Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

runawayjim

snow removal

Recommended Posts

i'm not sure if this has been covered, but what exactly are the laws regarding snow removal. is it the property owners or the city that have to remove snow? also, if you rent, is it the landlord's responsibility or the tenant's? i know in CT and MA, the landlord is responsible for snow removal, but i wasn't sure about RI since my lease says i'm responsible...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


The abutting land owner is responsible and can be fined by the city for not doing so, although apparently this never happens. I'm not sure what the laws are as far as mandating that a tenant be responsible for snow removal.

I would imagine for a business tenant, that snow removal is (or should be) a standard clause added to any lease. In the case of a residential tenant, in most jurisdictions in the northeast that I have lived in, the landlord would have to make somesort of consessions (reducuction in rent during winter months or something) in order to mandate that the tenant be responsible. Are you the sole tenant in you building? If not, I wonder what the other tenants leases say. If it's in your lease you may be stuck, but it may be something that is not allowed to be put in a lease. There must be some agency in City Hall that can answer the question.

On a side note. An inch and a half of snow and the city is crippled as far as pedestrian traffic goes. Can't wait for the 2 to 4 inches coming tonight. :rolleyes: All the usual areas are ice sheets, the sidewalks infront of Garibaldi Park on Federal Hill, the Atwells Bridge, around the Old Public Safety Complex, Parcel 12...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The abutting land owner is responsible and can be fined by the city for not doing so, although apparently this never happens. I'm not sure what the laws are as far as mandating that a tenant be responsible for snow removal.

I would imagine for a business tenant, that snow removal is (or should be) a standard clause added to any lease. In the case of a residential tenant, in most jurisdictions in the northeast that I have lived in, the landlord would have to make somesort of consessions (reducuction in rent during winter months or something) in order to mandate that the tenant be responsible. Are you the sole tenant in you building? If not, I wonder what the other tenants leases say. If it's in your lease you may be stuck, but it may be something that is not allowed to be put in a lease. There must be some agency in City Hall that can answer the question.

On a side note. An inch and a half of snow and the city is crippled as far as pedestrian traffic goes. Can't wait for the 2 to 4 inches coming tonight. :rolleyes: All the usual areas are ice sheets, the sidewalks infront of Garibaldi Park on Federal Hill, the Atwells Bridge, around the Old Public Safety Complex, Parcel 12...

my landlady has paid me (or reduced my rent) to shovel her snow (she lives next door). there's only one other apartment in my house with a single woman. last winter she came out to apologize to me as i was shovelling after the blizzard saying that she'd help, but she has a heart condition. so now i just wait until the very last minute to do any shovelling and make her deal with it driving in and out of the driveway. i have to park on a grassy lot a couple houses down because she has driveway rights (i got to use it when i first moved in because she lost her license and her car wasn't running). i refuse to shovel the driveway for her though since i'm not getting any help in shovelling. what i might do is have the post office hold my mail during snow storms and just let it build up. i don't mind shovelling, but she's a real you know what... so i don't feel any need to shovel for her. i might call city hall... but then again, my lease has expired, so i'm just on month-to-month, and i have a feeling the landlady will raise rent if i suggest she reduces my rent in the winter.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am really surprised that the Downcity Improvement District does not have some kind of traitor to drive around downcity sideways and keep them clear from snow. As they do for picking up trash in the summer months why not clear snow in the winter?

Far as making life better for people on foot and business owners it would be an obvious thing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am really surprised that the Downcity Improvement District does not have some kind of traitor to drive around downcity sideways and keep them clear from snow. As they do for picking up trash in the summer months why not clear snow in the winter?

Far as making life better for people on foot and business owners it would be an obvious thing.

I was just downcity and thought for sure I would slip on the wet and slippery sidewalks as I walked along Dorrance St. I was upset that building owners didn't sand the walkways in front of their buildings. The link master can provide many link to different law firms. :ph34r:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

lol.

does the state house/city hall shovel their property? or any property that the state/city owns?

someone should find a spot. 'city owned'.. that isn't shoveled or is icy, i'll go and fall, sue the city, and maybe they'll pass a law requiring all businesses to take care of that duty.

=-- :rolleyes: kidding--=

Is this something we can ask Thom Dellar about?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

lol.

does the state house/city hall shovel their property? or any property that the state/city owns?

someone should find a spot. 'city owned'.. that isn't shoveled or is icy, i'll go and fall, sue the city, and maybe they'll pass a law requiring all businesses to take care of that duty.

=-- :rolleyes: kidding--=

Is this something we can ask Thom Dellar about?

i think it's already a city law that requires businesses to take care of it... it's not enforced.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

does the state house/city hall shovel their property? or any property that the state/city owns?

Is this something we can ask Thom Dellar about?

The state and city both shovel selectively, i.e. around City Hall and around the State House, but both have property which goes unshoveled (sidewalks infront of city parks, the bridges over 95, the Point Street Bridge...). Thom Deller said PPD has the power to ticket property owners but they haven't made it a priority. I've sent letter to the City Council, the DOT (re the route 95 bridges), the media. No one seems to care.

To be fair, right now we can't expect the sidewalks to be clear, it's probably coming down 2 inches an hour. But tomorrow, when they aren't clear, is time to be pissed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To be fair, right now we can't expect the sidewalks to be clear, it's probably coming down 2 inches an hour. But tomorrow, when they aren't clear, is time to be pissed.

How about a week later? Literally one week after the snow storm, the sidewalks are more dangerous than ever now that the exisiting ice is covered in rain. People are falling down left & right this morning around Kennedy Plaza and on Dorrance...Westminster is a damn joke. :angry:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How about a week later? Literally one week after the snow storm, the sidewalks are more dangerous than ever now that the exisiting ice is covered in rain. People are falling down left & right this morning around Kennedy Plaza and on Dorrance...Westminster is a damn joke. :angry:

not to mention the streets that still aren't fully plowed... someone who drives a plow posted this to craigslist...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

not to mention the streets that still aren't fully plowed... someone who drives a plow posted this to craigslist...

That's true...except that school should not have been scheduled if they were expecting a snowstorm. That was a big reason for the traffic nightmare.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's true...except that school should not have been scheduled if they were expecting a snowstorm. That was a big reason for the traffic nightmare.

the snowstorm we got last friday was far worse than expected. the weather was calling for up to 3 inches. if it didn't rain in the middle, we would've had 8-10 inches of snow. after the storm, there was a good 6-8 inches in my driveway. i think the storm ended up lingering over us for longer than expected and the temperature didn't increase during the day as expected, leaving us with a lot more snow than rain. it would've gotten icy, but there would've been a lot less snow if the storm "did what it was supposed to". :P

it's actually warmer today than expected, so i'm hoping the snow melts on the streets that aren't plowed (some of which i use regularly), although it'll just turn into ice tonight. there is no excuse for the city to not have streets cleaned and sidewalks shovelled a week after a snowstorm (not to mention the fact that the snow stopped during the day around 4pm, they could've at least had all the roads plowed by the end of the day and hte sidewalks done over the weekend... but i bet they don't work weekends when not "necessary").

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If not mentioned in the lease, snow removal is the landlord's responsibility.. But if it is so designated in the lease, it is tenant's responsibility.. I don't put it in my leases because tenants generally won't do it anyway, and then the driveways are a sheet of ice... Or if the do shovel, they shovel a path for their car only.. So I just shovel.. They sometimes help, mostly out of guilt.. Some people are very good about it though.

I tried to get a few plow guys on contract, but the word "contract" apparently has different meaning in plow guy circles.. To normal people, a plow contract would mean the guy plows when it snows.. In Plowese, plow contract means "plow if I get around to it".. So I do a lot of shovelling.. Put it this way, I hate the snow..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If not mentioned in the lease, snow removal is the landlord's responsibility.. But if it is so designated in the lease, it is tenant's responsibility.. I don't put it in my leases because tenants generally won't do it anyway, and then the driveways are a sheet of ice... Or if the do shovel, they shovel a path for their car only.. So I just shovel.. They sometimes help, mostly out of guilt.. Some people are very good about it though.

I tried to get a few plow guys on contract, but the word "contract" apparently has different meaning in plow guy circles.. To normal people, a plow contract would mean the guy plows when it snows.. In Plowese, plow contract means "plow if I get around to it".. So I do a lot of shovelling.. Put it this way, I hate the snow..

thanks for the info... some people told me it was illegal for her to put it in my lease, but they only knew the laws in CT and MA, which state it's the landlord's responsibility.

here's a question though... would it be legal for her to put it in one lease, but not another? i'm wondering if the woman who lives below me has the same clause in her lease since she doesn't see a need to shovel.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

thanks for the info... some people told me it was illegal for her to put it in my lease, but they only knew the laws in CT and MA, which state it's the landlord's responsibility.

here's a question though... would it be legal for her to put it in one lease, but not another? i'm wondering if the woman who lives below me has the same clause in her lease since she doesn't see a need to shovel.

As far as I know it is fairly common for one tenant in a building to have some form of property maintenance in their lease. Some times it is more than one tenant but in your case I bet you are the only one with this arraignment. I think this because she has reduced your rent to compensate you for shoveling. She would not want to reduce everyone's rent if she could avoid it. Each lease is a separate contract between the landlord and tenant and they can be quite different from lease to lease.

I know that one of the tenants in my house has reduced rent in exchange for mowing the lawn. I don't begrudge his reduction in rent because I know I don't have to deal with the lawn. I know sometimes he doesn't like mowing the lawn but he gets cheep rent. It all seems to work out in the end.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As far as I know it is fairly common for one tenant in a building to have some form of property maintenance in their lease. Some times it is more than one tenant but in your case I bet you are the only one with this arraignment. I think this because she has reduced your rent to compensate you for shoveling. She would not want to reduce everyone's rent if she could avoid it. Each lease is a separate contract between the landlord and tenant and they can be quite different from lease to lease.

I know that one of the tenants in my house has reduced rent in exchange for mowing the lawn. I don't begrudge his reduction in rent because I know I don't have to deal with the lawn. I know sometimes he doesn't like mowing the lawn but he gets cheep rent. It all seems to work out in the end.

wouldn't an agreement like that usually be accompanied with the landlord informing you of this? my rent doesn't change in the winter, and i truly doubt that it's a reduced rate. i think she put it in there to sort of protect herself. regardless of whether or not the other tenant has that clause, i shovel when i get around to it and if it inconveniences anyone else or if i get fined by the city, i will be sure i send the bill to the other tenant who does absolutely no shovelling.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

wouldn't an agreement like that usually be accompanied with the landlord informing you of this? my rent doesn't change in the winter, and i truly doubt that it's a reduced rate. i think she put it in there to sort of protect herself. regardless of whether or not the other tenant has that clause, i shovel when i get around to it and if it inconveniences anyone else or if i get fined by the city, i will be sure i send the bill to the other tenant who does absolutely no shovelling.

Being personally very cognizant of litigation, I do the shoveling.. Would that clause hold up in a court case if the tenant (you) didn't shovel and there was a slip & fall? Would that clause hold the tenant and not the landlord liable? My guess is no.. I'm no lawyer, but to me it seems as though that would be the case...

So from that aspect I feel the ultimate responsibility falls on the LL or Super.. So the clause in the lease more or less (to me) means the tenant has a responsibility to shovel if they want to stay and live there.. So if they don't it would be a violation of a lease and possibly a terminable one... But if someone were to get hurt due to tenant negligence with the shoveling, I believe the brunt would fall on the LL..

Does this seem correct to people?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Being personally very cognizant of litigation, I do the shoveling.. Would that clause hold up in a court case if the tenant (you) didn't shovel and there was a slip & fall? Would that clause hold the tenant and not the landlord liable? My guess is no.. I'm no lawyer, but to me it seems as though that would be the case...

So from that aspect I feel the ultimate responsibility falls on the LL or Super.. So the clause in the lease more or less (to me) means the tenant has a responsibility to shovel if they want to stay and live there.. So if they don't it would be a violation of a lease and possibly a terminable one... But if someone were to get hurt due to tenant negligence with the shoveling, I believe the brunt would fall on the LL..

Does this seem correct to people?

sounds right to me considering the person would be falling on the landlord's property, not the tenant's.

she's actually told me she put that in there just so that i do it in the case that she can't get ahold of someone to come do it right away (she has paid people to come shovel hers and mine, she lives next door). i was really just curoius if the RI law requires the landlord to remove snow.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here in Albany we just a few inches of snow and a few inches of ICE. I'm amazed at snow removal here, the streets are clean as hell, sanded, salted perfectly. Not ONE sidewalk, however, is cleared, not even ones around the state offices or anything. I fell down twice and stepped in like seven ankle deep slush puddles. So anyway, I'm guessing it's not just Providence that has snow removal problems.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So anyway, I'm guessing it's not just Providence that has snow removal problems.

No it's not, but I lived in Portland, Maine during one of their snowiest winters in recent history, and their snow removal was flawless. Where there's a will, there's a way.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Walking home yesterday I noticed something astonishing, the sidewalk on the Atwells Bridge had been shoveled. :shok:

I assumed that it was the DID Clean and Safe Team that did it and sent them an email to ask about it.

They said, no, they did not do it, but they had met with the city to determine who should do it, and it was decided the city should, and the DID very strongly suggested to the city that it was very important that it be done. So in a roundabout way, the DID actually did shovel the sidewalk.

This morning it was shoveled too, a shovel-wide path, but it's better than nothing. It should be noted, that though the DID did not actually shovel the bridges, they are shovel the ramps at the corners of all the Downcity intersections. I saw a couple of them out this morning.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Walking home yesterday I noticed something astonishing, the sidewalk on the Atwells Bridge had been shoveled. :shok:

I'm assuming that you mean the bridge crossing over Rt 95. Back in December I walked over the Atwells Ave bridge crossing over Rt 6/10 and it was a sheet of ice, forcing people to walk in the streets. Who's responsible for this piece of land?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm assuming that you mean the bridge crossing over Rt 95. Back in December I walked over the Atwells Ave bridge crossing over Rt 6/10 and it was a sheet of ice, forcing people to walk in the streets. Who's responsible for this piece of land?

Yes, the 95 bridge. The city would also be responsible for the Route 10 bridge. Since there's no DID at that end of the street pressuring the city, it's not getting shoveled. Has anyone been on the Point Street Bridge, when I worked in Davol Square that was never shoveled either.

My other big peeve, Garibaldi Park on Atwells, is unshoveled. Also, Paolino's Parking lot (the circular gas station site) is unshoveled. I suppose he expects the people who pay to park there to levitate to their eventual destination so he sees no need to shovel. Garibaldi and Paolino's sidewalks going unshoveled kind of negate the progress made on getting the bridge shoveled. It should be noted though, as gastly as their building is, Dominica Manor has crews out throughout and after every storm keeping all the sidewalks around it's parcel clear.

Also notable, the sidewalks around the old Public Safety Building were clear this morning, this may have been the DID, but I suspect it was The Proccianti Group taking control of that building making this snow removal happen. I've heard terrible things about working for them, but it's been my experience since they've begun taking over the 'Power Block' that they take care of their properties, even the abandoned ones (Fogarty, Public Safety).

All in all, sidewalks are Federal Hill are a disaster this morning, sidewalks Downcity are great, what a difference a DID makes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.