Mayor Olivia Chow's Toronto

[Mount Dennis Resident]

Yes but those are not full blown expressways.

Kingston Road is formerly Highway 2 however it is not and never was a highway like the 401, Gardiner or DVP. It is a local road more than anything else.

The only road that can truly be considered a municipal expressway in Toronto will be the Allen.

Before development, they were located in farmland (speed limit 80 km/h?). It was when development moved in that the province downloaded those former provincial highways to the municipalities (speed limit 50 km/h, allegedly?).

 

[mdu]

He could have pulled a “Ford to City: Drop dead” (ironic that you can reuse that headline, almost 50 years later), but he didn’t...

Hume: Ford to Transit City: Drop dead

Mayor Rob Ford's first day on the job is one to remember.

www.thestar.com

 

[TwinHuey]

Received from Cycle Toronto yesterday.

I wonder if our newly elected Ward 20 Councillor will be attending the meeting on Friday?

 

[Richard White]

Received from Cycle Toronto yesterday.

View attachment 523380
View attachment 523381

I wonder if our newly elected Ward 20 Councillor will be attending the meeting on Friday?

Removing the bike lanes from Brimley was not a bad thing. Brimley is heavily used and placing bike lanes there was a stupid idea to begin with.

Right now, with the Line 3 shuttles placing bike lanes in Central, North or Northeast Scarborough is a bad idea. Midland and Kennedy have the Line 3 Replacement service while McCowan has the SSE Extension works. This leaves Brimley as the only viable alternative in that part of Scarborough.

The only place I can see bike lanes working is on Bellamy or along Military Trail.

 

[Northern Light]

Removing the bike lanes from Brimley was not a bad thing. Brimley is heavily used and placing bike lanes there was a stupid idea to begin with.

Disagree.

Right now, with the Line 3 shuttles placing bike lanes in Central, North or Northeast Scarborough is a bad idea. Midland and Kennedy have the Line 3 Replacement service while McCowan has the SSE Extension works. This leaves Brimley as the only viable alternative in that part of Scarborough.

I do agree that Kennedy and Midland are off limits south of 401 and north of Eglinton for now.

The only place I can see bike lanes working is on Bellamy or along Military Trail.

Yes to Bellamy; no to Military Trail, since it will be reconstructed again...........and even if construction weren't an issue the frequent steep hills are a problem.

****

To serve central Scarborough, I would prioritize Pharmacy, Birchmount north of St. Clair only for now; Danforth/Kingston (more at the south end, but part of a logical network), and off-road projects, (Meadoway and Warden Hydro Corridor)

 

[Admiral Beez]

Highway 27 (between Eglinton and Steeles) is still maintained by Toronto.

Black Creek Blvd. was to be a southern extension of Highway 400 to Weston Rd., is still maintained by Toronto.

Spadina Expressway, now known as Allen Rd., between Sheppard and Eglinton, is still maintained by Toronto.

Other former provincial highways have been maintained by Toronto for decades now...

• Highway 2, aka Lake Shore Blvd. and Kingston Road;
• Highway 5, aka Dundas Street West, Bloor Street, and Danforth Road;
• Highway 11, aka Yonge Street;
• Highway 11A, aka University Avenue and Avenue Road;
• Highway 48, aka Markham Road;
• Highway 50, aka Albion Road.

By freeway we can discern that this refers to divided, higher speed roads without traffic lights or intersections.

 

[Richard White]

To serve central Scarborough, I would prioritize Pharmacy, Birchmount north of St. Clair only for now; Danforth/Kingston (more at the south end, but part of a logical network), and off-road projects, (Meadoway and Warden Hydro Corridor)

As someone who lives off of Birchmount north of St Clair that may be a bit of a fight.

There are tons of commercial buildings and houses along that stretch which may raise a stink about bike lanes.

 

[Northern Light]

CafeTO and changes to said program are on the agenda for the next Executive Ctte meeting.

There are some modest improvements proposed in terms of timing, (getting decisions made quicker and fast tracking previous permit holders) ; and starting the season earlier (May 1st, instead of May 15). Also better is the deployment of extra staff and coordination with BIAs in particular to help resolve issues in real-time as installations are done.

However, the program remains over bureaucratized.

And under the 'stupid' file......... they propose to ratchet up the fees substantially this year and next.

Report here:

https://www.toronto.ca/legdocs/mmis/2023/ex/bgrd/backgroundfile-240938.pdf

Proposed Fee Structure:

So, here, I feel the need to give people some guidance on what the above looks like.

The rule in restaurant dining is roughly 20ft2 per seat (that includes table and walking space to get to/from same for customers and servers)

1m2 is 10.7ft2; so for simplicity's sake, 2m2 is one seat. Typical tables are 4m-8m2 (2 seats, 4 seats)

So if you're a small operator, and you want to put out 4 tables, of 4 seats each.....

You're being asked for roughly an extra $3,500 per year.

That has to be offset by profit, not revenue.

So profit of roughly $220 (additional) per seat.

Typical margin for a full-service restaurant is 4%

So multiply the above by 25 and you get a need for additional gross revenue of $5,500 per seat.

***

Sigh....that'll help drive interest in the program....

 

[DSC]

CafeTO and changes to said program are on the agenda for the next Executive Ctte meeting.

There are some modest improvements proposed in terms of timing, (getting decisions made quicker and fast tracking previous permit holders) ; and starting the season earlier (May 1st, instead of May 15). Also better is the deployment of extra staff and coordination with BIAs in particular to help resolve issues in real-time as installations are done.

However, the program remains over bureaucratized.

And under the 'stupid' file......... they propose to ratchet up the fees substantially this year and next.

Report here:

https://www.toronto.ca/legdocs/mmis/2023/ex/bgrd/backgroundfile-240938.pdf

Proposed Fee Structure:

View attachment 523383

So, here, I feel the need to give people some guidance on what the above looks like.

The rule in restaurant dining is roughly 20ft2 per seat (that includes table and walking space to get to/from same for customers and servers)

1m2 is 10.7ft2; so for simplicity's sake, 2m2 is one seat. Typical tables are 4m-8m2 (2 seats, 4 seats)

So if you're a small operator, and you want to put out 4 tables, of 4 seats each.....

You're being asked for roughly an extra $3,500 per year.

That has to be offset by profit, not revenue.

So profit of roughly $220 (additional) per seat.

Typical margin for a full-service restaurant is 4%

So multiply the above by 25 and you get a need for additional gross revenue of $5,500 per seat.

***

Sigh....that'll help drive interest in the program....

I like patios as much as anyone but the City has been investing a lot of money on creating wider sidewalks for pedestrian safety and patios, I am not sure it is fair that businesses who happen to have a business located on a street that is suitable for a patio should get access to this public space without paying a fair price. (Yes, I do not really know what 'fair' is.) For businesses that occupy a parking space or spaces, it is also not unreasonable that the revenue the City loses should, if not be fully recouped, be compensated. I understand that the rents charged to merchants in the St Lawrence Market are partly based on turn-over and a similar arrangement MIGHT be worth exploring for patios??? (The St Lawrence arrangements are noted in https://www.toronto.ca/legdocs/mmis/2023/gg/bgrd/backgroundfile-240018.pdf )

 

[rbt]

CafeTO and changes to said program are on the agenda for the next Executive Ctte meeting.

There are some modest improvements proposed in terms of timing, (getting decisions made quicker and fast tracking previous permit holders) ; and starting the season earlier (May 1st, instead of May 15). Also better is the deployment of extra staff and coordination with BIAs in particular to help resolve issues in real-time as installations are done.

However, the program remains over bureaucratized.

And under the 'stupid' file......... they propose to ratchet up the fees substantially this year and next.

Report here:

https://www.toronto.ca/legdocs/mmis/2023/ex/bgrd/backgroundfile-240938.pdf

Proposed Fee Structure:

View attachment 523383

So, here, I feel the need to give people some guidance on what the above looks like.

The rule in restaurant dining is roughly 20ft2 per seat (that includes table and walking space to get to/from same for customers and servers)

1m2 is 10.7ft2; so for simplicity's sake, 2m2 is one seat. Typical tables are 4m-8m2 (2 seats, 4 seats)

So if you're a small operator, and you want to put out 4 tables, of 4 seats each.....

You're being asked for roughly an extra $3,500 per year.

That has to be offset by profit, not revenue.

So profit of roughly $220 (additional) per seat.

Typical margin for a full-service restaurant is 4%

So multiply the above by 25 and you get a need for additional gross revenue of $5,500 per seat.

***

Sigh....that'll help drive interest in the program....

That's 4% net margin. In this case the fees are an expansion of floorspace; a temporary lease. $1000/sqm/year is an a fairly typical lease rate for physical restaurant space in the core of Toronto, and that doesn't include property taxes. It also isn't entirely tablespace where CafeTO space is almost entirely new seating.

If the restaurant can fill both the outdoor and interior seating spaces they'll be doing quite well financially off this service versus a physical expansion.

 

[Mount Dennis Resident]

https://x.com/StrongTowns/status/1729505953198805415?s=20

 

[Northern Light]

I like patios as much as anyone but the City has been investing a lot of money on creating wider sidewalks for pedestrian safety and patios, I am not sure it is fair that businesses who happen to have a business located on a street that is suitable for a patio should get access to this public space without paying a fair price. (Yes, I do not really know what 'fair' is.) For businesses that occupy a parking space or spaces, it is also not unreasonable that the revenue the City loses should, if not be fully recouped, be compensated. I understand that the rents charged to merchants in the St Lawrence Market are partly based on turn-over and a similar arrangement MIGHT be worth exploring for patios??? (The St Lawrence arrangements are noted in https://www.toronto.ca/legdocs/mmis/2023/gg/bgrd/backgroundfile-240018.pdf )

I oppose street parking on major streets entirely.

***

This patio space is solely at the expense of parking/road space not at the expense of sidewalk space.

There are certainly cases where I would support wider sidewalks over patios, if a permanent alteration is made.

***

That's 4% net margin. In this case the fees are an expansion of floorspace; a temporary lease. $1000/sqm/year is an a fairly typical lease rate for physical restaurant space in the core of Toronto, and that doesn't include property taxes. It also isn't entirely tablespace where CafeTO space is almost entirely new seating.

If the restaurant can fill both the outdoor and interior seating spaces they'll be doing quite well financially off this service versus a physical expansion.

I am aware I over simplified.........

Still.

Patios are interrupted by poor weather, particularly precipitation but also days/evenings of temperature extremes.

They most certainly have lower overall revenues, over the course of a week, per seat, that interior spaces.

The permits also cover a maximum of 167 days per year.

The fees are not being varied based on area market rents or business types (coffee shops have much lower revenue per seat than 'The Keg'.)

No, the fees aren't oppressive, but they are higher than necessary for a social good, that increases employment, decreases crime (eyes on the street), drives tourism, and supports small business; while encouraging walkability.

Considering the subsidy rate for Permit Parking remains ~67% on average (below market value) ......

Edit to add:

The precipitous drop in participation by restaurants certainly suggests many do not see it as worth the time or money.

 

[christiesplits]

CafeTO and changes to said program are on the agenda for the next Executive Ctte meeting.

There are some modest improvements proposed in terms of timing, (getting decisions made quicker and fast tracking previous permit holders) ; and starting the season earlier (May 1st, instead of May 15). Also better is the deployment of extra staff and coordination with BIAs in particular to help resolve issues in real-time as installations are done.

However, the program remains over bureaucratized.

And under the 'stupid' file......... they propose to ratchet up the fees substantially this year and next.

Report here:

https://www.toronto.ca/legdocs/mmis/2023/ex/bgrd/backgroundfile-240938.pdf

Proposed Fee Structure:

View attachment 523383

So, here, I feel the need to give people some guidance on what the above looks like.

The rule in restaurant dining is roughly 20ft2 per seat (that includes table and walking space to get to/from same for customers and servers)

1m2 is 10.7ft2; so for simplicity's sake, 2m2 is one seat. Typical tables are 4m-8m2 (2 seats, 4 seats)

So if you're a small operator, and you want to put out 4 tables, of 4 seats each.....

You're being asked for roughly an extra $3,500 per year.

That has to be offset by profit, not revenue.

So profit of roughly $220 (additional) per seat.

Typical margin for a full-service restaurant is 4%

So multiply the above by 25 and you get a need for additional gross revenue of $5,500 per seat.

***

Sigh....that'll help drive interest in the program....

Thanks, Northern, for the recap and analysis.

The increase in fees is really unfortunate, especially with the current status and future outlook of the restaurant industry looking bleak.

 

[Mount Dennis Resident]

If we ban single-occupant private use non-resident motor vehicles from downtown and streetcar routes, we can replace the parking spaces with wider sidewalks and permanent patios.

 

[DSC]

If we ban single-occupant private use non-resident motor vehicles from downtown and streetcar routes, we can replace the parking spaces with wider sidewalks and permanent patios.

As if that is going to happen .....