Today Monday Tuesday
It is forcast to be Chance of a Thunderstorm at 10:00 PM CDT on May 19, 2013
Chance of a Thunderstorm
90°/68°
It is forcast to be Thunderstorm at 10:00 PM CDT on May 20, 2013
Thunderstorm
86°/68°
It is forcast to be Thunderstorm at 10:00 PM CDT on May 21, 2013
Thunderstorm
88°/66°

18 Comments

news

Liveblog: Debating OneCity and the Future of Transit in Toronto

Council once again looks at the long-term prospects for building transit in Toronto.

The original OneCity transit proposal.

At City Hall this afternoon: another chapter in the long story of council’s vexed relationship with transit planning, as councillors debate several motions that have to do with establishing long-term transit priorities and the funding thereof.

Today’s debate is sparked by the OneCity transit plan unveiled a couple of weeks ago by TTC Chair Karen Stintz (Ward 16, Eglinton-Lawrence), and TTC Vice-Chair and Scarborough councillor Glenn De Baeremaeker (Ward 38, Scarborough Centre). Though it initially called for 21 new transit subway, LRT, streetcar, and bus rapid transit lines, and a new property tax-related revenue tool to help pay for them, the plan’s authors have backed off considerably. What’s left for debate today: a proposal for a staff report that will outline a process for creating a long-term transit strategy for Toronto, a proposal to create a regional roundtable to discuss revenue tools to raise money for transit, and proposals to make an East Bayfront LRT and Scarborough subway the city’s top two new transit priorities.

Follow our liveblog of the debate after the jump…

QUICK REFERENCE

MOTIONS FOR DEBATE

  • A motion which calls for including transit priorities in the City’s Official Plan, which is currently under review. Peter Milczyn (Ward 5, Etobicoke-Lakeshore) told reporters earlier today that he will move an amendment to this, asking for a full study of Toronto’s long-term transit options. (This is very similar to a motion council already approved back in March—see #5 here.) PASSES 43-1
  • A motion that calls for making an East Bayfront LRT a transit priority for Toronto, in the hopes of completing such a line in time for the Pan Am Games in 2015. This proposal also addresses some concerns that the rapid development in the Port Lands requires that transit infrastructure be included from the beginning—that it will help shape the neighbourhood to have transit included at the outset rather than trying to jam it in later. PASSES 38–6
  • A motion that originated with councillor Josh Matlow (Ward 22, St. Paul’s), which calls on the City of Toronto to try to establish a working group including officials from GTA municipalities as well as the province, to discuss the various revenue-generating tools Metrolinx might include in its long-term funding plan, which will be released next year.
  • A motion (not yet online) addressing the future of transit in Scarborough, as the RT line is at the end of its lifespan. Earlier this spring council decided to restore the Transit City strategy for dealing with this: replacing the RT with an LRT line. Scarborough councillor Glenn De Baeremaeker is proposing that council reconsider that decision, and that staff study the viability of extending the Bloor-Danforth subway line into Scarborough instead RULED OUT OF ORDER

6:48 PM: Peter Milczyn’s motion calling for a major study on long-term transit planning priorities PASSES 43-1 (the one dissenter is John Filion). And the motion to make an East Bayfront LRT a priority transit line; report on funding options in October PASSES 38-6. (Rob and Doug Ford were among the dissenters.)

6:47 PM: Bells ringing, signalling that voting is about to commence. Woo!

6:38 PM: More seriously, Stintz says that this motion is important because it will install transit priorities in the City’s Official Plan, and that will make them more resilient. One of our big problems, she says (and she is far from the first), is that “our transit plans don’t survive election cycles.” She adds: “I would be remiss as chair of the TTC and as a member of the Planning and Growth Management Committee if I let the debate end at those four [Transit City] lines.”

6:36 PM: Karen Stintz rises to speak, thanks Peter Milczyn, as chair of the Planning and Growth Management Committee, for taking carriage of the motion calling for a long-term transit study. She jokes that when he agreed to take carriage of the motion, he told her he’d do it on one condition: “that next time I have an idea, I keep it to myself.” A few awkward laughs.

6:16 PM: Shelley Carroll, a few minutes ago regarding Peter Milczyn’s motion calling for a broad transit study: “It’s a face saving motion, and we need one right now.” The difference between that and the OneCity plan, she adds, is that it begins with staff study and research. Message: if council is going to go out into the community and conduct public consultations on what our transit priorities should be, they can’t do it properly without staff advice.

5:36 PM: Gord Perks makes a plea for councillors to pay attention to maintaining and sustaining the network we already have instead of just getting fixated on building new things, and also to pull together and work together more effectively than they have been. “Stop fighting about what part of the city you’re from, stop fighting about what part of the political spectrum you’re from, stop fighting about what technology you want, and start fighing for Toronto.”

5:25 PM: Diversion! Former mayoral chief of staff Nick Kouvalis has rewritten the lyrics of U2′s “One” in honour of OneCity and addressed to TTC Chair Karen Stintz, and is publishing these new words line by line on Twitter. A sample:

Have you come here for forgiveness?
Have you come to raise the dead?
Have you come to play Jesus?
Is the TTC Union in your head?

Did I ask you for too much?
More than a lot.
You gave me Transit City
Now LRT’s is all I got
We’re one
But we’re not the same
Well we
Hurt each other
Then we do it again

5:17 PM: So, councillors continue to discuss the merits of long-term transit planning. Given that they have already voted to conduct a long-term transit study (earlier in the spring) and are today considering a motion that doesn’t substantively add to that earlier request for study, there is not much new that is being said. At some point, council will turn to the East Bayfront LRT line—a priority which, while on the books, could potentially get accelerated by a decision today. Which is to say, that debate might produce something new. For now, not much to report.

5:12 PM @TTCchair: An unfortunate missed opportunity @ ‪#TOcouncil‬ to consider a subway in Scarborough. Moving forward with a ‪#Toronto‬ transit vision.

4:58 PM: Giorgio Mammoliti is speaking again. Yelling, actually. “What’s in your Kool-Aid?” he asks councillors who sometimes want subways and sometimes LRT, among various other complaints.

4:38 PM: And, councillors uphold the chair 26-14. De Baeremaeker’s motion is out of order, will not be debated. No Scarborough subway study. One of the last major elements of OneCity falls. (Note: councillors who voted to uphold the chair / kill Scarborough subway bid: Ford and most of his allies, and most of the progressive/left councillors. Voting against the chair, trying to keep the Scarborough subway vision going: Augimeri, Bailao, Cho, Colle, Davis, De Baeremaeker, Doucette, Fletcher, Fragedakis, Lee, McMahon, Mihevic, Milczyn, Stintz.)

4:35 PM: Glenn De Baeremaeker has just introduced his motion regarding a Scarborough subway. Speaker Frances Nunziata rules that motion out of order because; councillors will now vote on whether to overrule her.

4:18 PM: Milczyn: “I have heard no new ideas in the past two weeks.” Speaking now in favour of his motion, which calls for a global transit study that would eventually have a list of priorities incorporated into the City’s Official Plan. Also, a plea to his colleagues: “If we could set aside egos.”

4:16 PM: More information from Byford: the Scarborough RT ridership is close to subway capacity; ridership projected to be 11,000—14,000 an hour if it is rebuilt as a subway extension. Also, he says that the RT could stay open for relatively low cost if a subway was constructed, during the construction period; this option doesn’t exist if the RT is replaced with LRT.

4:13 PM: Deputy mayor Doug Holyday asks TTC CEO Andy Byford if, supposing the goal of transit is to take cars off the road, it wouldn’t make sense rather than extending the Bloor/Danforth subway east, we extend it west into Mississauga? Andy Byford, diplomatically, replies that such questions could certainly be folded into an overall transit review.

3:55 PM: “For reconsideration of a specific line now you’re back into what we went into for six or eight months and the end of last and beginning of this year.” City manager Joe Pennachetti in reply to questions from Raymond Cho, on the consequences of revisiting council’s decision on Scarborough transit. He say that changing one of the lines now might re-opoen up whole debate, and also will incur costs due to delays, new studies, and so on. A bit later in questioning he says the added costs could be as high at $100 million.

3:42 PM: Metrolinx is coming in for some pointed remarks today—even Pennachetti said during questioning that they are not an accountable body, since no politicians serve on the board.

3:40 PM: Technical note: the province has indicated that it is not interested in revising the plan for Scarborough transit. Since they are the ones paying for it, that’s significant. Since in principle they have said they will only pay for complete assets (like the planned LRT line) rather than extensions of other assets (like adding new subway stops to the Bloor/Danforth line) even if council were to change course and vote for a subway rather than light rail as the replacement of the Scarborough RT, it seems they will have no provincial money to enact that plan. (This is importantly different than the province’s “we will respect the will of council line”—that was contingent on council proposing a plan that met the province’s funding guidelines, which a Bloor/Danforth extension would not.)

3:28 PM: We’ve got advance copies of the language of two key motions.

For a transit study (from Peter Milczyn):

That City Council direct the City Manager….to report to the September [2012] meeting of the Planning and Growth Management Committee..respecting transit related matters including the development of a Toronto Public Transit Expansion Plan; consultation with the Toronto Transit Commission and Metrolinx; review of all transit routes contained within the current Official Plan, Metrolinx Big Move, the previous Let’s Move Plan, and other previous City, TTC or provincial plans.

That City Council direct the City Manager…to report to the Planning and Growth Management Committee in the second quarter of 2013 with a proposed City-wide transit plan to update the Official Plan and a prioritization strategy for all lines.

For a study on a Scarborough subway extension (from Glenn De Baeremaeker):
De Baeremaeker wants to amend the above motion by adding the following clause—

…respecting transit related matters including the development of a Toronto Public Transit Expansion Plan, such expansion plan to consider the eastern extension of the Bloor/Danforth subway and that an interim report on the merits of the eastern extension of the Bloor/Danforth line be submitted to the October 12, 2012 Planning and Growth Management Committee meeting.

3:15 PM: Michael Thompson asks Pennachetti about what opportunities there might be for the public to weigh in on transit, so it isn’t just politicians participating in the discussion? Pennachetti says that what he thinks is best is for staff to finish its research and prepare its report, to come out in October. Then councillors could weigh in, and City staff could facilitate a period of public consultation. The City would then need to make a final decision about its priorities by February, so that it could pass those decisions on to Metrolinx, which needs to issue its own report on a regional transit strategy next June.

3:08 PM: Josh Matlow asks City staff: given that TTC CEO Andy Byford has said publicly that Toronto’s next major transit need is a downtown relief line, does that mean that the DRL is, in fact, already established as our next major transit priority, and is it useful for council to be advancing other transit lines at the same time? City manager Pennachetti (Byford isn’t the council chamber right now) replies that what they (staff) would prefer is to be able to report back to council in October on what their research indicates should be our city’s top transit priorities.

2:59 PM: Reminder: council has already asked City staff to write a report on revenue options for transit funding, and on what our transit planning priorities should be. The results of staff research will be summarized in a series of reports anticipated in October of this year.

2:55 PM: Mammoliti to the City Manager Joe Pennachetti: “did the decisions in the spring take you off your game?” (Note: this is fairly aggressive as councillors don’t generally impugn the professionalism of staff in public debate.) Mammoliti’s voice rises as he asks “Where is OneCity??” And then, as his mike is turned off, “where’s Waldo?”

2:52 PM: And, we’re off. Councillors will begin by asking questions of City staff. Currently up: Giorgio Mammoliti, who is trying to get staff to describe the councillors who wrote OneCity as flip-floppers, for backing a subway in Scarborough now after resisting the mayor’s call for subways earlier this year. TTC Chair Karen Stintz rises to point out that nobody is voting on OneCity today.

Comments

  • Vampchick21

    Gods, Mammoliti is an idiot.

  • Anonymous

    Let’s all agree the OneCity ‘scarborough subway’ is both a sop, and a (pretty shrewd, if you ask me) challenge to those braying last spring for subways in suburbia to put our tax money where their big bloviating mouth is.

  • Anonymous

    “[Byford] says that the RT could stay open for relatively low cost if a subway was constructed, during the construction period; this option doesn’t exist if the RT is replaced with LRT.”

    Closing the SRT during construction is going to be a huge hardship, keenly felt by thousands and thousands of Scarberians. Bus service in Scarborough sucks for all concerned on a good day — and this would make it a lot worse.

    Being able to keep the RT running is a big plus for a subway extension.

    • Anonymous

      What about alternatives? Why not install HOV lanes on a comparable route and give buses signal priority to mitigate the impact? That would be cheaper than building a subway.

      • OgtheDim

        There are no decent comparative above ground routes for the SRT.

        And the volume would overwhelm a bus route of any type.

        • Anonymous

          Well yes, obviously packing everyone from the SRT onto buses is going to suck. But there are options in between “shuttle buses in mixed traffic” and “let’s build a subway!”

          • Anonymous

            In this case, ridership levels support the case for extending the Bloor-Danforth subway (according to TTC staff). Initial estimates are that it could be done for about $500-million over the cost of building an LRT, compared to the $4-billion needed to extend the Sheppard stubway (which would probably not achieve supportable ridership levels in any case).

            Being able to continue running the SRT during subway construction is a considerable added bonus that makes this option more politically palatable. There is no trivial fix for this looming problem, that would significantly degrade transit in Scarborough for several years at least, adding insult to injury. Dedicated bus lanes and signal priority (both highly unlikely, if past experience is anything to go by) just won’t cut it.

            Leaving emotions aside: the Sheppard subway extension proposal made no fiscal sense. A Bloor-Danforth subway extension makes a lot of sense.

          • Anonymous

            I certainly understand the argument for converting SRT into subway, I’ve made it before myself in the past. I think given the situation we’re in now though, it’s simply not going to happen, the moment has passed and the LRT plan is in motion. The thing to do now is to think about how to make that plan work out as well as possible, not to daydream about what might have been.

          • Anonymous

            I understand a lot of people, perhaps including you, are experiencing ‘transit-discussion fatigue’.

            Irregardless, too much is at stake to throw away any opportunity to re-tune current and future transit projects to better meet our needs.

            Junking the SRT before a viable alternative is in place doesn’t meet anyone’s needs.

            LRT rebuild is good. Changing it to subway before that project has started is, in this case, manifestly better.

          • Anonymous

            It’s not so much discussion fatigue as it is we’ve already pulled the trigger. If we wanted to switch to subway, we’d have to do all new EAs and public consultations, we’d have to do all of the engineering studies, and we’d have to line up the extra funding. By the time that is all done, the SRT will have fallen apart, we could have built the LRT, and Scarborough RT riders will be stuck on buses anyway until the subway gets built, or possibly stuck on buses forever, if it gets cancelled like every other transit project.

          • Anonymous

            With due respect, all that is pure conjecture.

            Let’s have a real study by those with more experience and better understanding, instead.

          • Anonymous

            It’s pure conjecture that we haven’t done the engineering reports for this proposed subway line? Can you show me them?

          • Anonymous

            “By the time that is all done [yadda yadda]” is pure conjecture.

          • Anonymous

            Yes, my timeline is conjecture, as is my estimate for the lifespan of the SRT.

            Let’s look at a real example though, the Sheppard East LRT. It was officially proposed in 2007; funded in 2009, the same year detailed planning began for it; was expected to open in 2013; now the plan is to start it in 2014 and finish it in 2018.

            I don’t mean to be a dick or anything, but going from “idea on a napkin” to “funded plan” took 3 years; an SRT -> subway plan has 3 months. Do you really think that’s feasible? The Sheppard LRT is a much easier project than a subway, do you really think that we could build a subway in fewer than the 11 years it’s going to take to build LRT? Do you think the SRT will still work in 11 years?

  • Anonymous

    Has anyone talked about looking at transportation as a whole, and not just transit? The infrastructure for improved walking and cycling is much cheaper than anything else, and would also contribute to stronger, more vibrant neighbourhoods. Simple zoning changes could make local trips easier. Commuter rail is much cheaper than subway. Removing certain regulatory perverse incentives would help the market help us (e.g. getting rid of lower property taxes for unoccupied properties and parking lots).

    Shouldn’t we focus on the inexpensive, low-hanging fruit as well as the expensive, “sexy” projects?

  • Mike D

    So Kouvalis’ super-wild comedy throwdown involves adding around three numbingly easy references to a song that was had its currency exhausted about 20 years ago? Hysterical

    • OgtheDim

      Cookie Monster stole his groove.

  • Anonymous

    Where is Rob Ford, Norm Kelly and Mammo’s vaunted support for subways, subways, subways?

    Where’s Waldo indeed…

Weather forecast by WP Wunderground & Denver Snow Removal