Comment 37946

By UrbanRenaissance (registered) | Posted February 10, 2010 at 13:55:52

frank wrote:

...inundating City Hall with supposed bylaw infractions can actually make the city less likely to respond quickly to more serious infractions.

I agree, which is why Matt is personally verifying each report before City Hall is contacted and before the property is posted on my map. He then ranks each property based on the severity of the infractions before submitting them to the city.

Also having unskilled or unqualified people comment on structural deficiencies creates a problem with reporting techniques.

I'm not a doctor, but if I see someone who appears to be in medical distress I'm definitely going to call for an ambulance.

The point of the crawl is not to pass any sort of binding judgment, all we're doing is reporting to the proper authorities that certain buildings may require a professional inspection.

My view on the thing would be to limit the crawl to buildings that are vacant or businesses with a history of infractions.

That is exactly the purpose of the Crawl, the focus is always on the vacant or obviously derelict properties first. The vast majority of all the buildings reported thus far are in fact vacant.

I'd recommend you read Matt's posting here in response to a similar (but much more belligerent) comment made over at Cal DiFalco's blog. He nicely lays out the goals and methodology used in organizing the By-Law Crawl.

Permalink | Context

Events Calendar

Recent Articles

Article Archives

Blog Archives

Site Tools

Feeds