion of somebody who doesn’t currently shovel their walk isn’t relevant; the only difference for them would be the increased tax payment which of course nobody wants, separately from its associated benefit.

I also note that the high-quality pilot in Victoria park actually came out in favour. Why not do a bigger pilot based on that pilot? It seems more than questionable to base a city-wide decision on a survey of a hypothetical when those who have actually experienced the hypothetical come out strongly in favour. Or try the new way city-wide for a year; I predict going back would be a political 3rd rail.

Yup...these are all better options than the current staff recommendation, which is basically status quo with a little bit of saving face.

[danbrotherston]

Well ... it's not a council decision yet, only a staff recommendation. There is time to lobby the councilors and/or present to the council at the meeting.

You aren't wrong, but I think there's exactly zero chance council will overrule a staff recommendation of this magnitude.

[panamaniac]

I think that's probably accurate, especially given the apparent extent of opposition and the present circumstances, which make talk of tax increases not related to "covid recovery" politically impossible for the time being.

[danbrotherston]

I think that's probably accurate, especially given the apparent extent of opposition and the present circumstances, which make talk of tax increases not related to "covid recovery" politically impossible for the time being.

Then staff should delay the report...because doing this kills any possibility of doing it now.

Frankly, at this point, I might just go to council and yell at them for wasting 140k on bullshit sidewalk clearing theater.

[dtkmelissa]

Well ... it's not a council decision yet, only a staff recommendation. There is time to lobby the councilors and/or present to the council at the meetin

Yes, I am gathering my thoughts now and trying to figure out what exactly I want to ask of council. I suspect that, as has been mentioned, there isn't a lot of hope for moving ahead on this. But I find it fascinating that the Vic Park pilot area has such support (and the Record goes with the much more negative headline). I mean, how many city projects get that kind of support in a relatively short period of time?

Though not my ideal, I do wonder if the best way forward right now is to encourage council to consider a slow build out of the program, starting in the (more dense and overall walkable) core/central neighbourhoods and expand that out slowly over the next several years. Still thinking on this of course, but it's just one idea I had to try to find a way to move forward.

Is the actual report public yet somewhere?

[tomh009]

Well ... it's not a council decision yet, only a staff recommendation. There is time to lobby the councilors and/or present to the council at the meetin

Though not my ideal, I do wonder if the best way forward right now is to encourage council to consider a slow build out of the program, starting in the (more dense and overall walkable) core/central neighbourhoods and expand that out slowly over the next several years. Still thinking on this of course, but it's just one idea I had to try to find a way to move forward.

That could be good value indeed. But the funding would likely have to come out of general revenues, which means that it would be shared by all property owners in the city. Or is there a way to have only the downtown wards' property owners pay for this? Or would this be small enough that it would be acceptable to distribute across all properties?

[dtkmelissa]

Though not my ideal, I do wonder if the best way forward right now is to encourage council to consider a slow build out of the program, starting in the (more dense and overall walkable) core/central neighbourhoods and expand that out slowly over the next several years. Still thinking on this of course, but it's just one idea I had to try to find a way to move forward.

That could be good value indeed. But the funding would likely have to come out of general revenues, which means that it would be shared by all property owners in the city. Or is there a way to have only the downtown wards' property owners pay for this? Or would this be small enough that it would be acceptable to distribute across all properties?

Yes, I've definitely thought that will be the main objection (or at least one of the objections). I do think this kind of thing happens fairly often though (where one segment of residents) bares the costs of services that they don't benefit from. I think of when I lived out in Williamsburg area and all of the expensive infrastructure that had to be but in place so my neighbours and I could have indoor plumbing and roads  But I understand that it may not be a palatable option because it seems unfair to suburban residents to pay for sidewalk clearing 'downtown'.

[ijmorlan]

But I understand that it may not be a palatable option because it seems unfair to suburban residents to pay for sidewalk clearing 'downtown'.

Maybe pick a few neighbourhoods in different types of area of the city? So a different downtown neighbourhood, a couple of suburban neighbourhoods, some areas in between, maybe a major street (rather than an area). Then see what people in those areas think in the spring.