The Sunday Northwestern includes an article on an amendment to the city's snow and ice removal ordinance that the city council will be considering on Tuesday. One part of the amendment will make the property owner ultimately responsible for removal of snow and ice.
The other noteworthy change to the ordinance would be requiring that snow and ice be removed by noon on the day following the cessation of the snowfall. The current language requires that snow be removed "within 24 hours after it falls." I know that the city of Appleton has the "noon on the following day" language in their policy, so it's not as if something radically new is being proposed here. I have not had a chance to read the Department of Public Works' rationale for the amendments, so I don't yet know if I support them.
The agenda for Tuesday's meeting also includes, under "City Manager Announcements, Statements & Discussion," this item: "Review of Snow Plowing & Removal Processes." Do you have questions that should be raised during this part of the meeting? If so, you can post them on this blog, email then directly to City Manager Rohloff (mrohloff@ci.oshkosh.wi.us) or me (tpalmeri@ci.oshkosh.wi.us or tony@tonypalmeri.com). You can also call me at 235-1116.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
5 comments:
And what about the slush, ice chunks and road overflow that lands on the sidewalks when plowing after the sidewalks have been cleared?
A little balance would be good. It doesn't take much for a neighbor or other citizen to call and make a complaint if a walk is not cleared.
---
One the other point- ultimately- it is the home owners responsibility- lease or not. If they have a tenant/lease problem, that should be their problem, not the city's.
I do applaud the ordinance amendments. Especially to be tougher on businesses that wait and wait to clear sidewalks by their property of ice and snow.
I wish there was a better way to the city could come aware of those property's not be taken care. An idea is to have Postal Carriers alert the city for they have to walk on the sidewalks six days a week.
I also wish the amendments would take care of making sure that curbs at the end on city blocks would have a clear path of entry either into the street onto the sidewalk.
At the end of many streets there are pile of snow that is built up-a great deal of due to the snow plowing of the streets.
Like I say I do support the amendments but I wish there was better way to detect and take care of the problem unkempt sidewalks that full of snow and ice. So basically the question of enforcement of ordinance is what needs to be resolved.
I do support the amendments to the ordinance. But I do have some additional thoughts and ideas on the matter. One is I wish there was a better way alert the Public Works Department on which sidewalks are not being kept up with snow and ice removal.
The problem is not just with residential properties I find there is just a much amajor problem with businesses that do not take care of the sidewalks by their property in timely and safe way for pedestrians to walk on the sidewalk.
I thought at one time an idea would be to have Postal Carriers inform the city of Oshkosh Public Works on what properties have sidewalks that are snow and ice covered and unsafe to walk on.
The question really becomes of enforcement to identify those problems areas get them safe to walk again and have those fining those property owners making sidewalks near their property unsafe to walk on.
Another issue is making sure the ends of city blocks are clear enough of the snow and ice to be able to wither enter the street to cross the street corner and/or enter onto the next city sidewalk block after the crossing the street. Many ends of streets are blocked with chucks of snow and ice not easy for the elderly and handicap to walk and move around on the city streets
Hi Tony,
Thanks for responding to my previous emails on this subject. I don't want to bother you needlessly.
I just crossed Hwy.41 over the 9th Ave. bridge. You can guess it. The last "snow event" was last Saturday. It is now Monday at 3 pm and the City's side walks on 9th Ave. have not been touched. Seems to me that if they City can't live up to its own expectations of its citizens the Council should reject the Public Works Dept. policy change.
As always, thanks for listening. Sincerely, Ed Riddick
Ed,
The city is going to have trouble keeping up whether we have the noon requirement or the current 24-hour policy. So really by the criteria you are setting the city should have no requirement to clear snow at all since the city will never be able to meet even the 24 hour rule.
I'm interested in whatever policy is most likely to keep our streets clear for pedestrians without punishing citizens who are conscientious. I'm convinced the 24 hour rule is not working, though that doesn't mean that I see the noon rule as some kind of cure-all.
If it takes the city forever to get to its own property (as on 9th), then you know it takes just as long to get to houses that have been complained about. The problem is usually this: By the time the city gets to a house that has been [usually repeatedly] complained about, another snow event has occurred and so city staff get involved in ridiculous debates with property owners about when the snow actually stopped falling.
So the noon rule, if I understand it correctly, is actually designed to give the city the power to clean up the _last_ snow event.
I think at the root of the anger at this proposed policy is a complete distrust of city hall. That distrust is certainly justified, and in fact it's one of the main reasons I ran for office in 2007. The problem is that we get into a situation where it's hard to put any reforms in place, even relatively mild ones like the noon rule.
Thanks for your participation! --Tony
Post a Comment