An update for the shortened holiday week. Monday night we’re talking about snowplowing our streets and sidewalks, and about the proposal for a single hauler solid waste system in the city. Tuesday night the Recreational Authority is talking about the South Campus Entrance to the Grand Traverse Commons, and specifically about the need for the pedestrian-bike connection to Silver Lake Road that was called for in the design plan.
Snow
This time of year the Department of Public Services works mightily to clear our streets and sidewalks. The snows always prompt a good discussion, in particular about the clearing of sidewalks and trails and what we can do to ensure we remain a walkable community in the winter. Issues that come to the fore each winter include wheelchair mobility and walkable routes to our in-town schools.
We will be discussing this program Monday night – both for public education and for suggestions on improvement. Here is an outline of the city’s snowplowing strategy, which I cribbed from a memo last year by DPS director Bob Cole:
In response to a snow event, our first priority is to clear the streets, then the sidewalks, then the trails. (Street plowing has its own set of priorities, beginning with State Trunklines through major streets then to emergency routes then local streets and finally alleys.) If all required equipment and personnel are available, we can take care of the streets and sidewalks at the same time. Day shift Streets employees are generally called in to begin working at 5 AM in response to a snow event.
Assuming that we have enough people available, we can send out 10 plow route operators and 3 sidewalk blowers. But this year we only have 11 day shift employees – so we have pulled one of the afternoon shift employees onto days; done without the yard man; and ‘borrowed’ employees from the Water/Sewer Maintenance Division to help run the sidewalk blowers. If we don’t have enough employees available to fill all the plow trucks and snow blowers, priority goes to the plow trucks. In response to a weekend or holiday snow event, we call employees in for overtime to plow the major street routes, but not the sidewalks. On a day that is not a snow event day, all of the day shift employees work from 8-5, including the sidewalk blower operators.
On a snow event day, assuming we can send out three sidewalk blowers, here is generally the pattern. One departs the DPS building for the east side of town by way of Boardman and Front Street to clear the routes near the high school and college along Eastern before proceeding to his Boardman neighborhood routes. Another operator heads west along Eighth Street to Central Grade School, then down to 13th and 14th around the Montessori and Trinity Schools, then up Elmwood to Willow Hill before commencing west-side neighborhood routes. A third blower heads down Rose to Traverse Heights, then Downtown, then to Union and Cass before completing his Central neighborhood routes. If only one or two blowers can get out, they will split the schools up so that the areas immediately around the schools get covered first.
We have over 70 miles of sidewalks to clear, plus the TART and other trails. The sidewalk blowers don’t move as fast as plow trucks, so it takes three days to finish all of the routes. As you have heard me say before, if we have snow events day after day, then the sidewalk blowers basically have to restart the 3-day route every day in order to make sure that the priority routes immediately around the schools are cleared. This can mean that during extended periods of daily snowfall, some sidewalks may not get cleared for several days.
Once the snow event has ceased and priority street and sidewalk routes have been cleared, we stop paying overtime and have our folks work normal shifts. For example, this past Tuesday, which was the second workday after a weekend snow event, our sidewalk blowers went out to continue working on their routes at 8 AM, even though some sidewalks had not been cleared. I prefer not to pay overtime to clean only non-priority sidewalks – just like I prefer not to pay overtime to clean only non-priority streets.
So far I have written a lot about how we staff sidewalk blowing operations, but I should also mention the equipment that we use. Streets Division has three Holder tractors equipped with snow blowers for clearing sidewalks. These Holder tractors are used because they have narrow wheelbases and can fit on a standard-width sidewalk. The blowers that are mounted on the tractors are equipped with shoes and rubber cutting edges to prevent steel to concrete contact and also to hold the blowers about 1-2 inches above the surface so that they don’t ram into broken or raised sidewalk edges. Obviously these tractors are subject to maintenance issues. I don’t think a day goes by that one of the blowers doesn’t get plugged by a newspaper, dog chain, football, or wet snow – and they shear a good quantity of pins, throw drive chains, and so forth. If a tractor goes down with a serious problem, we can experience delays due to lack of parts availability – they are manufactured in Europe.
Other equipment has been used by the City in the past. I’m sure some folks still remember that the sidewalks used to be plowed by a horse – and then by a Jeep. Some communities use blades instead of blowers – usually where snowfalls are less (blades are only good until the snow next to the walk gets too high). We experimented with salting and sanding the walks – got lots of complaints that the salt killed the grass and the sand got tracked into houses.
Nothing about our procedures or techniques for cleaning sidewalks is cut in stone. We can do anything that we are asked, provided that adequate resources are made available.
I will add that there a few instances last winter of DPS making adjustments in response to specific concerns – clearing the Wadsworth sidewalk more quickly in response to comments from parents with kids at Central grade school and the Glen Loomis Montessori. As noted, they can do more with more resources, which is a priority discussion for city residents to have with the CC.
It is also vital to point out that each resident and business is required by ordinance to shovel their own sidewalk. The blowers can take off much of the snow mass, but do not clear down to pavement. I find this takes an extra 10 minutes after I’ve done the other areas at my house. The GT County Commission on Aging also includes snow removal for seniors on a sliding fee scale, based on income. More info at http://www.co.grand-traverse.mi.us/departments/Commission_on_Aging/services.htm.
Trash
The city is looking at collectively bidding residential trash pickup and recycling service to a single hauler. The reasons to do this are to reduce costs, improve services, and/or get some of the trucks off the alleys. A concept briefing on the issue was on this site back in May: http://planfortc.com/2010/05/31/talking-trash-and-a-note-about-the-blue-wall-june-1/
The bids are in, and the time to make a decision is nearing. A summary can be found at http://www.ci.traverse-city.mi.us/agendas/Packet20101220.pdf starting at page 64 of the pdf.
In short, there were three bidders. Their monthly bids for the large carts currently offered plus weekly recycyling and monthly pickup of bulk items are American Waste $11, Waste Management $10.54, and Allied Waste offers the lowest price at $10.40. For a smaller cart plus weekly recycling and bulk pickup, Waste Management offers the best price at $9.59 per month, and the same is true for budget bag plus recycling at $3.60 per bag. American Waste is the highest cost but offers the unique single stream waste processing – more so if their new facility at the old Tower Automotive facility in Garfield Township comes through.
These prices are better than the prices most individuals pay in the city, which are $13, $20, and $21 per month, depending on the provider. On the other hand, 8% of TC customers are part of collective arrangements in Central, Old Town or Slab Town neighborhoods that have a 2011 price from Waste Management of $10.30. These arrangements are paid one year up front and do not include bulk items, but they also do not include possible fuel cost adders which the city bids all do. The city bids have set price escalators of 2.5 and 3%, depending on bidder, while it is unknown what the neighborhood agreements may look like after 2011.
Niche services, like higher end recycling and yard pickup, will not be eliminated. Existing residential contracts will be honored until they are complete. Commercial solid waste arrangements will not change.
Monday night will not be the end of the discussion but it will be an important discussion. Please let us hear your opinion.
South Campus
The South Campus entrance is meant to connect Silver Lake road, and Garfield Township generally, to the barns, the Grand Traverse Commons, and the Munson hospital campus. It was meant to be a traffic calmed, non-cut-through road with “strong provisions for pedestrian and non-motorized access.” The design plan is at http://www.ci.traverse-city.mi.us/recauthority/southcampusentrance.pdf. It includes paths separated from the roadway on both sides of the street.
Unfortunately, though not surprisingly, the design produced by city staff included no paths to Silver Lake road. Rather, the one path that was included in the staff plan ended well short of Silver Lake because of wetlands. Part of the roadway runs through the same wetlands.
At its November meeting, the Rec Authority declined to release its $132,000 in funds for the project until staff could “provide options that fully accommodate bicycle and pedestrian access.” City staff has since produced an exorbitantly expensive boardwalk design, with no plan to pay for it and no timetable in which it will be built.
The Rec Authority will be meeting again Tuesday night at 7 pm in the city building to discuss the issue again. The Rec Authority packet is at http://www.ci.traverse-city.mi.us/recauthority/Packet20101221.pdf. More details and a call to action are at http://mywheelsareturning.com/2010/12/16/the-south-campus-entrance-that-thinks-it-can-thinks-it-can/.
My hope is the Rec Authority will reject the staff recommendation and hold its ground. Pedestrian and bike access was integral to the whole concept of South Campus, not an add-on that may or may not ever be built. The board asked for options to make this happen and has not been given any viable options. If cost is the impediment, then a least-cost option needs to be formulated. Then the public bodies can determine what can be funded, and how.
This is the key connection between the Commons and Copper Ridge, schools, the future Buffalo Ridge trail, Meijer, the YMCA, and the subdivisions off Silver Lake and Barnes roads. It’s way too important to blow off, or to accept another list of excuses. We’ve been here before, it’s time to learn from our mistakes and do it right this time.


10 comments
Comments feed for this article
December 22, 2010 at 10:39 am
Maxwell
I also wanted to agree with the people who complained about the icy sidewalks in the downtown area. When I’m downtown in the winter I’ve had to walk in the street because the sidewalks down there (not all, but in a lot of spots) are so dangerous…with sheer ice or ice patches hidden by snow.
This includes the sidewalks in front of the government center and the old courthouse! I walked by there over the weekend and couldn’t believe how icy they were!
I would like to add too that the sidewalks at the Civic Center (not the track, but the sidewalks that lead from the parking lots to the track) have been awful as well.
I slipped and fell on those (Civic Center) and last year a friend of mine slipped and hurt his knee on a downtown (Front Street) sidewalk. The downtown/Civic Center sidewalks really need to be dealt with a lot better than they have been!
January 3, 2011 at 7:19 pm
Rob
Wow, goes to show how much people know about there own community. The civic center is not city property nor is it taken care of by the city. Property owners are responsible for the clearing of the sidewalks in front of their homes/businesses. Want want want.
January 4, 2011 at 8:11 am
Maxwell
The city does have an ordinance regarding sidewalk snow and ice removal so they do have the authority to enforce that regardless of who owns/maintains the property. I don’t think it’s unreasonable to expect safe sidewalks downtown and at the Civic Center.
January 5, 2011 at 10:02 pm
Rob
I agree it’s not an unreasonable request to have a safe place to walk, but is it too much to ask for said homeowner/business owner to do something themselves to help keep it safe for others.
You mention the city ordinance about snow and ice removal, I bet you can’t find the last time it was enforced on a mass scale and good luck starting. One last thing, the civic center is owned by the county, they also maintain it and are not subject to the ordinance.
December 22, 2010 at 10:22 am
Maxwell
After listening to everyone’s comments at the city commission meeting, I have a few more comments to add.
First of all, I want agree with the two people who expressed concerns about Waste Management’s customer service. I dealt with them a few years ago and at the time felt their customer service was so atrocious that I switched haulers. A low price really isn’t worth terrible customer service.
I’ve dealt with American Waste since then and while I do think they have some room for improvement (such as actually notifying customers when they intend to switch pick-up days), they aren’t nearly as bad as Waste Management’s customer service.
I’ve never dealt with Allied Waste so I can’t say anything about their service.
I’m assuming that “participation by choice” that was mentioned by the American Waste proponents at the meeting means that people using budget bags won’t have to sign up for curbside recycling if they don’t want to.
But I still want to point out that the budget bag + recycling package is far more expensive (in terms of the amount of trash generated) than the other package they offer! It seems very backward to me that those people generating less trash are paying a lot more to have it collected! I don’t appreciate it at all. If you generate less waste, you should pay less.
Another thing I heard from the American Waste manager who spoke was something about reward points and a plea to really read and understand their offer. I’m wondering how members of the public can read the offers? I’ve looked on the Traverse City website for the actual bids but have not been able to find them.
But I will say this about offering reward points: I think it’s stupid and annoying. I hate it when the local grocery stores do it and don’t expect I’m going to like it if the trash company does it. Why not just offer all of us a good deal in the first place rather than having some tedious points game?
And how will these reward points apply to those of us using budget bags who don’t want to pay the outrageous $6/month for curbside recycling and take our recycling up to the bins?
I’m also wondering if the scheduled price increases apply to the cost of budget bags?
Another thing I’m not impressed with was all the happy talk about “single stream recycling”. For those of us using budget bags, it’s not a good deal because the more trash you put into the bag the more your trash removal costs you. So why would I want to put the recycling in with the regular trash? That would not help my bottom line at all.
I’m not sure I understand the pro-American Waste arguments presented regarding the recycling facility. What exactly is going to be happening at this recycling facility? I’m guessing it’s a place for sorting and packaging recycling which will be shipped elsewhere for re-use, right? How do the other haulers handle their recycling? Do they sort and package it here? If so then I don’t see how this facility really makes American Waste’s offer any better.
Also, couldn’t American Waste’s facility accept recycling from any hauler? Why does it have to be recycling that they pick up in order to be sorted and packaged in their facility? I think these types of questions need to be answered before using this proposed recycling facility as part of the reason to accept American Waste’s bid for trash pick up in TC.
One last thing is the city manager stated that he assumes that American Waste has an intermediate sized tote that’s the same price as the 96 gallon tote. I don’t think that’s the case. They don’t have an intermediate size now so I assumed they just didn’t bother to offer one in their bid. With American Waste it’s either the budget bags or the 96 gallon tote and nothing in between. Why can’t they come up with a smaller tote? I know those exist, I’ve seen them at home improvement and hardware stores.
December 20, 2010 at 11:46 am
Marlynn Sable
Another of our right to choose out the window! This one vendor only for city residents needs to stop! Now! I do just fine sourcing my own trash collection from the lowest priced and most competent company.
This should be put to a vote of the citizens if it’s that important. And not just letting the Central Neighborhood elitests and the Mayor tell us what to do.
Stop the controling ways of the Mayor and his little group on the city commission.
December 20, 2010 at 8:36 am
GLHowe
Thank you for setting the table and providing context on these issues.
To keep my comments short, I just want to comment on snow removal. Simply put, a basic shovel and taking an extra moment would go a long way in improving conditions in the winter. How do we create incentives and create a culture where the community as a whole takes responsibility for the details?
The image captures a minor problem to many people, but a major issue for many others. These crossings could be cleared easily with attention to detail and a handy shovel.
Will your wheel chair go over this ice clump?
http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5203/5277355448_30c197f2a0_z.jpg
December 20, 2010 at 8:16 am
Maxwell
Mr. Mayor, the way the trash bid information is written on the agenda it seems to me to be an incredibly bad deal for city residents.
As an example, I took a look at Allied Waste’s pricing for the “package” 96 gallon container, recycling and bulk pickup. In the agenda it says:
“Allied’s pricing will increase 3% per month at the beginning of contract years 2 thru 5″ (and the other haulers have something similar)
I’m not sure how to interpret this? Does this mean it goes up 3% at the beginning of the 2nd year and then stays the same price for the rest of the year and increases another 3% the next year and so on or does this actually mean an increase of 3% per month?? The way it’s written it seems to me it means starting in year 2 and thru the end of the contract there will be a 3% per month increase in the trash bill.
Below is what a 3% per month increase will look like on a city resident’s trash bill.
Yr 2
Jan 10.71
Feb 11.03
March 11.36
April 11.7
May 12.05
June 12.41
July 12.78
Aug 13.16
Sept 13.56
Oct 13.97
Nov 14.39
Dec 14.82
Yr 3
Jan 15.27
Feb 15.73
March 16.20
April 16.69
May 17.19
June 17.71
July 18.24
Aug 18.79
Sept 19.35
Oct 19.93
Nov 20.53
Dec 21.15
Yr 4
Jan 21.78
Feb 22.43
March 23.10
April 23.79
May 24.50
June 25.24
July 26.00
Aug 27.00
Sept 27.80
Oct 28.63
Nov 29.49
Dec 30.38
Yr5
Jan 31.29
Feb 32.23
March 33.20
April 34.20
May 35.23
June 36.29
July 37.38
Aug 38.5
Sept 39.21
Oct 40.39
Nov 41.60
Dec 42.85
If this is actually the case, then this is not a good deal for us at all. I’d suggest shortening the contract length to 1 or 2 years with a price cap and let them bid again after that time. I think a shorter contract length might be a good idea anyway to keep it more competitive.
I also don’t think they should be able to add another fee for fuel cost increases unless they agree to give a decrease in the bills if fuel prices decrease.
December 20, 2010 at 8:37 am
chrisbzdok
Max, you are correct, the phrasing in that part of the memo is ambiguous. The 2.5% and 3% increases are annually. So Allied’s bid for example starts at $10.40 for large tote and weekly recycling and monthly bulk item, then rises to $10.71 in year 2, $11.03 in year 3, $11.36 in year 4, and $11.71 in year 5. Thank you for all your comments, they are helpful.
December 20, 2010 at 1:57 pm
Maxwell
Thanks for the clarification on that. I’m still confused about some things, though. Are the “package” deal bids all alternate bids to the separate bids listed? So residents will have to choose from only the package deals or can it be more of an a la carte choosing from the items listed? I’m just trying to determine what we residents would ultimately be choosing from here? Because the bids don’t seem to match up between the itemized list and the package deals…so that is confusing me.
Also, I just want to be clear that Waste Management is only charging one price for budget bags + recycling because currently they are charging the cost of the bags plus a monthly charge so I’m surprised they are just charging one charge on their package bid.
Right now I use American Waste budget bags which cost $2.50 per bag (currently) and I use 1 bag per month. I declined their curbside recycling because they (right now) charge $5/month in addition to the cost of the bags. I take my recycling once a month to the bins on LaFranier Rd. The irony of taking it up there myself is that the truck still comes down my street and still picks up my neighbors’ recycling.
Still, I don’t see why I should pay $5/month (or $6) when it doesn’t cost me anywhere near that in my own car. I’m not going to be happy if I have to pay a lot more for curbside recycling when the cost is negligible for me to put a months’ worth of recycling into my car and take it up there myself.
I’m also wondering if the amount of recycling we could put out there for curbside pickup will still be an unlimited amount under this contract arrangement?