You are focusing on the wrong things here. I'm not arguing for the "end of winter," although that's always a possibility, I'm simply pointing out that taking one data point in one place (e.g. it's snowing more here than ever!) is a poor way to assess whether or not climate change is happening....
One way to look at it is this: in any given year, a certain number of records will be broken. Either it's the warmest July 4th on record, or the rainiest Sept 20th, or the most consecutive days of rain in October, or what have you. One of the things I notice when they're doing the weather report on Global is they usually tell us what the high and low temps were today and when the record high and low temps were. Often they're decades ago. So records were being broken way back in the mid-twentieth.
However, what really measures how things are going are the total number of records broken in a given year. So for instance if in the 1960s on, 5 records (of any arbitrary list of measurements) were being broken in a year, and in the 70s it was 8 per year, and in the 80s it was 12 per year, and in the 90s it was 20 per year, etc, then you have a trend regardless of what the weather is doing in any particular area in any particular year.
Now mind you I just made those specific numbers up out of thin air, because the actual numbers would depend on how many data points you were tracking, and where. But the point is that more records are actually being broken more often in more places, and it's not just a case of more measurements. People have been tracking this stuff as closely as we track baseball statistics, and for longer.