From My Bottom Step

In his 2009/11/16 report to the Environment & Transportation Committee, David Leckie (Director of Roads & Transportation) states that “snow clearing is a debate that takes place in all Canadian cities.” Which explains why in this province, the Ontario Good Roads Association commissioned a task force to review the province’s existing Minimum Maintenance Standards for roads. It in turn commissioned a sub-group to develop a best practice for sidewalk winter maintenance. According to Mr. Leckie’s report, that group “concluded that there is no single standard to recommend, because climate and diversity of approaches across municipalities create too great a variation.”

Mr. Leckie explains that in London “We do all sidewalk maintenance and have adopted our own standards for doing so. The only exception is our downtown area, where the shop owners are expected to do that maintenance.”

Mr. Leckie further explains that “Our existing level of service is defined in our winter sidewalk quality standard, a prefaced version of which is as follows:

“

Here’s a comparison with some of the other cities that use mechanical equipment to clear snow from sidewalks:

So far so good. I don’t believe that London’s winter sidewalk quality standard is sufficient, but that’s something to be addressed later. So far as this report is concerned, to this point it simply describes the current state of affairs. It’s what comes next that I take some exception to.

Mr. Leckie writes that “mechanical clearing of sidewalks is disadvantaged.” To which I say, so what? Pedestrians, and especially those who have physical disabilities, are a damn sight more disadvantaged by the lousy sidewalk maintanance in London than the city’s machines are.

That’s not to say that we should be insensitive to any difficulties that city staff may have to deal with, only that it’s important to put things into perspective.

Mr. Leckie points to two factors that make the mechanical removal of snow difficult.

First of all, he blames pedestrians. Specifically, he purports that we compact the snow before the city ploughs can clear it away. Well, I’m waiting to see the proof that that’s true. And if it is, whether it’s simply because the city ploughs aren’t getting around fast enough and often enough.

Secondly, Mr. Leckie provides this reason: “The plow is set in a float position to ride on the sidewalk. This float position enables the plow to safely ride over expansion joints, minor vertically discontinuities or elevations changes and distortions on the sidewalk.”

Huh?

But Mr. Leckie’s very best (?) excuse for not doing a better job of clearing London sidewalks is to point out that Ontario’s Municipal Act contains the following clause: “44.9 (9) Except in case of gross negligence, a municipalify is not liable for a personal injury caused by snow or ice on a sidewalk.”

In other words, what Mr. Leckie is pointing out to City Council is that thanks to Dalton McGuinty and his band of merry Liberals (like Chris Bentley and Deb Matthews and Kamil Ramal) if you or I should fall and injure ourselves because the City hasn’t done a good enough job clearing the sidewalk, it’ll be difficult for us to hold the City legally responsible.

But not impossible. Because, what’s the definition of “gross negligence”? What’s the case law? How many claims are made against the City of London every year for falls/injuries and how often does a court order the City to pay up?

Mr. Leckie leaves that information out of his report.

Mr. Leckie offered these options for City Council to choose from. I believe that there should have been more. And I also think that the descriptions are open to challenge:

And the report offered some conclusions…

“Although it is unfortunate that a common standard could not be achieved, it does allow Municipalities the opportunity to define their own level of service for now.”

Even if there was a minimum provincial standard, that ought not dissuade members of London City Council from providing it’s citizens with a higher standard of service.

“For a given sidewalk, the best clearing can be achieved with a shovel if adjacent owners act early. This poses enforcement issues if it is required under by-law and still leaves a substantial inventory of sidewalk where the City is the logical agent to do the clearing.”

This city isn’t very good at enforcement when it’s pedestrian rights that are being infringed. Witness the way that pedestrians are repeatedly obstructed by sidewalk advertising signs in downtown London and the way that my inquiries to By-law Enforcement and Councillor Bryant have been ignored.

There’s also a liability issue that staff don’t want to talk about. These are public sidewalks that we’re talking about. Owned by the City. If a homeowner is engaged in forced labour and suffers a heart attack and sues, how much will it cost London ratepayers?

And as for the quality of the clearing that can take place, let’s rebut that one as well. If the City can’t clear a sidewalk as well as an individual homeowner, it’s only because the City isn’t trying hard enough.

“The most practical way of striving for a clear sidewalk is to use significant amounts of salt, a practice that goes against Environment Canada’s goals of reducing salt usage. Salt does have limitations as well, as it ceases to be effective at temperatures in the vicinity of -12 degrees Celsius.”

Again, Mr. Leckie makes an assertion that’s easy to rebut. There’s nothing “practical” about using substances that will damage our environment. Sooner or later, a price will have to be paid for that folly. And it’s apt to end up costing us a lot more in the long run.

“This report addresses winter maintenance methods for clearing sidewalks and walkways. It should be noted that a future report on what pedestrian facilities should be maintained in winter is forthcoming, with winter pathway maintenance being the main focus.”

London’s pedestrians should be alarmed if that report is going to be prepared by City Hall engineers. And they should closely review the many good recommendations coming out of the Strengthening Neighbourhoods Task Force and lobby members of Council to adopt them.

“The Accessibility for Ontarians with Disabilities Act, (AODA) has not developed guidelines for this service. Sidewalk plowing will likely bridge two standard Development Committees – the Built Environment and Transportation. It would be premature to make a substantive service level change until such time as the requirements are known.”

No it wouldn’t. This is simply another stalling tactic, the same way that the recommendation to wait for the Good Roads report was.

“Additional budget dollars have not been requested in the 2010 budget.”

And they damn well should be. So if you’re a London pedestrian, make it clear to your ward Councillor and to the Controllers and the Mayor that you want the winter sidewalk maintanance budget increased substantially. And even more importantly, the level of service that we’re getting.

So. What kind of discussion took place when ETC addressed the report?

Here’s the ETC recommendation that went to Council:
“7 (11) That, on the recommendation of the Director of Roads & Transportation, the current level of service for winter sidewalk maintenance BE CONFIRMED for the winter of 2009/2010: it being noted that additional budget funding has not been included in the 2010 Operating Budget; it being also noted that the attached presentation was received from J. Parsons, Division Manager, Transportation & Roadside Maintenance. (2009-S08-00 “

And the discussion that took place at Council: