Perspective Ottawa » Blog Archive » It now falls to Mathieu Fleury

It now falls to Mathieu Fleury

20 December 2010 7 Comments

On November 4, 2010, I wrote how Pat Archer, a Rideau Vanier resident, was having trouble dealing with the city regarding her laneway (you can read the post here). Someoneat City Hall was reading because Ms. Archer got a phone call that day from the city and made an appointment to come out to her house and inspect the problem.

Since that appointment on November 10, 2010, Ms. Archer is still waiting for a response from city staff on how the problem will be resolved. Here are the emails she has exchanges between Ms. Archer and the city:

     From: Pat Archer
     To: XXXXXXXX,XXXXXX
     Sent: Monday, December 20, 2010 11:15 AM
     Subject: Re: Laneway

Four weeks have passed since this email. I am still awaiting a response.

—– Original Message —–

From: XXXXXX, XXXXXXX

     To: Pat Archer
     Sent: Monday, November 22, 2010 7:54 AM
     Subject: RE: Laneway

I am now preparing the visit minutes and response to your earlier e-mail

     XXXXXXXX XXXXXXXX
     XXXXXXX XXXXXX XXXXXXXXX
     Infrastructure Services Department
     Business and Technical Services Branch
     Utility/Development Coordination Unit
     (XXX) XXX-XXXX
     XXXXXX.XXXXXXX@ottawa.ca

—————————————————————————————————————

     From: Pat Archer
     Sent: November 18, 2010 4:22 PM
     To: XXXXXX, XXXXXXXX
     Subject: Laneway

Greetings,

I have not heard from anyone since our meeting last Wednesday.

I am not satisfied with this being pushed off to Council until 2011 and will be pursuing my case persistently.

Regards

Patricia Archer

So, Ms. Archer is wondering what else she can do to get her 16 month issue resolved. Any ideas?

7 Comments »

Corry Burke said:

Could you clarify the issue? I read the original post and I am not sure why the City is plowing her neighbour’s laneway in the first place. Why is the City performing this task? Is there a special circumstance that we are not aware of?

And, yes, I agree, this issue should be capable of resolution in under 30 minutes…

# 20 December 2010 at 2:28 pm

BlakeBatson.ca (author) said:

That, Corry, is exactly the question. She wants to why her laneway is not being plowed while the other driveway is. Either hers gets plowed or the other one stops getting plowed.

First email went out in 2009. Staff went to see first hand if they are indeed identical and if they are, why is only one getting plowed.

At their meeting on Nov 10, the city worker says they are identical and doesn’t know why the two differing policies.

On Nov 22, he said he was writing up his response. As of today, no response. And now it’s winter, one laneway is getting plowed and one isn’t.

# 20 December 2010 at 3:59 pm

Perry said:

This could be another communication failure from the city; where they either tell the snow removal operator to plow all lanes or stop doing both lanes but the direction is not being followed. Furthermore, the city does not have a good record to getting back to the residents on measures it took to fix the problem.

Time for Mathieu to step in and ensure the lines of communications get open.

# 21 December 2010 at 9:39 am

Michel Tardif said:

It is the same old laid back staff and they will go away attitude. I have no response from my Councilor, Tim Tierney.

It has been this way for years on end.

It would have been better to call the city information line, get the name of the manager of snow removal therefore she would definitely get a response over the phone or e-mail.

# 21 December 2010 at 4:36 pm

BlakeBatson.ca (author) said:

Actually Michel, it’s the opposite. It has been city staff that have not been responding to Ms. Archer’s emails. Even when they give an answer, it’s a non answer.

The issue is a simple one. Are the driveways the same or not. And if they are (and I believe they are)they should be treated equally. Plow both or plow neither.

I will post the official city response tomorrow.

# 21 December 2010 at 5:11 pm

RealGrouchy said:

Looking forward to it, Blake.

- RG>

# 22 December 2010 at 12:03 pm

Michel Tardif said:

Blake:

I have had staff numerous requests for information in the past. One example; was information pertaining to Para Transpo budget.

Para Staff did not respond for my request and the request from Michel Bellemare office but I did call the information line (311 or 613-580-2424). I had informed the call-taker of the situation resulting in her providing me with the phone number and the name of the OC accounts manager.

The Accounts manager provided me the information within two days as well as answering two e-mails for more information later on.

This seems to be the best way when councilors cannot step up to the plate for their ward residents.

Basically put, go up the ladder even though it is a simple problem to resolve.

# 22 December 2010 at 5:06 pm