#4 Direction on snow removal enforcement action on private sidewalks
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS MEMORANDUM
December 30, 2009
TO: City Council
FROM: John Whitcomb, Operations Director
SUBJECT: Discussion and Direction to Staff on Proposed Changes to Enforcement
Actions Regarding Snow-Covered Sidewalks Abutting Private Property
Summary
During review of the 2010 proposed City budget, some Councilmembers expressed a
desire to decrease the City’s response time to citizen complaints about snow-covered
sidewalks abutting private property. This memorandum outlines statutory and
ordinance provisions, current complaint response procedures, procedures in 16 other
Wisconsin cities, and provides recommendations aimed at reducing response times.
Staff Recommendation
Staff recommends eliminating the current procedure of mailing a letter to a property
owner whose sidewalk has been inspected and found non-compliant with ordinance
provisions. Staff further recommends replacing this procedure with two other forms of
contact: first, inspectors would attempt personal contact with tenants of buildings
abutting sidewalks found to be non-compliant. Second, if personal contact has not been
achieved, inspectors would leave a door hanger with pertinent information, including the
City’s intent to clear the walk if the tenant or property owner does not.
Recommended Motion
I move to approve staff eliminating the procedure of mailing a letter to a property owner
whose sidewalk is found to be non-compliant.
City Manager Recommendation
The City Manager concurs with staff’s recommendation, with the understanding that
corrective action by City crews will not occur less than 48-hours after the end of a storm.
Background
Authority State Statute 66.0907 (5) requires the City clear sidewalks of snow and
ice when abutting property owners fail to do so. This statute further allows the City to
pass along, to the property owner, the cost to perform this clearing. No timeframes for
property owner compliance are established by statute. City Ordinance 12.08.080
requires sidewalks be cleared of snow and ice within 12 hours of cessation of snow.
Current Procedures The City’s response to snow-covered sidewalks is reactive,
relying primarily on citizen complaints. Once a complaint is received, inspectors will
investigate to determine compliance. The following procedures are implemented:
1
?
An Operations Division staff member inspects the address where the complaint
was noted and also reviews other nearby properties for compliance;
?
If non-compliance is observed, property owners are sent a letter directing them to
clear the sidewalk; property owners have three (3) days from the date of the
notice to clear sidewalks;
?
After the deadline has expired, an Operations Division staff member will re-
inspect the property; if compliance is found, no further action is taken; if non-
compliance remains, City crews will be scheduled to clear the sidewalk and the
property owner is sent an invoice for labor and equipment costs;
?
A property owner will only receive one written notice from the City in a season;
for subsequent instances of non-compliance at the same property, City crews will
perform work without notice.
All of this is currently accomplished utilizing Operations Division staff. Under ideal
circumstances, the process can take approximately four days from receipt of complaint
to having City crews clear a sidewalk. Under typical circumstances, the process takes
approximately one week. Significant staff time is devoted to multiple inspections and
processing letters.
Peer City Procedures A review of procedures in 16 Wisconsin cities was
conducted. In summary:
?
12 of 16 communities respond to snow covered sidewalks on a complaint basis.
The other 4 communities do some form of proactive inspection.
?
12 of 16 communities utilize a door hanger to notify tenants of buildings that their
sidewalks are out of compliance. One of these communities (Wauwatosa)
notifies residential properties with a door hanger but they do not provide notice to
businesses. Three communities mail letters to property owners. Only 1
community (Oshkosh) does not provide any notice prior to clearing a sidewalk in
non-compliance.
?
12 of 14 communities take picture documentation at each location. These
communities indicate this was important in proving the work was performed,
especially when using contractors.
?
4 of 13 communities issue citations for violations. Eight of 13 communities never
issue citations.
?
7 of 16 communities only use city labor to clear sidewalks. An equal amount (7
out of 16) only use contracted labor to clear sidewalks. Some communities (2
out of 16) use city labor supplemented by contractors when necessary.
Summary
The primary emphasis in developing and reviewing alternatives was to obtain
compliance as quickly as possible following receipt of a citizen complaint, whether that
be by tenant/property owner action or by City forces. The primary factors influencing
the timeliness of response to citizen complaints are:
2
?
The current practice of issuing notices to property owners and conducting
multiple inspections upon the first complaint;
?
During the winter season, major storms and events with rain or freezing rain
require significant follow up by Operations Division personnel for streets and
public sidewalks, making them unavailable to respond to private sidewalk
complaints; these types of weather conditions also increase the volume of
complaints received;
Thus, the following are proposed:
?
Eliminate the mailing of a letter to owners of property found to be non-compliant.
It would not be practical to reduce the timeframe given a property owner to
something less than three days from the date of a notice. Postal delivery time
must be considered. Eliminating the notification process then becomes the only
alternative. Notification to property owners is not required by either state statute
or City ordinance. Lack of notification does not prohibit the City from passing on,
to the property owner, its costs to clear sidewalks. This is a very punitive action
but is implemented in a majority of the cities reviewed. Implementing this
recommendation will very likely generate a significant number of complaints from
affected property owners. However, this recommendation must be implemented
in order to decrease response time.
?
In lieu of letters, inspectors would attempt personal contact at the building
abutting the non-compliant sidewalk. This, too, should improve response time in
that more sidewalks are likely to be cleared by building occupants rather than by
City forces.
?
If personal contact is not achieved, inspectors would utilize a door hanger
containing pertinent information for the occupants, including the City’s intent to
clear the walk if the tenant or property owner does not.
Though a more punitive approach, it is the approach used in a majority of Janesville’s
peer cities and will achieve the goal of reducing the response time to citizen complaints.
Staff will ensure that these procedural changes, if supported by the Council, are
communicated to the community in advance of implementation.
Lastly, additional actions are being considered to address times when City crews may
be unavailable to inspect and/or clear snow from sidewalks. These include utilizing
employees from other divisions as well as supplementing City forces with contracted
labor and equipment.
3