Matt ElliottHolyday steps in to help Bradford out, asking Bradford if construction is risky and if the city has ever directly built a high-rise building. Bradford says no. Holyday asks if the City has a history of cost overruns and delays on other projects. Bradford says yes.
Bravo asks if Bradford agrees that recent experience with P3s show that the private sector does not in fact take on the risk and build projects better.
Bradford responds by claiming the Eglinton Crosstown is a “government agency-led project” with Metrolinx in charge.
Councillor McKelvie has some motions too.
- To develop an “adaptive management framework” to meet the new housing targets.
- Update the housing dashboard with the new targets.
Councillor Paula Fletcher moves for staff to do analysis on approaches for building affordable housing on Villiers Island, and for a report on redeveloping a Danforth Ave site with additional affordable units.
Time to vote. Holyday’s motion to provide quarterly reports on the new Housing Plan FAILS 8-17. They’ll stick with annual reports.
Councillor Bradford’s motion to request inclusionary zoning be applied only in areas “where supported by market analysis” FAILS 10-15.
Councillor Bradford’s motion to delete the words “public builder model” and rule out the city serving as construction manager or general contractor on housing projects FAILS 9-16.
Mayor Olivia Chow’s new affordable housing plan, targeting 65K rent-controlled units by 2030, CARRIES 24-1.
Up now: a debate on Toronto’s shelter system, and the readiness for the winter season. It all looks grim — the system is already at capacity, with hundreds of people unable to find beds each night.
The city plans to add up to 390 indoor spaces (including a new 24-hour respite centre with 40 spaces) and offer up to 275 new housing opportunities this winter. (The inclusion of “up to” with numbers like these always makes me nervous.)
Deputy Mayor Ausma Malik asks about using the federal armouries in the city as shelters this winter. Shelter GM Gord Tanner says the inquiry has been made, and the city is waiting to get info from the federal government on whether they’ll be made available.
On the shelter plan, Mayor Chow notes the cold and wet weather outside right now. She says the fed gov must step up to help the ~40% of shelter users who are refugees. At same time, city must transition high-cost shelter hotels to lower-cost new purpose-built shelters, mayor says
The request that the federal government open city armouries for use as shelter spaces CARRIES 22-1.
Request to look at using public land for permanent or temporary shelters, modular housing, tiny homes etc CARRIES 22-1.
And that’ll do it for today. Council breaks for the night.
Back at 9:30 a.m. with 44 items left on the agenda. Up first tomorrow: the expansion of the non-police crisis response service.
Council’s back for day two. Things are getting started with a tribute to the Toronto Youth Cabinet on the occasion of their 25th anniversary. Damn the youth cabinet is getting old.
Day two stream is here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hdi7ZqJ23ec
City Council - November 9, 2023
Up first: the recommended city-wide expansion of Toronto’s non-police crisis response service. A pilot project has gone pretty darn well, with nearly 7K calls received, and 78% handled with no police involvement. https://secure.toronto.ca/council/agenda-item.do?item=2023.EX9.10
The proposed expansion will see calls for people experiencing mental crisis handled by four organizations, with three geographic districts and one city-wide Indigenous service.
The city-wide non-police crisis response program is expected to cost $35 million a year. Report recommends council ask the provincial government to fund it like they do other public health programs, with a 75%/25% provincial/city split. Will Queen’s Park agree? TBD.
(Seems like there’s a decent case this program should be funded via an offset from the police budget but I’m not sure there’s an appetite to have that argument right now.)
After staff questions, Mayor Olivia Chow is the first speaker on the item. She lauds the non-police crisis response service and the work that got city hall to this point, saying that adding this as Toronto’s fourth emergency service will have a “generational impact.”
Councillor Stephen Holyday has a motion. He wants to strike the language about the crisis response service becoming “Toronto’s fourth emergency service.”
He worries those words may “haunt us” and create undue liability or expectation.
Councillor Chris Moise asks Holyday if he thinks people in mental health crisis are not, in fact, experiencing an emergency? Holyday deflects and says he’s not trying to devalue the experience of people, but just doesn’t like the use of the word “emergency” in this context.
Holyday’s motion to NOT call Toronto’s non-police crisis response service an “emergency service” FAILS 2-21.
Council votes 23-0 to ENDORSE the city-wide expansion of the non-police crisis response service.
Up now: the Waterfront East LRT, which is way overdue and also way underfunded and years — maybe decades — away from construction. A sad story. I wrote about it in the Star this week: https://www.thestar.com/opinion/contributors/massive-overhaul-of-the-toronto-port-lands-is-already-something-to-see-just-don-t/article_e0f8e9f0-7dd8-5763-8983-173d95600fb0.html
Council is being asked to advance parts of the Waterfront East LRT to 60% design, but there’s a risk of up to $135 million in prelim work being “sunk costs” if federal/provincial/other funding doesn’t materialize for construction. https://secure.toronto.ca/council/agenda-item.do?item=2023.EX9.14
From the archives: a 2003 motion adopted unanimously by Toronto City Council that they “reaffirm the principle that transit is a core element of the future redevelopment of the Waterfront.”
Twenty years later, still waiting.
Councillor Nick Mantas asks if staff have considered “trackless transit” technology for the waterfront. Staff say they have not, and have concerns about adding new types of technology in terms of long-term maintenance, etc.
Councillor Lily Cheng asks about proportion of public space in the eastern waterfront, and how staff are making sure it isn’t “very cluttered, with a lot of housing which is what a lot of our current waterfront looks like.” Chief Planner says the vision is a complete community.
Staff say further delays on the Waterfront East LRT will undoubtedly increase project costs, potentially to the tune of 4.5% to 5% for every year of delay. Current full-project estimate is $2.6 billion.
Councillor Mike Colle is also asking about technology alternatives, saying “streetcar technology” is outdated. “Why spend billions building an obsolete thing on the waterfront?”
Colle points to how long it’s taken to build LRTs on Eglinton and Finch, and suggests the city must look at alternatives for the waterfront. “This could be another boondoggle that we could avoid.” He likes electric buses in dedicated lanes but isn’t making a motion. Okay then.
Mayor Olivia Chow is the final speaker on the Waterfront LRT. Nunziata accidentally calls her “Councillor Chow.” Chow jokes that’s appropriate, because she actually was a councillor when this line was first talked about, twenty years ago.
Chow says waterfront transit will benefit everyone, linking people to these new neighbourhoods. “It’s exciting, and we are starting — FINALLY — to do the planning.”
The vote on the Waterfront East LRT will be delayed until after lunch, because Councillor Paula Fletcher wants to be in the chamber for it, and she’s not now.
Back at 2 p.m. to do that, then the rest of everything. There are 37 items left on the agenda.
Council is back. The recommendation to go forward with design work on parts of the Waterfront East LRT — despite uncertainty about construction funding — CARRIES 18-2.
(Don’t know what’s up with that alternative vote results screen. Kind of neat you can see the seating chart for mayor and councillors, I guess!)
On to member motions. Councillor Chris Moise’s motion for a report on using photo radar to enforce the King Street transit corridor CARRIES via show of hands. https://secure.toronto.ca/council/agenda-item.do?item=2023.MM12.1
Councillor Dianne Saxe’s motion requesting the federal government create a Youth Climate Corps CARRIES via show of hands. By their powers combined… Earth, Fire, Wind, Water, Heart! https://secure.toronto.ca/council/agenda-item.do?item=2023.MM12.4
Councillor Stephen Holyday’s motion for a report on whether the Etobicoke Coat of Arms is, in fact, racist fails to make the agenda. Vote was 15-8. It needed a two-thirds majority. Item will get referred to committee. https://secure.toronto.ca/council/agenda-item.do?item=2023.MM12.6
Councillor James Pasternak’s motion to endorse the “Mayoral Declaration on Addressing Hate, Extremism and Polarisation” CARRIES 23-0. https://secure.toronto.ca/council/agenda-item.do?item=2023.MM12.12
Not a lot of action with the member motions. Most were minor and passed without objection. Only one was held for debate. There are now just 13 lucky items left on the agenda.
Up now: a report on the Congestion Management Plan. Major focus of the plan is adding more “traffic agents” directing traffic. But because the city is having trouble recruiting/retaining traffic agents, they’re looking to have the cops do it in more places https://secure.toronto.ca/council/agenda-item.do?item=2023.IE7.2
I wrote about the traffic agent program, and the plan to expand it, a couple of weeks back. My experience is that they are not always great for pedestrians. https://www.thestar.com/opinion/contributors/toronto-s-traffic-agents-may-help-cars-move-but-there-s-a-more-effective-way/article_e93d66ce-60b3-514c-8c08-85c9bf1392fb.html
Councillor James Pasternak asks if traffic agents have the power to enforce traffic laws. Director of Traffic Management Roger Browne says agents technically have enforcement powers, but the focus is on “traffic management rather than enforcement.”
Councillor Brad Bradford moves for a report on programs intended to better coordinate major construction projects.
Councillor Chris Moise moves for a report on measures to improve way-finding for finding alternate routes around construction. He calls downtown construction right now a “cluster… mess.”
Councillor Paula Fletcher moves for reports on the feasibility of increasing the permit fees for construction projects that close streets and a plan to consult with various types of road users on the congestion management plan.
On the Congestion Management Plan, all motions CARRY via show of hands.
Plan is APPROVED by Council by show of hands.
Watch for more traffic agents, coming soon to an intersection near you.
Up now: a debate on doubling the number of “free-floating” car share vehicle permits in the city. These are car share vehicles where users can start and end trips at on-street spaces. Currently Communauto is the only provider in the city. https://secure.toronto.ca/council/agenda-item.do?item=2023.IE7.3
Councillor Stephen Holyday wants to make sure there’s nothing in this report that would suddenly lead to car share vehicles parked on streets without permitted on-street parking. Staff say that’s not the intent. Holyday seems relieved.
Councillor Dianne Saxe moves for a report in May 2024 on making “free floating” car shares available city-wide, eliminating current restrictions that limit them only to some areas where there’s on-street permit parking.
Councillor Holyday, on the other hand, moves to ensure car-share vehicles aren’t allowed to start/end trips in areas without on-street parking. He says in his ward people have private parking spaces, and nobody wants “cars dumped randomly on the street and left there to linger”
Council contains multitudes. Both the Saxe and Holyday motions CARRY via show of hands. Not sure how that’s going to work long-term, but I guess we’ll see what the future holds. Original recommendation to increase number of permits available to Communauto CARRIES too.
Up now: a report with some updates on the Vision Zero Road Safety Plan, with a focus on traffic calming. https://secure.toronto.ca/council/agenda-item.do?item=2023.IE7.4
Councillor Jon Burnside asks about obstructed license plates, which can be a real issue with the photo radar program. A rep from Toronto Police says they issued 11,905 tickets for obstructed/obscured/peeling license plates in 2022. 2023 year to date is already at 14,186 tickets.
“So, if I was the parent of some fictional child named — harkening back to the previous councillor for Etobicoke — Little Ginny. Little Ginny is much safer on streets designed for 30 km/h than one that’s posted at 40 and gets traffic calming at 50?” asks Perks. Staff agree.
That’s a real wayback playback from Councillor Perks there. Here’s the context. https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/toronto-s-deputy-mayor-says-downtown-no-place-for-kids-1.1275547
Here’s a quick flowchart comparison of the old process for getting traffic calming measures installed on a Toronto street (left), versus the proposed new one (right). Crucially, no more need for petitions and a supermajority poll result.
Saying he regrets that he has to do this, Councillor Stephen Holyday moves to refer the proposed new traffic calming policy back to staff for more work. He wants a policy that is more “responsive to the differences in wards across the city.”
nev@GraphicMatt you remember Little Ginny? She's in college now
Tom 🇨🇦Do you know why Toronto has an enormously larger number of lane closures associated with construction than other large cities?
@misterscience I don't, but it would be good to get some data on that! My guess would be that Toronto still has relatively low permit fees for blocking lanes, and doesn't enforce timelines very aggressively. You often see streets/sidewalks blocked for days/weeks after the construction work is done.