Should the City reconsider the snow removal policy? [Split from weather]

[4X4]

Originally Posted by You Need a Thneed

Everyone make sure to make sure the storm sewer drains are clear!

Sounds like fun. Go digging under the snowpile the plow put on the side of the road. I, for one, will not be making sure the storm drains are clear.

This kind of helps make a point that I was going to bring up. I think maybe the City needs to rethink plowing. I'm kind of amused by what my street has become with all this snow we've been getting. Plows did their thing during the parking ban, and my back thanks them for not putting all the snow on my sidewalk, but on the other hand, now cars can't park up against the curb, for fear of getting high centered on the windrow. So what are my neighbours doing? Parking beside the windrows, essentially narrowing the width of the street.

Every time a bus goes by, there's a mini traffic jam, because cars have to pull into vacant "parking spaces" to let the bus get by all the cars that are parked 3' toward the center of the street on either side.

Now I know it'd be insanely expensive to run those snow removal conveyor machines, and dump trucks down every street, but there has got to be some kind of solution for this. Any bright ideas out there in CP land? TBQH, this doesn't really affect me, since my truck can handle the windrows (they're not THAT bad), but most cars can't handle them. Nobody is parking a Corolla on the piles in front of my house. They're parking beside them, with really no other option.

[ken0042]

I decided this should be it's own discussion......

I have always said we should have better plowing. $10-20 million extra would go a long way, and translate into $10-20 per person extra in taxes. Heck- even get insurance companies to chip in; and free up some overtime from the police that have to respond to crashes.

In Winnipeg, each street has designated places for them to pile up snow. If the accumulation warrants it, they will then remove the snow from the piles. This can be done long after the snow has fallen; like on a day like today where the plows wouldn't be as busy.

[CaptainCrunch]

Didn't they just bump it by 10 million bucks last year or the year before?

[You Need a Thneed]

It would cost a lot more than $10 million to remove all the snow from every side street.

[Ozy_Flame]

Citizens should register as official "snow angels" and get a tax break for taking care of excess snow on roads. There is manpower available all over the city (citizens) who are motivated to get this stuff cleared ASAP and some form of tax relief may be a good incentive.

City could provide registered "snow angels" with a proper shovel and an iPhone app that notifies them when they should remove snow based on snowfall projections or weather trends. Property size would have to come into play for tax break amount, but it could be a way of helping out. People can also sponsor a neighbour to be their angel which qualifies them for a bigger tax break or other incentive if said person can't do it themselves. And if an angel doesn't clear their roads? Neighbours can submit complaints and the City implements a three-strike rule or something to that effect.

Thoughts? Seems crazy but lets not discount how citizens could respond to this.

[Bigtime]

Bumping up the budget seems like a good plan at first, but what happens if we get a year where the weather gods bless us and the Chinook does all the work, does that budget money get used up anyways (the old gotta use it or lose it thinking)?

Could it be held in some sort of reserve, being budgeted for but can only be accessed if in dire need (like this last couple of weeks)?

[FlamesKickAss]

The snow route approach needs to change. Maybe two levels of snow routes. I live on a priority 2 route that is a snow route and during the snow event we never saw a plow. Why not stagger the events, priority one snow event and priority two snow event. Although it would take people another 3 years to figure it out.....

[CaptainCrunch]

Originally Posted by Ozy_Flame

Citizens should register as official "snow angels" and get a tax break for taking care of excess snow on roads. There is manpower available all over the city (citizens) who are motivated to get this stuff cleared ASAP and some form of tax relief may be a good incentive.

City could provide registered "snow angels" with a proper shovel and an iPhone app that notifies them when they should remove snow based on snowfall projections or weather trends. Property size would have to come into play for tax break amount, but it could be a way of helping out. People can also sponsor a neighbour to be their angel which qualifies them for a bigger tax break or other incentive if said person can't do it themselves. And if an angel doesn't clear their roads? Neighbours can submit complaints and the City implements a three-strike rule or something to that effect.

Thoughts? Seems crazy but lets not discount how citizens could respond to this.

I like this idea, but I wonder, if someone is injured doing their snow angel duty for the city and getting a tax break what the liability is?

If Joe Smith goes out to clear a sidewalk has his forms and confirmation of the tax break and then falls and breaks his hip, would he be able to sue the city?

You would also need to do a business based tax incentive to companies with heavy equipment and have a corporate snow angel as well.

[fundmark19]

Originally Posted by Bigtime

Bumping up the budget seems like a good plan at first, but what happens if we get a year where the weather gods bless us and the Chinook does all the work, does that budget money get used up anyways (the old gotta use it or lose it thinking)?

Could it be held in some sort of reserve, being budgeted for but can only be accessed if in dire need (like this last couple of weeks)?

I was just discussing this with a co worker. Everyone should pay into a slush fund for snow clearing much like you pay for garbage disposal. The city can then use that fund to take better care of the roads. If we have a warm winter without any major needs for the fund it just keeps rolling over.

[Bigtime]

Originally Posted by fundmark19

I was just discussing this with a co worker. Everyone should pay into a slush fund for snow clearing much like you pay for garbage disposal. The city can then use that fund to take better care of the roads. If we have a warm winter without any major needs for the fund it just keeps rolling over.

Would there be an upper limit to this fund though? What if it gets too big? Could it have a minimum quantity and a maximum and anything over gets put back into the city coffers?

[habernac]

I just think of the older people I saw trying to dig our their driveways after the plow came by. There has to be a better solution. Bronco's solution was "Chinooks", but we really shouldn't have to wait that long.

[ken0042]

I know in Winnipeg the fund carries over year by year. So if they have $50M set aside and only use $45M, the next year they have $55M available. Most of the time it works out, as one year you have less snow and the next year you have more.

As for the cost of plowing every side street, it was a number of years ago but I seem to recall the number being $5M to plow every side street. It came up as "It would cost $100M to plow every side street every time it snows; which would be 20 times per year." My arguement is that it doesn't have to be done after every snowfall. Just major snowfalls.

If somebody came by and told me that my share to have my street plowed would be $20 (4 people in my house), I would pay it without question right now.

[CaptainCrunch]

Originally Posted by Bigtime

Would there be an upper limit to this fund though? What if it gets too big? Could it have a minimum quantity and a maximum and anything over gets put back into the city coffers?

No

[undercoverbrother]

Originally Posted by ken0042

I decided this should be it's own discussion......

I have always said we should have better plowing. $10-20 million extra would go a long way, and translate into $10-20 per person extra in taxes. Heck- even get insurance companies to chip in; and free up some overtime from the police that have to respond to crashes.

In Winnipeg, each street has designated places for them to pile up snow. If the accumulation warrants it, they will then remove the snow from the piles. This can be done long after the snow has fallen; like on a day like today where the plows wouldn't be as busy.

So citizens get to chip in twice, once directly and once via increased premiums.

Sorry I dislike this idea.

I would be interested in knowing Montreal's snow removal policy. That place get's snow and lots of it. They are a comparable population wise.

[fundmark19]

Originally Posted by Bigtime

Would there be an upper limit to this fund though? What if it gets too big? Could it have a minimum quantity and a maximum and anything over gets put back into the city coffers?

I would say once it gets that big if ever roll it over to park/pathway imporvement. Or snow removal upgrades like buying new equipment or using the money for road improvements to better implement snow removing plans

[Hack&Lube]

Due to Calgary's urban sprawl, I think a density of your neighborhood should be a metric used to calculate a tax or fee paid by residents to have their streets plowed.

A plow working on an inner city street can clear a street that services thousands of people in one go. A plow clearing the same area in a lower-density neighborhood will nominally have to both travel further to get there, but the work it performs has a much lower efficacy due the lower number of residents serviced by those streets. Not only that, but as density decreases and we project the radius of neighborhoods out, the surface area of roads that need to be cleared increases exponentially.

That's the only way we can keep up with increasing sprawl and new neighborhoods popping up at the periphery as the city expands to make sure everybody has access to roads in a safe and reliable manner.

This is the same as any proposed levy for providing any other infrastructure related services as those also have to increase dramatically as the surface area increases and density of the city decreases going outward.

[burn_this_city]

I read somewhere the other day, I believe the Herald, that the 2013 Budget for snow removal was $35M and they had spent $25M so far. I'm was sort of confused why they are sitting on $10M with 3 weeks left in the year.

A few years ago I heard that if the individual districts within the city under run their budget than everyone gets a bonus out of the remaining balance, not sure whether or not this is true, if it is, that give incentive to do a half-assed job.

I wish the city would subcontract the entire thing to a contractor like Carmacks, they do a very good job on Deerfoot and Stoney Trail compared with major routes done by the city. Is the issue with the city a lack of gear or man-power, I don't get why the difference is so substantial.

[undercoverbrother]

Originally Posted by burn_this_city

I read somewhere the other day, I believe the Herald, that the 2013 Budget for snow removal was $35M and they had spent $25M so far. I'm was sort of confused why they are sitting on $10M with 3 weeks left in the year.

A few years ago I heard that if the individual districts within the city under run their budget than everyone gets a bonus out of the remaining balance, not sure whether or not this is true, if it is, that give incentive to do a half-assed job.

I wish the city would subcontract the entire thing to a contractor like Carmacks, they do a very good job on Deerfoot and Stoney Trail compared with major routes done by the city. Is the issue with the city a lack of gear or man-power, I don't get why the difference is so substantial.

What makes you believe that Carmacks can deliver the service cheaper than the current city set up?

[Hack&Lube]

Originally Posted by burn_this_city

I read somewhere the other day, I believe the Herald, that the 2013 Budget for snow removal was $35M and they had spent $25M so far. I'm was sort of confused why they are sitting on $10M with 3 weeks left in the year.

A few years ago I heard that if the individual districts within the city under run their budget than everyone gets a bonus out of the remaining balance, not sure whether or not this is true, if it is, that give incentive to do a half-assed job.

I wish the city would subcontract the entire thing to a contractor like Carmacks, they do a very good job on Deerfoot and Stoney Trail compared with major routes done by the city. Is the issue with the city a lack of gear or man-power, I don't get why the difference is so substantial.

I'm guessing that the City of Calgary Unions have something to do with it.

[Ozy_Flame]

Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch

I like this idea, but I wonder, if someone is injured doing their snow angel duty for the city and getting a tax break what the liability is?

If Joe Smith goes out to clear a sidewalk has his forms and confirmation of the tax break and then falls and breaks his hip, would he be able to sue the city?

You would also need to do a business based tax incentive to companies with heavy equipment and have a corporate snow angel as well.

Very good points Cap. Injury from snow angel activity would have to be factored in as part of a legal disclaimer thing. I think more of an issue would be people standing in the road and getting bumped by a car that can't stop in time. So that would be an issue.

The corporate snow angels would also have to be accounted for. There could be various types of snow angels (resident, community angel, corporate angel) that would have have to meet different requirements (etc. equipment available) and have different expectations for delivering snow removal.

I just see a huge benefit to enlisting citizens to take care of some of this. Rather than 20 able-bodied people waiting for one machine to come by their road, they can take action themselves, freeing up City plowing resources for other areas to focus on.