Is it too much to ask that people shovel their sidewalks? Or at least put salt down? A majority of the sidewalks in our neck of the woods STILL have lots of ice of them and make it impossible to walk.

The sidewalks in front of my house are shoveled. Always are. However, they are NOT my sidewalks. I don't own them or the property they sit on. Never could understand why people think it is a homeowner's responsibility to shovel the walks adjacent to their house. If a homeowner is obligated to shovel the walks adjacent to their house, why aren't they equally as obligated to clear the street in front of their house?

quote:

Originally posted by Fish:
Never could understand why people think it is a homeowner's responsibility to shovel the walks adjacent to their house.

(745 ILCS 75/1) (from Ch. 70, par. 201)
Sec. 1. It is declared to be the public policy of this State that owners and others residing in residential units be encouraged to clean the sidewalks abutting their residences of snow and ice. The General Assembly, therefore, determines that it is undesirable for any person to be found liable for damages due to his or her efforts in the removal of snow or ice from such sidewalks, except for acts which amount to clear wrongdoing, as described in Section 2 of this Act.

Of course, you have seen this before. You just don't agree with it.

Don't most lots in GE run to the curb? So don't you own the land under the sidewalks, subject to a public easement? Moreover, aren't at least some improvements such as sidewalks partially funded by homeowner assessments?

Finally (which perhaps should have been first and solely), don't you think that enabling people to use the sidewalks in front of your house fits under the category of neighborliness? You strike me as looking for a legalistic excuse for laziness and a lack of consideration for others in the community you chose to live in.

I might imagine cutting some slack to older or infirm people, but it really amazes me when some of the houses that are NEVER cleared belong to (apparently) young and healthy couples with (apparently) young and healthy teenagers.

This is one of many clean-up jobs that is easiest to do if it is done promptly after the "mess" is made. The longer you wait, the more difficult the chore - you can't count on Mother Nature's sunshine to take care of it for you.

Imagine the parkway grass never getting cut also. Would look like Vietnam.

I feel the houses that are not shoveled are people that may be away for the winter or for a few weeks. Snowbirds. (Bad indication to state 'Hey I'm not home'!)

quote:

Originally posted by lupechennel:
I feel the houses that are not shoveled are people that may be away for the winter or for a few weeks. Snowbirds. (Bad indication to state 'Hey I'm not home'!)

Possible in some cases. Of course, in many more instances with icy sidewalks I notice the driveways are neatly plowed. Gotta be able to drive, no reason to make it easy for people to walk.

My favorite is a home on the N side of Turner, just west of the one C. George is working on. They consistently clear their driveway in a manner such that it piles snow onto the sidewalk on either side of the driveway, which subsequently freezes over into nice icy mounds. Nice!

I was out for a run yesterday down Crescent (so obviously on the sidewalk Vs the street) and there is a large section of sidewalk in front of a large/espensive house that is all ice. The woman turned into her driveway and I was "this close" to stopping and asking her why she hasn't bothered to take care of the ice. Maybe her servants were out of town...

quote:

Originally posted by Dinsdale:

quote:

Originally posted by Fish:
Never could understand why people think it is a homeowner's responsibility to shovel the walks adjacent to their house.

(745 ILCS 75/1) (from Ch. 70, par. 201)
Sec. 1. It is declared to be the public policy of this State that owners and others residing in residential units be encouraged to clean the sidewalks abutting their residences of snow and ice. The General Assembly, therefore, determines that it is undesirable for any person to be found liable for damages due to his or her efforts in the removal of snow or ice from such sidewalks, except for acts which amount to clear wrongdoing, as described in Section 2 of this Act.

Dinsdale, you're not really pointing to public policy as a legal buttress to your statement, are you?

Fish is right....there is no legal responsibility. There may be a social responsibility, but there are a lot of social responsibilities that go unheeded.

quote:

Originally posted by Fish:
Never could understand why people think it is a homeowner's responsibility to shovel the walks adjacent to their house.

(745 ILCS 75/1) (from Ch. 70, par. 201)
Sec. 1. It is declared to be the public policy of this State that owners and others residing in residential units be encouraged to clean the sidewalks abutting their residences of snow and ice. The General Assembly, therefore, determines that it is undesirable for any person to be found liable for damages due to his or her efforts in the removal of snow or ice from such sidewalks, except for acts which amount to clear wrongdoing, as described in Section 2 of this Act.

[/QUOTE]

Fan - Are the words "encouraged" and "undesirable" defined legal terms?

So, along with the village needing to scoop up the snow in the CBD and place it elsewhere (to avoid the large piles along the curb that shoppers can barely cross), my husband and I feel that the village should clear some sidewalks - particularly those in high traffic areas such as the schools. The sidewalks near Hadley were absolutely treacherous last week. I watched kids falling and walking gingerly hoping not to fall. My husband saw so many injuries from falls on ice last week and a little the week before, it was insane. For something that is somewhat avoidable (falling), people have a responsibility to take care of their walks (call it a social or legal responsibility - to me, one is no more binding than the other). But we'd support the village doing a little more to keep Glen Ellyn moving safely.

quote:

Originally posted by GE Fan:

Dinsdale, you're not really pointing to public policy as a legal buttress to your statement, are you?

Fish is right....there is no legal responsibility. There may be a social responsibility, but there are a lot of social responsibilities that go unheeded.

As far as I can tell, all that is occurring in this thread is people commenting on their neighbors failing to heed their social responsibilities.

Fish said:

quote:

Never could understand why people think it is a homeowner's responsibility to shovel the walks adjacent to their house.

He did not specify "legal" responsibility.

IMO, good neighbors refrain from doing countless things that they might legally be allowed to do, as well as doing many thngs they are not legally required to do, simply in the interest of being good neighbors.

Take a wild example where, say, a neighbor allows their dogs to bark. That may not violate any statute. But I would not criticize a neighbor for being upset about that and considering it inconsiderate and unneighborly. YMMV.

Also IMO, the fact that our state legislature has seen fit to state in such plain language that they "encourage" people to do something, while not requiring such action, at least suggests something about community standards and values.

It's so hard these days. My sidewalks are shoveled, but this morning, they may be icy. With the melting snow yesterday and freezing temps overnight, my sidewalks probably had puddles which froze over. I honestly didn't check them.

quote:

Originally posted by Mamattorney:
It's so hard these days. My sidewalks are shoveled, but this morning, they may be icy. With the melting snow yesterday and freezing temps overnight, my sidewalks probably had puddles which froze over. I honestly didn't check them.

I walk to the train every day, and walk the neighborhoods for pleasure and exercise. I have no complaint with people who make some effort to clear their walks. What I find reprehensible are the folks who never make the slightest effort to move a single flake of snow from their sidewalks. It is those sidewalks that become tremendously treacherous, as they become both extremely slick and uneven. And they remain icy long after all other sidewalks that were even half-assed shovelled become clear.

Sure, there are some sidewalks where melt water collects. Heck, any pedestrian with a brain realizes that there is no way for a homeowner to entirely eliminate that. I will observe, however, that a little sand and/or salt makes a tremendous improvement and is greatly appreciated.

quote:

Originally posted by Amy:
So, along with the village needing to scoop up the snow in the CBD and place it elsewhere (to avoid the large piles along the curb that shoppers can barely cross), my husband and I feel that the village should clear some sidewalks - particularly those in high traffic areas such as the schools. The sidewalks near Hadley were absolutely treacherous last week.

I always assumed it was the responsibility of the school's maintenance staff to clear their sidewalks.

I'm always surprised at hearing how many other suburbs clear at least some of their sidewalks. Just another example of the level of services Glen Ellynites DON'T get for the taxes they pay.

It really boggles my mind that someone would buy a house down the street from a school or commuter station, and not clear the walks for the pedestrians. Not just snow, but bushes and trees that encroach upon the walk. But I gues I'm just a compassionate sweetheart who loves my fellow man!

When I used the word "responsibility" I think I meant it in a legal context, as in a "duty," for which a failure to perform that "duty" would expose one to liability, whether in the form of a negligence action if someone were hurt or a municipal fine for violation of some ordinance. It's just that so many people expect the sidewalks to be cleared, and yet no legal obligation is placed upon ANYONE to clear them. If the legislature were really trying to encourage people to clear the walks adjacent to their homes, they should have provided some real incentive. Immunity from liability for negligently clearing snow has not motivated one person to clear a sidewalk.

Dinsdale asked: "Don't most lots in GE run to the curb? So don't you own the land under the sidewalks, subject to a public easement?"

No and no. Pull out that survey you got at the closing from 10 years ago and look at the lot lines. This leads me to my next point. As noted in another thread, we expect (demand) the Village clear our streets. Why don't we demand that they clear our sidewalks? It is, after all, their property. Why shouldn't they shoulder that burden? I'm sure no one here would expect the Village to clear the sidewalks in front of their home, but I suspect that is because it has never been done. In reality, however, there is no real distinction to be made between the street and the sidewalk when it comes to who is ultimately responsible for maintaining that piece of property.

Finally, please remember, when I clear my drive, I also clear my sidewalk, my neighbor's sidewalk to the south of me who is much younger, stronger and good looking than me, my ultra-rich neighbor to my north and the ultra-rich neighbor north of them. I do it because I like it, just don't tell me I have to do it. If anyone is obligated to remove the snow, it is the entity that owns the property.

quote:

Originally posted by Fish:
When I used the word "responsibility" I think I meant it in a legal context, as in a "duty," for which a failure to perform that "duty" would expose one to liability, whether in the form of a negligence action if someone were hurt or a municipal fine for violation of some ordinance.

Thanks for your clarification. I did not get that from your prior post and was, instead, thinking in terms of "responsible home ownership."

quote:

I do it because I like it, just don't tell me I have to do it.

I never intended to say you have to do it. Instead, I was merely stating my opinion that if someone doesn't do it, they are a jerk and a crappy member of their community (at least in this one respect).

quote:

Dinsdale asked: "Don't most lots in GE run to the curb? So don't you own the land under the sidewalks, subject to a public easement?"

No and no. Pull out that survey you got at the closing from 10 years ago and look at the lot lines.

Did not have my plat in front of me as I typed that, and readily acknowledge that I may have been mistaken. I'll check when I get home. I do know the survey posts are generally on the house side of the sidewalk, rather than to the curb. ISTR that in some places lot lines run to the center of the street, which I always thought a tad silly.

My understanding - that certainly may be incorrect - was that the homeowner held title to the land under the sidewalk and the parkway, but the village and other entities (utilities) had varying degrees of easments over that land. Certainly not my area of specialty, tho. And not critical to my opinion that keeping your sidewalks clear and passable is a part of minimum basic home maintenance.

Just thinking off the top of my head (or out my other end), but if a home does not have a sidewalk, their property likely runs to the curb, no? Then, if at some point the village installs sidewalks, does the property plat get redrawn such that the owner ceases to own the property from the sidewalk to the curb? Because I'm thinking that in at least a few spots in town, there were undoubtedly homes before there were paved sidewalks...

quote:

Originally posted by Dinsdale:
I always assumed it was the responsibility of the school's maintenance staff to clear their sidewalks.

I didn't mean the sidewalks AT the schools. I meant the sidewalks NEAR and leading up to the school property. I supposed I wasn't clear.

quote:

It really boggles my mind that someone would buy a house down the street from a school or commuter station, and not clear the walks for the pedestrians. Not just snow, but bushes and trees that encroach upon the walk. But I gues I'm just a compassionate sweetheart who loves my fellow man!

But we knew that already Dins!

quote:

Originally posted by Dinsdale:

quote:

Originally posted by Fish:
When I used the word "responsibility" I think I meant it in a legal context, as in a "duty," for which a failure to perform that "duty" would expose one to liability, whether in the form of a negligence action if someone were hurt or a municipal fine for violation of some ordinance.

Thanks for your clarification. I did not get that from your prior post and was, instead, thinking in terms of "responsible home ownership."

I'm calling total bull **** on this excuse. You posted a statute in response to Fish's posts. You knew what he was saying...then you got bitch slapped by the errors in your cite. Now you are trying to back peddle. What's next, are you going to claim that you have personal issues?

Oh, despite the above, I think you are wonderful person.

Fan, there are two scenarios here that I need your litigation experience on.....#1, Joe Blow is walking on my sidewalk that has not been touched after a 3 inch snow fall. Joe falls, hurts himself and sues me..........Am I on the hook?

#2, Joe Blow is walking on my sidewalk, but this time, I have cleared the snow, but he slips on a icy spot that I missed.......Am I on the hook?

There is great debate in my household and my wife's family about this issue..I know what the insurance answer is, but what does an experienced litigator say?