Winter Walking and Cycling

[goggolor]

GRT stop clearing is a whole other issue... I complained to the region recently because the bus stop near my house (which services a hospital) hasn't been cleared all winter even a week after major snowfalls, and GRT Twitter has been ignoring snow complaints. The contact from the region told me they've been having issues with their Kitchener contractor this winter and are working on better solutions.

[danbrotherston]

GRT stop clearing is a whole other issue... I complained to the region recently because the bus stop near my house (which services a hospital) hasn't been cleared all winter even a week after major snowfalls, and GRT Twitter has been ignoring snow complaints. The contact from the region told me they've been having issues with their Kitchener contractor this winter and are working on better solutions.

They did say that in the meetings today.

Sadly this is a perennial issue, and it has to do with the fact that, aside from building road capacity, the region refuses to purchase for peak times, not for snow clearing, grass cutting, or even ambulances.  But hey, we "save money" in the end...

[the_councillor]

the_councillor, welcome to the thread and the board. We are happy to have you engaging with us here on this fraught, seasonal topic about how best to ensure people can safely and reliably transport themselves around here.

I'm in the "spend the money" camp. I think that even an exorbitant expense is worth it to clear the sidewalks in the cities, and that by shifting the expense to residents' wallets, labour, schedules, and health we are creating an unfair externality.

I know spending more money just isn't a political reality, though. Budgets are fixed, revenue streams grow slowly (especially taking inflation into account)... but if ever there were a topic that could wedge a property tax line item onto our invoices, I think sidewalk clearing might be it.

Do you think so? Could we fund that?

Speaking specifically to whether we could fund it?  Yes, Kitchener is in great shape financially, we could conceivably afford to pay for this service, but here's the rub.  At $4 million in one time costs and an additional ~$3.5 million in annual operating costs, it would be ALL we could afford to do over the next many years.  There are a few issues with this:

-  I remain convinced this service in other cities is not good.  I follow it very closely and have pictures sent often (daily recently) from other cities like London.  It's a LOT of money for mediocre value.

- The environmental harm, CO2 from sidewalk plows + about 70 more dump trucks of salt into the earth each year... on the heels of our council committing to environmental targets no less.

- Residents have been clear in every statistically-significant survey we've put out-- the vast majority want us to try to maintain services and hold taxes to inflation.  I know many here may not care... but the point is there are limits to tax increases.  Especially with regressive property-taxation like ours.  Remember, an ultra-wealthy Google-couple pulling in $300K in salary pays the same tax on their $400k condo as a widower on a $30k pension in the modest $400K home she raised her family in.  We need to consider these people too.

- As mentioned above, we could probably perform this service (though as poorly as others) and keep taxes near inflation... but what we need to realize is one of two things will happen; either taxes will rise well above inflation (highly unlikely) or other progressive things will begin to get (perhaps quietly) cut, or scaled back.  What things?  Well I know this council intends to spend a lot more on slowing traffic down, cycling infrastructure is a big ticket item (many signed pledges for), affordable housing, and I personally want to better leverage technology and our narrowband streetlight network for smart-city initiatives.

This is what we must balance.  I get people here don't have to acknowledge this reality, but I do, and it is the reality.  Even if other cities cleared snow well, I'd still struggle losing other progressive items like those mentioned above due to the huge cost... but when they can't... when I hear people with disabilities can't traverse sidewalks in places like Ottawa and London a week after a snowfall... I think maybe we at least try to go after the 10-15% that don't clear their walk first.  And despite popular belief, we haven't tried before, or put ANY new dollars towards enforcement in my 8 years on council.  That is, until this year, and bylaw has just begun trying to change behaviours.

[Canard]

[Spokes]

There's a lot of discussion about salt these days.  I wonder if it has to do with the salt shortage we're having.  Hmmm.

[Canard]

I find it fascinating we all have to clear our sidewalks diligently but the Region can just put up a “Closed” sign with a smarmy excuse.

[KevinL]

Has there been a significant reduction in the salt used on roads? Are there initiatives to make a significant dent in that? If not, this comes across very poorly.

[tomh009]

- The environmental harm, CO2 from sidewalk plows + about 70 more dump trucks of salt into the earth each year... on the heels of our council committing to environmental targets no less.

Why would city clearing sidewalks use more salt than residents clearing sidewalks, assuming both are done to the same standard?

And without some actual data I am not yet convinced of the impact of the sidewalk plow emissions, especially if this enables more people to walk, bicycle and take transit. And residents do use snowplows as well -- usually with two-cycle engines which pollute considerably more.

[MidTowner]

Speaking specifically to whether we could fund it?  Yes, Kitchener is in great shape financially, we could conceivably afford to pay for this service, but here's the rub.  At $4 million in one time costs and an additional ~$3.5 million in annual operating costs, it would be ALL we could afford to do over the next many years.  There are a few issues with this:

-  I remain convinced this service in other cities is not good.  I follow it very closely and have pictures sent often (daily recently) from other cities like London.  It's a LOT of money for mediocre value.

- The environmental harm, CO2 from sidewalk plows + about 70 more dump trucks of salt into the earth each year... on the heels of our council committing to environmental targets no less.

- Residents have been clear in every statistically-significant survey we've put out-- the vast majority want us to try to maintain services and hold taxes to inflation.  I know many here may not care... but the point is there are limits to tax increases.  Especially with regressive property-taxation like ours.  Remember, an ultra-wealthy Google-couple pulling in $300K in salary pays the same tax on their $400k condo as a widower on a $30k pension in the modest $400K home she raised her family in.  We need to consider these people too.

- As mentioned above, we could probably perform this service (though as poorly as others) and keep taxes near inflation... but what we need to realize is one of two things will happen; either taxes will rise well above inflation (highly unlikely) or other progressive things will begin to get (perhaps quietly) cut, or scaled back.  What things?  Well I know this council intends to spend a lot more on slowing traffic down, cycling infrastructure is a big ticket item (many signed pledges for), affordable housing, and I personally want to better leverage technology and our narrowband streetlight network for smart-city initiatives.

This is what we must balance.  I get people here don't have to acknowledge this reality, but I do, and it is the reality.  Even if other cities cleared snow well, I'd still struggle losing other progressive items like those mentioned above due to the huge cost... but when they can't... when I hear people with disabilities can't traverse sidewalks in places like Ottawa and London a week after a snowfall... I think maybe we at least try to go after the 10-15% that don't clear their walk first.  And despite popular belief, we haven't tried before, or put ANY new dollars towards enforcement in my 8 years on council.  That is, until this year, and bylaw has just begun trying to change behaviours.

What convinces you that the service in other cities is not good? Have you ever seen any data on it? You have alluded to poor service in Guelph, London and Ottawa. Now you mention receiving photos of poor service in London. That's just not my experience in London, and I don't think that pictures being snapped by people wanting to demonstrate the poor job the city is doing are excellent data on which to base a decision.

I wonder why the most important question is not far and away "what would work best to keep sidewalks clear"? Has anything been done to figure out what that is? TriTAG at least undertook to try on a small scale to apply some methodology to see whether the current system in Kitchener is working. Is there really no actual data we can access showing the actual performance of other cities' systems?

I think a lot of your other considerations are important ones, but ultimately secondary. A lot of people here will definitely sympathize with your point about CO2 emissions for sure, but that's not a primary consideration. After all, the City spent tax dollars this winter to buy gas-powered snow blowers to give away to private citizens.

[danbrotherston]

There's a lot of discussion about salt these days.  I wonder if it has to do with the salt shortage we're having.  Hmmm.

This was closed long before the salt shortage.

Most egregiously, the back access (from Queen St.) to Region Hall is blocked as a result of this policy.  I basically had a choice, traverse 20 feet of glare ice, or walk at least 8 minutes around the block.  Guess what I did.

[danbrotherston]

- The environmental harm, CO2 from sidewalk plows + about 70 more dump trucks of salt into the earth each year... on the heels of our council committing to environmental targets no less.

Why would city clearing sidewalks use more salt than residents clearing sidewalks, assuming both are done to the same standard?

And without some actual data I am not yet convinced of the impact of the sidewalk plow emissions, especially if this enables more people to walk, bicycle and take transit. And residents do use snowplows as well -- usually with two-cycle engines which pollute considerably more.

I can believe that plows would use more salt because they leave a layer of snow which must then be melted, however, that's why we use this equipment in DTK:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VWO3Lpk9shU

Of course, the average homeowner doesn't use the right amount of salt, some use far far too much some use none even when needed, thus sidewalks are both environmentally wasteful, and unsafe.  It's the worst possible situation, use salt, and force people to drive.

The environmental argument is at best, unclear.

[danbrotherston]

Speaking specifically to whether we could fund it?  Yes, Kitchener is in great shape financially, we could conceivably afford to pay for this service, but here's the rub.  At $4 million in one time costs and an additional ~$3.5 million in annual operating costs, it would be ALL we could afford to do over the next many years.  There are a few issues with this:

-  I remain convinced this service in other cities is not good.  I follow it very closely and have pictures sent often (daily recently) from other cities like London.  It's a LOT of money for mediocre value.

- The environmental harm, CO2 from sidewalk plows + about 70 more dump trucks of salt into the earth each year... on the heels of our council committing to environmental targets no less.

- Residents have been clear in every statistically-significant survey we've put out-- the vast majority want us to try to maintain services and hold taxes to inflation.  I know many here may not care... but the point is there are limits to tax increases.  Especially with regressive property-taxation like ours.  Remember, an ultra-wealthy Google-couple pulling in $300K in salary pays the same tax on their $400k condo as a widower on a $30k pension in the modest $400K home she raised her family in.  We need to consider these people too.

- As mentioned above, we could probably perform this service (though as poorly as others) and keep taxes near inflation... but what we need to realize is one of two things will happen; either taxes will rise well above inflation (highly unlikely) or other progressive things will begin to get (perhaps quietly) cut, or scaled back.  What things?  Well I know this council intends to spend a lot more on slowing traffic down, cycling infrastructure is a big ticket item (many signed pledges for), affordable housing, and I personally want to better leverage technology and our narrowband streetlight network for smart-city initiatives.

This is what we must balance.  I get people here don't have to acknowledge this reality, but I do, and it is the reality.  Even if other cities cleared snow well, I'd still struggle losing other progressive items like those mentioned above due to the huge cost... but when they can't... when I hear people with disabilities can't traverse sidewalks in places like Ottawa and London a week after a snowfall... I think maybe we at least try to go after the 10-15% that don't clear their walk first.  And despite popular belief, we haven't tried before, or put ANY new dollars towards enforcement in my 8 years on council.  That is, until this year, and bylaw has just begun trying to change behaviours.

What convinces you that the service in other cities is not good? Have you ever seen any data on it? You have alluded to poor service in Guelph, London and Ottawa. Now you mention receiving photos of poor service in London. That's just not my experience in London, and I don't think that pictures being snapped by people wanting to demonstrate the poor job the city is doing are excellent data on which to base a decision.

I wonder why the most important question is not far and away "what would work best to keep sidewalks clear"? Has anything been done to figure out what that is? TriTAG at least undertook to try on a small scale to apply some methodology to see whether the current system in Kitchener is working. Is there really no actual data we can access showing the actual performance of other cities' systems?

I think a lot of your other considerations are important ones, but ultimately secondary. A lot of people here will definitely sympathize with your point about CO2 emissions for sure, but that's not a primary consideration. After all, the City spent tax dollars this winter to buy gas-powered snow blowers to give away to private citizens.

This is the same councillor who has repeatedly accused others of "cherry picking" pictures when they show pictures of blocked sidewalks in Kitchener.  

He is also the same councillor who voted against implementing a pilot project to actually evaluate what the best solutions is.

Between these two things, I don't believe he has a real interest in honest data collection.

As for snowblowers, I cannot recall for sure, but it might have been this councillor who actually requested the snow blower program...certainly he voted for it.

[danbrotherston]

the_councillor, welcome to the thread and the board. We are happy to have you engaging with us here on this fraught, seasonal topic about how best to ensure people can safely and reliably transport themselves around here.

I'm in the "spend the money" camp. I think that even an exorbitant expense is worth it to clear the sidewalks in the cities, and that by shifting the expense to residents' wallets, labour, schedules, and health we are creating an unfair externality.

I know spending more money just isn't a political reality, though. Budgets are fixed, revenue streams grow slowly (especially taking inflation into account)... but if ever there were a topic that could wedge a property tax line item onto our invoices, I think sidewalk clearing might be it.

Do you think so? Could we fund that?

Speaking specifically to whether we could fund it?  Yes, Kitchener is in great shape financially, we could conceivably afford to pay for this service, but here's the rub.  At $4 million in one time costs and an additional ~$3.5 million in annual operating costs, it would be ALL we could afford to do over the next many years.  There are a few issues with this:

-  I remain convinced this service in other cities is not good.  I follow it very closely and have pictures sent often (daily recently) from other cities like London.  It's a LOT of money for mediocre value.

- The environmental harm, CO2 from sidewalk plows + about 70 more dump trucks of salt into the earth each year... on the heels of our council committing to environmental targets no less.

- Residents have been clear in every statistically-significant survey we've put out-- the vast majority want us to try to maintain services and hold taxes to inflation.  I know many here may not care... but the point is there are limits to tax increases.  Especially with regressive property-taxation like ours.  Remember, an ultra-wealthy Google-couple pulling in $300K in salary pays the same tax on their $400k condo as a widower on a $30k pension in the modest $400K home she raised her family in.  We need to consider these people too.

- As mentioned above, we could probably perform this service (though as poorly as others) and keep taxes near inflation... but what we need to realize is one of two things will happen; either taxes will rise well above inflation (highly unlikely) or other progressive things will begin to get (perhaps quietly) cut, or scaled back.  What things?  Well I know this council intends to spend a lot more on slowing traffic down, cycling infrastructure is a big ticket item (many signed pledges for), affordable housing, and I personally want to better leverage technology and our narrowband streetlight network for smart-city initiatives.

This is what we must balance.  I get people here don't have to acknowledge this reality, but I do, and it is the reality.  Even if other cities cleared snow well, I'd still struggle losing other progressive items like those mentioned above due to the huge cost... but when they can't... when I hear people with disabilities can't traverse sidewalks in places like Ottawa and London a week after a snowfall... I think maybe we at least try to go after the 10-15% that don't clear their walk first.  And despite popular belief, we haven't tried before, or put ANY new dollars towards enforcement in my 8 years on council.  That is, until this year, and bylaw has just begun trying to change behaviours.

The regional survey for the budget this year in fact suggested that the majority of people supported increasing taxes to improve services.

Both of the types of people you highlight must pay a private contractor to clear the snow around their condo building, as condo buildings provide these services at scale it's actually much cheaper than an individual homeowner, but still much more expensive than it would cost the city to provide those services.  So your example is terrible because in those cases, a city service would save BOTH people actual dollars, as opposed to just labor.


Or maybe, and just stay with me on this one...you could cut other regressive programs, like continually widening roads.

If you care so much about taxes, why did you not take issue with the enormous sums of money spent to rebuild Belmont Ave. as a 1960s era unnecessarily wide wasteful dangerous road?  Millions could have been saved, we could be half way to paying for sidewalk plowing, and yet, nobody even questioned the need for it.

[chutten]

the_councillor, welcome to the thread and the board. We are happy to have you engaging with us here on this fraught, seasonal topic about how best to ensure people can safely and reliably transport themselves around here.

I'm in the "spend the money" camp. I think that even an exorbitant expense is worth it to clear the sidewalks in the cities, and that by shifting the expense to residents' wallets, labour, schedules, and health we are creating an unfair externality.

I know spending more money just isn't a political reality, though. Budgets are fixed, revenue streams grow slowly (especially taking inflation into account)... but if ever there were a topic that could wedge a property tax line item onto our invoices, I think sidewalk clearing might be it.

Do you think so? Could we fund that?

Speaking specifically to whether we could fund it?  Yes, Kitchener is in great shape financially, we could conceivably afford to pay for this service, but here's the rub.  At $4 million in one time costs and an additional ~$3.5 million in annual operating costs, it would be ALL we could afford to do over the next many years.  There are a few issues with this:

-  I remain convinced this service in other cities is not good.  I follow it very closely and have pictures sent often (daily recently) from other cities like London.  It's a LOT of money for mediocre value.

- The environmental harm, CO2 from sidewalk plows + about 70 more dump trucks of salt into the earth each year... on the heels of our council committing to environmental targets no less.

- Residents have been clear in every statistically-significant survey we've put out-- the vast majority want us to try to maintain services and hold taxes to inflation.  I know many here may not care... but the point is there are limits to tax increases.  Especially with regressive property-taxation like ours.  Remember, an ultra-wealthy Google-couple pulling in $300K in salary pays the same tax on their $400k condo as a widower on a $30k pension in the modest $400K home she raised her family in.  We need to consider these people too.

- As mentioned above, we could probably perform this service (though as poorly as others) and keep taxes near inflation... but what we need to realize is one of two things will happen; either taxes will rise well above inflation (highly unlikely) or other progressive things will begin to get (perhaps quietly) cut, or scaled back.  What things?  Well I know this council intends to spend a lot more on slowing traffic down, cycling infrastructure is a big ticket item (many signed pledges for), affordable housing, and I personally want to better leverage technology and our narrowband streetlight network for smart-city initiatives.

This is what we must balance.  I get people here don't have to acknowledge this reality, but I do, and it is the reality.  Even if other cities cleared snow well, I'd still struggle losing other progressive items like those mentioned above due to the huge cost... but when they can't... when I hear people with disabilities can't traverse sidewalks in places like Ottawa and London a week after a snowfall... I think maybe we at least try to go after the 10-15% that don't clear their walk first.  And despite popular belief, we haven't tried before, or put ANY new dollars towards enforcement in my 8 years on council.  That is, until this year, and bylaw has just begun trying to change behaviours.

Please correct me if I misinterpret: it sounds as though within the strictures of the present municipal funding arrangements (principally via property taxes, property taxes are a fixed proportion of property valuation irrespective of income, property tax increases greater than the rate of inflation are an excellent way to not be re-elected) it would be possible, but there are better programs to invest in.

(Well, depending on the reader's definition of "better", of course.)

Is there really no room to change the arrangement? I would think this winter would make an additional 100% tax-increase-funded snow-clearing line-item an easy sell. (That's certainly the sentiment on this forum, but we are of course not a representative sample).

Of course, there goes me, pre-supposing that it'd be better than what we have today. And there's no real way to measure that, is there.

Are there public sources of data (qualitative or quantitative) about municipal sidewalk snow clearing? You've been keeping an eye on this issue and have access to data we don't (what I wouldn't give for a public domain mandate from public institutions).

I wonder if there are standardized metrics for measuring snow clearing efficacy... average length of sidewalk between impassible segments? Impassible metre-days? At this point the only information I have is the anecdata on this forum from those who have experiences with nearby municipal sidewalk clearing and the weight of my own daily experiences walking my daughter to school in the mornings (the only sidewalks I can depend on being properly cleared are those in front of the school (I think they pay through the nose for priority care, but I'm not sure) and those that the city clears).

I crave something systematic and definitive and reproducible.

Once again, thank you for your continued engagement with us on this forum.

[danbrotherston]

Speaking specifically to whether we could fund it?  Yes, Kitchener is in great shape financially, we could conceivably afford to pay for this service, but here's the rub.  At $4 million in one time costs and an additional ~$3.5 million in annual operating costs, it would be ALL we could afford to do over the next many years.  There are a few issues with this:

-  I remain convinced this service in other cities is not good.  I follow it very closely and have pictures sent often (daily recently) from other cities like London.  It's a LOT of money for mediocre value.

- The environmental harm, CO2 from sidewalk plows + about 70 more dump trucks of salt into the earth each year... on the heels of our council committing to environmental targets no less.

- Residents have been clear in every statistically-significant survey we've put out-- the vast majority want us to try to maintain services and hold taxes to inflation.  I know many here may not care... but the point is there are limits to tax increases.  Especially with regressive property-taxation like ours.  Remember, an ultra-wealthy Google-couple pulling in $300K in salary pays the same tax on their $400k condo as a widower on a $30k pension in the modest $400K home she raised her family in.  We need to consider these people too.

- As mentioned above, we could probably perform this service (though as poorly as others) and keep taxes near inflation... but what we need to realize is one of two things will happen; either taxes will rise well above inflation (highly unlikely) or other progressive things will begin to get (perhaps quietly) cut, or scaled back.  What things?  Well I know this council intends to spend a lot more on slowing traffic down, cycling infrastructure is a big ticket item (many signed pledges for), affordable housing, and I personally want to better leverage technology and our narrowband streetlight network for smart-city initiatives.

This is what we must balance.  I get people here don't have to acknowledge this reality, but I do, and it is the reality.  Even if other cities cleared snow well, I'd still struggle losing other progressive items like those mentioned above due to the huge cost... but when they can't... when I hear people with disabilities can't traverse sidewalks in places like Ottawa and London a week after a snowfall... I think maybe we at least try to go after the 10-15% that don't clear their walk first.  And despite popular belief, we haven't tried before, or put ANY new dollars towards enforcement in my 8 years on council.  That is, until this year, and bylaw has just begun trying to change behaviours.

Please correct me if I misinterpret: it sounds as though within the strictures of the present municipal funding arrangements (principally via property taxes, property taxes are a fixed proportion of property valuation irrespective of income, property tax increases greater than the rate of inflation are an excellent way to not be re-elected) it would be possible, but there are better programs to invest in.

(Well, depending on the reader's definition of "better", of course.)

Is there really no room to change the arrangement? I would think this winter would make an additional 100% tax-increase-funded snow-clearing line-item an easy sell. (That's certainly the sentiment on this forum, but we are of course not a representative sample).

Of course, there goes me, pre-supposing that it'd be better than what we have today. And there's no real way to measure that, is there.

Are there public sources of data (qualitative or quantitative) about municipal sidewalk snow clearing? You've been keeping an eye on this issue and have access to data we don't (what I wouldn't give for a public domain mandate from public institutions).

I wonder if there are standardized metrics for measuring snow clearing efficacy... average length of sidewalk between impassible segments? Impassible metre-days? At this point the only information I have is the anecdata on this forum from those who have experiences with nearby municipal sidewalk clearing and the weight of my own daily experiences walking my daughter to school in the mornings (the only sidewalks I can depend on being properly cleared are those in front of the school (I think they pay through the nose for priority care, but I'm not sure) and those that the city clears).

I crave something systematic and definitive and reproducible.

One of the bigger problems is that not all clearing is created equal.  Look at the QOS that GRT achieves on their bus stops, or even Guelph achieves.  Their service is poor, because they spend very little, Guelph in fact has the same number of plows per sidewalk KM as Kitchener has, but they clear 100% of their sidewalks with that same equipment.

So Guelph's, QOS is relatively poor (although possibly still better than here).  On the other hand, you go to place in Europe, or hell, DTK, and we have an extremely good QOS.  

There are also very wide metrics, the effort required to clear things quickly but poorly is probably the same as required to clear things well, but slowly.  Which is better.

All I really know is that what we have here doesn't work, and whatever the city does for city sidewalks in Kitchener is far better than what we see on property owner cleared sidewalks.

My experience isn't total, but I walk an average of 10km a day, so it's fairly extensive.