Toronto mayor rebukes handyman whose steps saved taxpayers $50,000

Here's a good column dicussing the stairs.

Quote:

But just looking at photos of those stairs published in broadcast media and posted by social media users, you can see clearly that the city inspectors are not wrong. The stairs themselves have no concrete foundation, the stringers and railing sit on mud or gravel. The stringers support the stairs only in the middle, not across their length. The handrail is unstable, and it is not anchored to the ground. A series of boxed steps partly filled with wood chips leading up to the stairs present an obvious tripping hazard. The platform at the top of the slope is narrower than the stairs, has no handrail at all and has a large gap in the middle of the two boards it is made of.

So, definitely cheaper at only $500, but it looks like the builder got what he paid for.

The issue, of course, is liability.  People may have been falling on the slippery hill, but the hazards of a slippery hill are assumed to be self-evident, and the City is under no obligation to prevent the hill from being slippery.  But if someone leans on the handrail and it gives way, the City could be liable because it's reasonable to expect a handrail to not do that.

As noted, though, this whole thing did seem to promptly reduce the estimated cost of a City-sanctioned staircase by 80%, so that's a good thing.

Quote:

and it makes me wonder why Mayor Tory couldn't have said something roughly in that spirit.

Because sadly, the stick up his ass has a stick up its ass.  Jeebus.  I wasn't enamoured of Doug Ford, but at least I think I saw him smile once.

They do that in North Vancouver District for the hiking trails

------------

Where did the $65,000 quote to do the job come from?

was that city workers or an outside contractor?

and if it was an outside contractor why are their not 3 quotes obtained to ensure taxpayers are not being ripped off with stories like this it is no wonder some taxpayers hate governments 

Badriya wrote:

WWWTT wrote:

I read this somewhere when it first came out. I actually think there is a good middle groung here that can possibly be explored. A volunteer program where people donate their time and money, municipality pitches in some money and expertice at these small projects. Everyone gets their hands dirty, tax payers save money and the community get to contribute! 

Na forget it, that makes too much sence therefore doomed to fail from the word go!

So you want to replace well paying union jobs with volunteers? I don`t.

I never thought of that. But 50-100K for a set of stairs????

Perhaps if it was unionized city workers doing the job for much less as opposed to these jobs being contracted out?

Not just that, this type of project is just a small thing. Otherwise this guy would never get involved. Perhaps if something was organized with unionized city staff for small minor projects like this, it would promote the benefits of unionized labour?

Just an idea brother/sister, I didn't mean to disrupt labour.

Quote:

The issue, of course, is liability.  People may have been falling on the slippery hill, but the hazards of a slippery hill are assumed to be self-evident, and the City is under no obligation to prevent the hill from being slippery.  But if someone leans on the handrail and it gives way, the City could be liable because it's reasonable to expect a handrail to not do that.

And falling on a slope is generally less hazardous than falling down hard stairs.

I bet Mike Holmes could make it right, if only there was a woman to hug him.