Matt ElliottHolyday’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Councillor Mike Colle is also asking about technology alternatives, saying “streetcar technology” is outdated.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.”
Holyday warns that with the new traffic calming criteria, “nine out of ten streets will suddenly qualify!”
He calls the proposed policy flawed. He suggests different criteria could be used in different parts of the city based on “different types of road and driving conditions.”
“If Councillor Holyday does not want traffic calming in his ward then let’s move that motion. By all means, nothing for Councillor Holyday,” says Nunziata. She says she wants more traffic calming in her ward and thinks most other councillors do too.
Councillor Brad Bradford has a motion to update the criteria for installing traffic lights, so they can be installed if there’s been one person killed or seriously injured. Current criteria require way more injuries/deaths before city will install traffic lights.
Councillor Dianne Saxe moves for an annual report that lists every pedestrian/cyclist death caused by a driver in the city, and a summary of contributing factors and changes that could improve safety.
Councillor Paula Fletcher moves for a report on whether the police are using “textalyzer” tech, which is like a breathalyzer but it detects whether a person has been texting? Is this a thing?
Time to vote. Councillor Holyday’s motion to refer the new traffic calming policy back to staff for more consideration of the different traffic calming needs of wards like his FAILS 3-20.
Councillor Bradford’s motion to relax the criteria for installing traffic lights and pedestrian crossovers, so that they can be installed after one preventable death, CARRIES 21-2.
All other motions are carried via show of hands.
The new traffic calming policy is APPROVED by Council, 22-1.
Sticking with the traffic safety theme, Council’s next item is a request to the federal government to enhance safety regulations and requirements for heavy trucks, and for a report on city hall requiring trucks driving in the city to have side guards. https://secure.toronto.ca/council/agenda-item.do?item=2023.IE7.9
Mayor Olivia Chow moves that the coming report also look at the feasibility of retrofitting the City of Toronto’s truck fleet with side guards.
Chow’s motion on side guards on city trucks CARRIES via a show of hands. As does the item. Report coming in Q3 2024 on the feasibility of requiring trucks to have side guards.
Five items left. Council decides to just plow through. Up now: the proposed process for the city to use the new Community Infrastructure & Housing Accelerator, or CIHA. It’s basically a more formalized process through which cities can get MZOs. https://secure.toronto.ca/council/agenda-item.do?item=2023.PH7.8
Councillor Stephen Holyday moves to require written notice of at least 20 days when there’s a plan to use the new CIHA process to accelerate a project.
The Holyday motion and the item CARRY via show of hands.
One item left: tree removal at Ontario Place. The province intends to cut down a bunch of trees to make way for the mega-spa plans. A report suggests city hall probably can’t do much to stop ‘em. https://secure.toronto.ca/council/agenda-item.do?item=2023.CC12.14
Councillor Ausma Malik moves for city lawyers to look at intervening in court cases involving Ontario Place redevelopment and tree removal at the site. That CARRIES 20-1.
And that’ll do it. Council’s November 2023 meeting is in the books.
If you enjoyed this thread and found it informative, funny and/or enraging, consider supporting me with a subscription to my newsletter, City Hall Watcher, if you can. It means a lot. https://toronto.cityhallwatcher.com/subscribe
Alex@GraphicMatt rare good Bradford motion - amazing that Holiday is angry at the idea that we might want people not to be killed.
Globaltom@alexwaolson @GraphicMatt Holyday is opposed to trying anything that might driving less convenient anywhere in the City because he's worried *it might work*.
John Schrag@GraphicMatt Wait — so getting a traffic light installed literally requires a human sacrifice?