Sidewalk Snow Removal (K. Leibovici)

Recommendation:
That the April 1, 2003, Planning and Development Department report be received for information.

Report Summary

This report is in response to an inquiry regarding sidewalk snow removal.

Previous Council/Committee Action

At the March 11, 2003, City Council meeting, Councillor K. Leibovici made the following inquiry:

“Recently I have received complaints regarding the City’s enforcement of the bylaw regarding shovelling of sidewalks to bare pavement by residents.

My questions are:

  1. Please supply a brief history of the current sidewalk snow removal bylaw and the rationale for the time provided to individuals to remove snow as well as the policy of going to bare pavement.
  2. What occurs in Montreal, Toronto, Ottawa and Winnipeg re sidewalks being shovelled? Is it the responsibility of the City or the homeowner?
  3. What changes need to be made to our sidewalk snow removal policy to reflect that sidewalks should be level and sanded and that bare pavement may not be realistic to achieve, due to circumstances such as weather or location?
  4. As many citizens have said that packed snow is visible on city roads and streets, is there a level of packed snow on sidewalks adjacent to homes that is currently the responsibility of homeowners to shovel that could be acceptable, i.e. 1-2 inches deep?
  5. Please explain how the current process that is complaint driven can be fair to all citizens when individuals whose sidewalks are not shovelled but have no complaints registered do not receive tickets?
  6. Is it the City’s policy to plough to bare pavement on sidewalks that the City is responsible for removing snow?
  7. What would be the cost of the City ploughing all sidewalks on an as required basis?
  8. What leniency can be provided to those who have been issued tickets during times of extreme cold when it is difficult to shovel down to bare pavement?
  9. Furthermore, as I have received complaints from schools and parents regarding windrows at schools, what change in policy would be required to remove windrows on both sides of the street at school drop off zones?

I am requesting that the information be provided at the same time as Councillor
D. Thiele’s inquiry on snow route and parking bans and the report on Policy on Residential Street Snow Removal, at the April 22, 2003, Transportation and Public Works Committee meeting.”

Report

  1. Please supply a brief history of the current sidewalk snow removal bylaw and the rationale for the time provided to individuals to remove snow as well as the policy of going to bare pavement.

In April 1979, the City’s Traffic Bylaw 5590, Part 8, Section 801, was passed to regulate the removal of snow, ice, dirt and debris from City sidewalks adjoining property. The bylaw provides 48 hours from when the snow or ice was formed or deposited on the sidewalk to be removed. The bylaw differentiates single family property offences from commercial property offences.

The 48-hour grace period strikes a balance, giving property owners a reasonable time frame to clear the City sidewalks without prolonging an existing safety hazard for pedestrians while minimizing the City’s exposure to lawsuits for injuries resulting from uncleaned sidewalks.

The wording of Section 801 requiring “all snow and ice” to be removed allows for consistent enforcement application and sets a clear and objectively identifiable standard. By requiring all snow and ice to be removed, there is no uncertainty regarding which property is governed by the section and which is not. See Attachment 1 for a more detailed rationale.

  1. What occurs in Montreal, Toronto, Ottawa and Winnipeg re sidewalks being shovelled? Is it the responsibility of the City or the homeowner?

In Winnipeg a Sidewalk Cleaning Bylaw was introduced in 1983 relative to one particular neighbourhood. This bylaw placed the responsibility for snow removal within 48 hours of last snowfall on adjacent property owners. The remainder of the city sidewalks continued to be cleaned by their Public Works Department. Enforcement of that bylaw has been discontinued and the Public Works Department now cleans all city sidewalks. The cleaning is conducted on a priority basis with the downtown core and arterial roadway sidewalks being of primary concern.

The City of Ottawa has no bylaw placing the responsibility for snow removal from city sidewalks on adjacent private property owners. Instead, the city’s Transportation, Public Utilities and Public Works Department ploughs all city sidewalks. This is an inventory of approximately 1,500 km of sidewalk where the city ploughs and lays sand and grit. This inventory also includes approximately 250 km of sidewalk in the downtown core where the snow is removed down to the bare pavement and the sidewalk is salted. Outside of the downtown core the city ploughs whenever there is an accumulation of 5 cm of snowfall or greater. The approximate cost of annual sidewalk ploughing in the City of Ottawa ranges from $6 million to $7 million.

Toronto has a bylaw requiring property owners to remove all snow and ice from their adjoining public sidewalks within 12 hours of last snowfall. Failure to do so results in the city cleaning the walk and billing the property owner. If the property owner does not pay the bill the cost of the work is added to their property taxes. There are no penalty fines. However, the city does plough most sidewalks in residential and commercial areas with the exception of the downtown core. The snow is ploughed into windrows but the sidewalk is not cleaned down to the pavement and a base of snow remains on the walk. In areas where the city has undertaken the task of ploughing the walks no enforcement action is taken against adjacent property owners for failing to remove snow and ice from the public sidewalk. The city does not plough sidewalks in the downtown core due to heavy commercial and pedestrian traffic. Enforcement action is taken against property owners in the areas of the city, such as the downtown core, where the property owners are responsible for snow removal.

In Montreal there is no municipal bylaw governing snow removal from city sidewalks. The Public Works Department is responsible for removing snow and ice from all city sidewalks. Snow removal is effected whenever there is an accumulation of 2.5 cm or more of snow and ice. The entire city, all 27 boroughs, includes a total inventory of 6,409 km of public sidewalk. The sidewalks are cleaned with bobcats and snow blowers down to the bare pavement and all snow is removed from the public property to snow storage sites or disposed of through sewer outlets. Sand, salt and grit is applied to sidewalks to prevent ice build-up and render the walks safe. The 2003 snow removal budget for all 27 boroughs of the City of Montreal is $129,717,200. This figure includes the cost of cleaning all sidewalks and roads and removing all snow.

  1. What changes need to be made to our sidewalk snow removal policy to reflect that sidewalks should be level and sanded and that bare pavement may not be realistic to achieve, due to circumstances such as weather or location?

The interpretation given to the snow removal regulations by Enforcement Officers, the Crown Prosecutor, and the Court has been that unless there is bare concrete, there is a breach of the bylaw. Officers strive to be fair and reasonable with enforcement of a seemingly stringent snow regulation. As a consequence, officers established a threshold level whereby there must be a minimum amount of snow before a courtesy warning notice is issued and an another threshold amount before a fine is issued. Generally, landowners that receive a penalty ticket for failure to remove snow have a minimum of 25 mm of hard packed snow and ice. See Attachment 1.

  1. As many citizens have said that packed snow is visible on city roads and streets, is there a level of packed snow on sidewalks adjacent to homes that is currently the responsibility of homeowners to shovel that could be acceptable, i.e. 1-2 inches deep?

Administration recommends maintaining the current bylaw standard for sidewalk snow removal. The potential danger of snow remaining on City sidewalks represents a greater safety concern in comparison to similar amounts of snow remaining on the local City roadway network. The increased risk of slip and fall accidents on uncleaned sidewalks justifies the current approach.

  1. Please explain how the current process that is complaint driven can be fair to all citizens when individuals whose sidewalks are not shovelled but have no complaints registered do not receive tickets?

The City’s sidewalk snow removal regulations are both proactively and reactively enforced. Complaints can be citizen generated or officer initiated. All snow complaints are handled in a similar manner. See Attachment 2.

  1. Is it the City’s policy to plough to bare pavement on sidewalks that the City is responsible for removing snow?

The Transportation and Streets Department is held to the same bylaw standard and given the same tolerances as property owners, for sidewalk snow removal.

  1. What would be the cost of the City ploughing all sidewalks on an as required basis?

The Transportation and Streets Department is currently responsible for ploughing 832 km of sidewalks to meet City’s Traffic Bylaw 5590. In order to achieve a bare sidewalk surface as a result of snowfall, drifting snow, freeze thaw cycles, freezing rain, etc. an average of $1.8 million is expended per winter season (October 1 - April 30) based on the last five years. At present there is an additional 3,343 km of sidewalks within the City that are being maintained by the abutting property owner. Due to growth, an additional 70 km of sidewalk is being added per year to the overall City inventory on an annual basis.

The current winter service level on the sidewalks being maintained by the City is based on 12 cycles of ploughing and 2 cycles of sanding in freezing rain conditions. The approximate per cycle cost for this 832 km inventory is $150,000.

To complete one cycle of ploughing of the remaining 3,300 km of sidewalk inventory, the cost would be $500,000 per cycle or approximately $6 million over a winter season based on the existing service levels of currently maintained City inventory.

Ploughing of sidewalks adjacent to residential property also has the potential to cause damage to landscaping and result in the placement of windrows of snow.

  1. What leniency can be provided to those who have been issued tickets during times of extreme cold when it is difficult to shovel down to bare pavement?

When enforcing snow removal regulations Officers are given a degree of flexibility to ensure consistent, reasonable and fair enforcement of the Traffic Bylaw. The steps followed by the Officer have a degree of latitude which allows the Officer to deal with extenuating circumstances that may mitigate or aggravate enforcement actions. It is recognized that two Bylaw Officers’ opinions concerning an enforcement situation may vary. However, it is expected that their enforcement action fall within the set office policies and procedures.

Enforcement staff strives to obtain citizen compliance before considering enforcement action. In the pursuit of this goal, a balance is sought between the concerns of the complainant, the obligations of the complainee and the Bylaw requirements. See Attachment 3.

  1. Furthermore, as I have received complaints from schools and parents regarding windrows at schools, what change in policy would be required to remove windrows on both sides of the street at school drop off zones?

At present there are 313 schools within the City of Edmonton that could be impacted by snow ploughing operations. When ploughing occurs, all school drop-off zones and school frontages have the snow ploughed to the side opposite the school, leaving no snow accumulation in these zones immediately adjacent to a school.

Of the 313 schools there are currently 174 schools on existing snow routes. All of these locations are ploughed on a regular basis through our existing policy. Under normal circumstances the snow would be removed as part of a city wide pick-up program typically in January or early February. However, due to the cost of residential ploughing program this year, a decision was made not to remove windrows on many of the snow routes which resulted in snow being left opposite the school frontage.

There are 139 schools on residential roads that are not ploughed on a regular basis. When a residential road ploughing program is initiated the same ploughing criteria for schools on snow routes is used. At this time, ploughing of these schools is not part of our existing policy. It follows then that the removal of the windrows at these locations is also not addressed in our existing policy. Estimated cost to remove ploughed snow adjacent to schools currently not in the policy is approximately $500,000.

As part of a request for Transportation and Streets Department to develop a new policy that would govern the clearing of snow from residential streets, removal of snow at schools would be included.

Background Information Attached

  1. Interpretation and Application of Snow Removal Regulations.
  2. Bylaw 5590 Enforcement Policy and Procedure.
  3. Examples of Discretions, Flexibility and Leniency.

Others Approving this Report

Rick Millican, General Manager, Transportation and Streets Department

(Page 1 of 5)

Attachment 1

Interpretation and Application of Snow Removal Regulations.

The Traffic Bylaw’s wording within Section 801(1) “all snow and ice” allows for the consistent application of enforcement activities. By requiring all snow and ice to be removed there is no uncertainty regarding which property is governed by the section and which is not. The interpretation given to Section 801(1) by the Complaints and Investigations Section, the City of Edmonton’s Crown Prosecutor, and the Provincial Court Commissioners has been that unless there is bare concrete, there is a breach of the Bylaw.

To be reasonable with the enforcement of the snow regulation, Municipal Enforcement Officers have set a level whereby there must be at least a minimum of one-half inch of snow covering the sidewalk to warrant issuing a warning. Generally, landowners that receive a penalty ticket for failure to remove snow have predominantly between .6 cm to 1.2 cm (1-1/2 to 3 inches) of snow/ice on the sidewalk. Once the matter is before the court, however, the standard of “down to the concrete” is the measure uniformly applied.

The Law Branch feels that it is a tenant of criminal and quasi-criminal prosecutions that like situations must be dealt with in a like manner. The Traffic Bylaw outlining “all snow” is a clear and concise measure for assessing like situations. The absence of such a clearly worded section would make it impossible to expect a consistent application of the Bylaw. This could result in citizens being confused about their obligations to maintain their sidewalks, the court not applying the Bylaw consistently, and confusion amongst Bylaw Officers about when to issue a penalty ticket. Therefore, the consistent application of the Bylaw is desirable in order to achieve fair and equitable enforcement. Such consistency would be unattainable without a section worded very similarly, if not exactly, as Section 801(1) reads: “…all snow…”. The Section pertaining to snow removal provides a standard that has been uniformly interpreted by the Court to mean that sidewalks must be cleaned of snow and ice to the bare concrete within 48 hours of the last recorded snowfall.

The bare concrete standard makes for uniformity of application and for efficient and effective enforcement. Some defendants have argued that they have made a reasonable effort to try and remedy the situation. The Court recognizes the proper standard us to render the sidewalk free of snow to the concrete. The reasonable effort argument is a subjective one and if accepted by the Courts would result in a Bylaw that is discriminatory in its application. For example, it could be argued that which is reasonable for a 24 year old is not reasonable for a 74 year old. Without an objective standard such as “all snow and ice” the bylaw would be next to impossible to enforce.

The Law Branch reported a 99% conviction rate of individuals who contested penalty tickets for inadequate snow removal. The Development Compliance Branch uses these conviction statistics and court rulings as a yardstick to measure its enforcement procedures and Bylaw interpretation. Given the 95% voluntary compliance rate achieved from issuing warning notices and the high conviction rate in court, the enforcement unit feels its procedures and standards are both reasonable and fair to all the citizens of Edmonton.

Attachment 1 - Page 1 of 1

Attachment 2

Traffic Bylaw (Snow Removal) #5590.

Description:

A section of the bylaw regulating and controlling the removal of snow, ice, dirt, debris and any other material from City of Edmonton sidewalks within a 48-hour time period.

Rationale:

The purpose of this section is to ensure public safety through the regulation of public sidewalk conditions.

Procedure:

  1. A complaint can be either a citizen complaint or an officer initiated complaint.
  2. The officer shall ensure that the 48-hour grace period from when the snow/ice/debris was deposited has passed before he or she starts the investigation.
  3. A physical inspection will be conducted. If a violation of the Traffic Bylaw exists it must be documented and a notice to comply or a ticket may be issued.
  4. Properties will only be issued notices to comply once per season.
  5. Notices to comply concerning snow or ice on walks will be issued to the following types of property:
  • Apartments
  • Residential Homes (Owners/Tenants)
  • Condos
  • Duplexes
  • 4-Plexes
  • Churches
  • Vacant Lot
  • All City owned property
  • Schools
  • Charities
  • Non-profit Organizations
  • Community Leagues
  1. The following types of property will not receive a notice to comply:
  • Vacant Lots (with commercial activity)
  • Commercial Building
  • Strip Malls
  1. Notices to comply will be issued to the owner of the property abutting the sidewalk in question. A copy of the notice may be sent to the tenant if one should exist. The standard compliance date of the notice allows seven (7) days for delivery and remedy.
  2. The officer shall conduct a follow-up inspection after the expiration of the compliance period stated on the notice to comply.

6. If there is compliance the file may be concluded. If there is no compliance or if upon the initial inspection the property is of the type that does not receive a warning notice the officer shall record the length, width and depth (minimum one depth measurement) of the sidewalk area covered by snow or ice. The officer shall take photographs clearly depicting the sidewalk area affected. The officer may chip away a section of the snow/ice and take a close-up photograph showing the depth of the snow/ice. The officer will then record the last recorded snowfall time, date and amount.