Board of Trade Report on Congestion

[Midtown Hank]

Surprised this wasn't included in the News Roundup today. From the Toronto Star.

https://www.thestar.com/news/gta/a-...cle_0a7241d0-eee6-11ef-b36b-a75005b1c30a.html

 

[DSCToronto]

The final paragraph of the Star piece reads: "“Despite years of conversation and well-intended short-term fixes, we remain gridlocked,” said Giles Gherson, president of the board of trade. “Toronto’s streets are trying to do everything for everyone, and in the process, they’re failing to meet their fundamental purpose.”

I question whether the 'fundamental purpose' of streets is to move vehicles - there are other very legitimate 'users' such as cyclists and pedestrians. I agree that if vehicle users need more space to move (which they maybe do) then they should have more of it, but taken primarily from on-street parking! Of course, merchants (who are a large Board of trade constituency) will not like this as lack of parking 'at the door' is often blamed for lower retail sales and delivery problems!

 

[Northern Light]

Surprised this wasn't included in the News Roundup today. From the Toronto Star.

https://www.thestar.com/news/gta/a-...cle_0a7241d0-eee6-11ef-b36b-a75005b1c30a.html

I appreciate your posting this........... I will, however note, the article doesn't even have a link to the actual report...... other than some headline grabbing stuff like take bike lanes off busy streets and nix CafeTO it has very little to say.

So....

Here's the report itself: https://prodwebsitesttrbot.blob.cor...reaking-gridlock-congestion-action-plan_1.pdf

From the above: ( my comments on each action are underneath each point)

I'm fine with all the fee related suggestions, but 24/7 work in residential zones that could last years does not seem reasonable. People need to sleep.

Fine

No on Bike lanes, leave'em .

On removing parking from main streets, sure.

On CafeTO, the set-ups generally go in parking areas, if the parking is gone, so is the CAFE; but, some of that space should be claimed by widened siewalks which can allow for the same patios.

On delivery times, sure.

Fine.

We don't need more Czars, we have the mechanisms for accountability now, the problem is timid staff who duck their responsibilities and don't seek to rock the boat.

Staff change is in order.

 

[Northern Light]

I'll highlight some other things worthy of note:

I have specifically recommended both of these to pols and to staff.........

To do the first one, requires accelerating project planning relative to budget schedules, and it requires approving the Capital Budget for the year in the preceding fall, ideally by early November.

****

While we absolutely need to move forward with automated enforcement of 'Block the Box' offenses........ (obstructing intersections)

This chart shows, lax police enforcement is a problem in the interim:

This caught my eye:

And you thought TTC Fare evasion was an issue...........a 60% evasion rate on paying for parking!!

I like the sound of this, it merits immediate staff consideration/examination.

 

[DSCToronto]

I appreciate your posting this........... I will, however note, the article doesn't even have a link to the actual report...... other than some headline grabbing stuff like take bike lanes off busy streets and nix CafeTO it has very little to say.

So....

Here's the report itself: https://prodwebsitesttrbot.blob.cor...reaking-gridlock-congestion-action-plan_1.pdf

From the above: ( my comments on each action are underneath each point)

View attachment 632074

I'm fine with all the fee related suggestions, but 24/7 work in residential zones that could last years does not seem reasonable. People need to sleep.

View attachment 632075

Fine

View attachment 632077

No on Bike lanes, leave'em .

On removing parking from main streets, sure.

On CafeTO, the set-ups generally go in parking areas, if the parking is gone, so is the CAFE; but, some of that space should be claimed by widened siewalks which can allow for the same patios.

On delivery times, sure.

View attachment 632078

Fine.

View attachment 632079
View attachment 632080

We don't need more Czars, we have the mechanisms for accountability now, the problem is timid staff who duck their responsibilities and don't seek to rock the boat.

Staff change is in order.

I am really not sure I blame Staff, Councillors have an alarming tendency to push for 'exceptions' and their colleagues almost invariably agree as they want to be sure THEIR next 'special request' is approved too. Councillors are in charge of Staff and if anyone is to be blamed it is Council. Any Czar should be a Councillor and any Community Council decision on traffic/roads that ignored Staff advice should need to go to Council for final approval and the Czar should have to comment on it.

 

[Northern Light]

I am really not sure I blame Staff, Councillors have an alarming tendency to push for 'exceptions' and their colleagues almost invariably agree as they want to be sure THEIR next 'special request' is approved too. Councillors are in charge of Staff and if anyone is to be blamed it is Council. Any Czar should be a Councillor and any Community Council decision on traffic/roads that ignored Staff advice should need to go to Council for final approval and the Czar should have to comment on it.

Staff can stand up to Councillors if they have a backbone.

Councillors cannot fire staff. Though they can certainly help/hurt some people in their careers.

 

[Mihairokov]

And you thought TTC Fare evasion was an issue...........a 60% evasion rate on paying for parking!!

And doubled fines didn't move the meter much. Time to double them again.

 

[Northern Light]

And doubled fines didn't move the meter much. Time to double them again.

While I'm not opposed to higher fines necessarily, I am generally iffy on broad-based, mandatory minimum increases that hit low income earners much harder than high income earners.

I very much support income-continent fines, but regrettably, that move would require both Federal and Provincial legislation and seems unlikely in the near term.

I would be interested to know if existing legislation leaves room for fines that escalate for repeat offenses, as I'm more comfortable with the idea that you've given someone the 'warning shot', then you get harsher. GO does this with its fare evasion ticketing.

I think a version of this might be something like.............first offense, current fine, second offense double fine, third offense in a set time period (say 5 years just to pick a number), and you have to go to court under summons to answer for the offense and could face a much higher fine from the judge.

****

That said, I think we need to simply look at enforcement frequency; clearly some areas are not seeing frequent ticketing, and we also need to simply remove parking from major streets, beginning with streetcar routes, particularly downtown, and then do Bloor, either eliminating that parking or reducing it by 1/2, permanently. Using the mid-block space for widened sidewalks, but the space at intersections for new/expanded left-turn lanes.

 

[sixrings]

While I'm not opposed to higher fines necessarily, I am generally iffy on broad-based, mandatory minimum increases that hit low income earners much harder than high income earners.

I very much support income-continent fines, but regrettably, that move would require both Federal and Provincial legislation and seems unlikely in the near term.

I would be interested to know if existing legislation leaves room for fines that escalate for repeat offenses, as I'm more comfortable with the idea that you've given someone the 'warning shot', then you get harsher. GO does this with its fare evasion ticketing.

I think a version of this might be something like.............first offense, current fine, second offense double fine, third offense in a set time period (say 5 years just to pick a number), and you have to go to court under summons to answer for the offense and could face a much higher fine from the judge.

****

That said, I think we need to simply look at enforcement frequency; clearly some areas are not seeing frequent ticketing, and we also need to simply remove parking from major streets, beginning with streetcar routes, particularly downtown, and then do Bloor, either eliminating that parking or reducing it by 1/2, permanently. Using the mid-block space for widened sidewalks, but the space at intersections for new/expanded left-turn lanes.

Just pay for parking and it won’t matter if you’re a low earner. I’d double parking rates to raise money and then double the fines. We need people to leave their cars at home.

 

[Northern Light]

Just pay for parking and it won’t matter if you’re a low earner.

While I broadly agree, I also think people sometimes make dumb mistakes, and for that isn't violent and can be unintentional (such as running late getting back to your space on time) I'm disinclined to a 'Maximum Bob' approach to first offenses.

I’d double parking rates to raise money and then double the fines. We need people to leave their cars at home.

I agree that on-street rates are far too low and have advocated for raising them.

 

[sixrings]

While I broadly agree, I also think people sometimes make dumb mistakes, and for that isn't violent and can be unintentional (such as running late getting back to your space on time) I'm disinclined to a 'Maximum Bob' approach to first offenses.



I agree that on-street rates are far too low and have advocated for raising them.

I used to live on a one way street where half the month you could park on one side and the other half of the month you needed to park on the other side. I repeatedly told every guest at every dinner party. And sure enough there would always be one who was like naw I’m not moving it. Then they would get a ticket. The tickets are low enough people take their chances. This is my issue.

 

[Mihairokov]

While I'm not opposed to higher fines necessarily, I am generally iffy on broad-based, mandatory minimum increases that hit low income earners much harder than high income earners.

Speaking frankly, I don't see people driving and parking downtown as being low-earners. Low-earners are the ones taking transit and cycling, or walking. Your statement is more true for Scarborough or other outlying areas where owning a car is more of a necessity, but the only low-earning people driving downtown are uber and delivery drivers, IMHO.

 

[Northern Light]

Speaking frankly, I don't see people driving and parking downtown as being low-earners. Low-earners are the ones taking transit and cycling, or walking. Your statement is more true for Scarborough or other outlying areas where owning a car is more of a necessity, but the only low-earning people driving downtown are uber and delivery drivers, IMHO.

Lots of cars parking at Moss Park TCHC and at Alexandra Park.

I think you underestimate the number of people who need a car to get to their factory shift in suburbia.

***

That said, parking by-laws (set fines for offenses) apply equally all over the City, the fine doesn't vary by neighbourhood affluence.

 

[Admiral Beez]

1. Reduce lane closures​

This year, roughly 10 per cent of all Toronto streets, or 550 kilometres of roadway, will be occupied by construction work zones at some point, according to the report. Given existing demands on the road, the task force argues there needs to be a higher bar for lane closures and the city needs to actively manage how long they last.

It’s not about greater revenue opportunity for the city. Lane closures for condo construction should never be allowed no matter how lucrative the fees may be. Demand that the developers figure it out through reducing their footprint to make room for their gear and components.

 

[Jonny5]

Lots of cars parking at Moss Park TCHC and at Alexandra Park.

I think you underestimate the number of people who need a car to get to their factory shift in suburbia.

Or all the rideshare/taxi drivers who live in these areas.