Category: Politics

The East Gardiner: a chance to get it right
A snapshot I took back in March 2001 of the Gardiner Expressway’s demolition at Carlaw Avenue.

In June, 1999, Toronto City Council, after much debate, voted 44-8 to demolish the eastern section of the Gardiner Expressway. The section of elevated freeway from the Don River to Leslie Street, which opened in 1966, was underused and in need of serious repair.

The East Gardiner extension was built to connect with the Scarborough Expressway, part of a larger network of freeways proposed by Metropolitan Toronto that were never built. The Scarborough Expressway would have connected to Highway 401 near Port Union Road, cancelled in the aftermath of the June 3, 1971 decision of the Ontario Government overturning an Ontario Municipal Board decision permitting construction of the Spadina Expressway.

Council debated the merits of maintaining the 1.3 kilometre section of the Gardiner Expressway; several members resisted removal. Tom Jakobek, representing the Beaches neighbourhood and later disgraced in the MFP computer leasing scandal, was its most vocal defender.

“Cars are an important necessity in this society. Why would anyone want to eliminate road capacity anywhere, when it’s located in the middle of an industrial area and people use it?”

But the pro-demolition side won out. Of the 50 public deputations before that June 1999 vote, those in favour of demolition outnumbered opponents by a 2:1 ratio. Automobile groups and some Scarborough and Beaches residents were the most opposed as two new traffic lights would be added to their westward commutes.

Nine of the councillors who voted for demolition still serve today: Maria Augimeri, Raymond Cho, John Filion, Giorgio Mammoliti, Pam McConnell, Joe Mihevc, Denzil Minnan-Wong, Frances Nunziata, and David Shiner. Also voting with the majority were councillors Jack Layton, David Miller, and Olivia Chow. Mayor Mel Lastman did not vote on the final motion.

Among the eight opposed to the demolition were Jakobek and Sandra Bussin (both councillors represented the Beaches neighbourhood), along with conservatives Doug Holyday and Norm Kelly, both who would become Rob Ford’s deputy mayors.

Aerial photograph of the Gardiner Expressway eastern extension in 1992. the Leslie Street ramps are on the far right, the Unilever lands to the right of the Don Valley Park way flyover ramps. Image from Toronto Archives

Demolition began on April 28, 2000, a year later, it was gone, part from a few pillars left over near Leslie Street. A new bike path, and an improved Lake Shore Boulevard were built in the Gardiner’s place, and the traffic jams never materialized. In fact, parallel routes — Dundas Street and Eastern Avenue — were reduced to two lanes from four to accomodate new bike lanes. East-end residents coped.

Now, once again, we’re debating the future of the eastern Gardiner Expressway, this time the section between Jarvis Street and the Don Valley Parkway (DVP). Like the demolished section east of the DVP, city council is facing a crucial decision on whether to maintain the crumbling structure, or demolish it in favour of a widened Lake Shore Boulevard. Like the demolished section east of the DVP, the Jarvis-DVP section is underused and in need of major repairs.

The consultants in charge of the environmental assessment (EA) fr the Gardiner Expressway & Lake Shore Boulevard Reconfiguration Environmental Assessment & Urban Design Study have a website where you can find out more about the options and the process.

At first, four alternative solutions were considered:
- Maintain the elevated expressway (spend money only to rehabilitate the structure, this is the status quo option)
- Improve the urban fabric while maintaining the existing expressway (basically the status quo with some ground-level improvements for pedestrians and cyclists
- Replace with a new above-or-below grade expressway; and
- Remove the elevated expressway and build a new [wider Lake Shore Boulevard.]
It’s worth noting that the EA consultants recommended the remove option, replacing the six-lane Gardiner east of Jarvis Street with an eight-lane Lake Shore Boulevard.

But after feedback from the Public Works and Infrastructure Committee (PWIC) and First Gulf, the owners of the massive former Unilever lands at the foot of the Don River, there were two options carried forward for further public review: the “hybrid” option and the remove option. Both options would allow First Gulf to redevelop the 30 acre parcel, part of a larger 60 acre plan for up to 12 million square feet of commercial (office and retail) space. The public presentation [PDF] can be found here.

The remove option (as illustrated on Pages 23-29 of the presentation) results in the demolition of 2.2-kilometres of the Gardiner, replacing it with a eight-lane Lake Shore Boulevard. There would be signalized at-grade intersections at Jarvis, Sherbourne, Parliament, and Cherry Streets (with more intersections possible as the East Harbourfront lands develop), and flyover ramps connecting the widened Lake Shore Blvd with the Don Valley Parkway. The removal option would cost $326 million in up-front capital costs (demolition and the construction of new ramps) and $135 million in ongoing maintenance over a 100-year lifecycle. The study’s traffic models claim that removal would only increase travel times by 3-5 minutes.

It’s also worth noting that most commuters headed to the downtown core take transit: nearly half take the TTC, another 19 percent take GO Transit. Only 28 percent of downtown-bound commuters drive, and of those, 3% use the section of the Gardiner Expressway in question.

Page 8 of the Gardiner East presentation

The “hybrid” option, (as illustrated on Pages 36-42 of the presentation) maintains the Gardiner as-is west of Cherry Street, with new off-ramps to Lake Shore Boulevard east of Cherry and fly-over ramps to the DVP, elevated. It would cost $414 million in up-front capital costs, and $505 million in maintenance over a 100-year lifecycle. There would be no increase in travel times, all other variables remaining the same.

This is why I place quotation marks around “hybrid” — except for a short section east of Cherry, the hybrid option pretty much preserves the status quo. The pedestrian experience isn’t improved, fewer parcels between Yonge and Cherry streets are available for development, and the long-term capital costs are higher. Really, the remove option is a hybrid. It cements the retention of the Gardiner west of Jarvis Street for the long term, it includes expensive flyovers to the DVP, and it widens Lake Shore Boulevard to absorb auto capacity. Calling what almost amounts to the status quo as a “hybrid”option is a brilliant stroke of marketing, or simply a cynical attempt to push through a more expensive, auto-friendly scheme.

Opposition to the Gardiner removal is led by the Gardiner Coalition, which includes the Canadian Automobile Association (which promoted freeway expansion in Toronto before), the Canadian Courier & Logistics Association, the Ontario Trucking Association, Redpath Sugar and the Toronto Industry Network. The coalition of motorists and industry commissioned a separate report by the University of Toronto’s Eric Miller, that claimed that travel times would increase by 10 minutes. Why does Eric Miller’s name sound familiar? He was the lead transportation adviser to Tory’s campaign and a supporter of Tory’s SmartTrack platform.

On May 11, 2015, ahead of council debate, John Tory spoke in favour of the “hybrid” option, sounding a lot like Tom Jakobek in 1999: “no matter how much transit we get built, and I intend to try and get a lot built during my time as mayor, we are still going to have people driving around in cars and trucks, it’s a reality.” Tory echoed comments made earlier in April by Tory’s Deputy Mayor, Denzil Minnan-Wong:

“I did not get elected to increase congestion, I did not,” Minnan-Wong insisted. “The residents in the area that I represent in Don Mills are going to be negatively impacted. I was elected to solve congestion problems.”

It’s interesting how self-styled fiscal conservatives prefer to spend more money on roads when given the choice, isn’t it? Remember Minnan-Wong’s rants against pink umbrellas at popular Sugar Beach or washrooms at waterfront parks? If there’s money to throw at unnecessary expressway construction, what about the TCHC public housing repair backlog? Or accelerating work to make the TTC more accessible? Why worry about a small number of commuters to the downtown core?

Existing, hybrid, remove: Page 47 of the Gardiner East presentation

It’s worth noting that John Duffy, former Policy Director for John Tory’s mayoral campaign, is a registered lobbyist for First Gulf. Duffy is also planning a $1-million public-relations blitz to promote Tory’s SmartTrack transit plan, which would have a stop right at the Unilever site’s front door. Eric Miller’s and John Duffy’s names coming keep coming up. I’ll talk more about that in an upcoming post.

To be fair, First Gulf has stated several times that either the remove or the hybrid option for the East Gardiner suits their needs for developing the site, and denies supporting either option.

I strongly support the remove option. It’s the cheapest alternative, but it offers the most opportunities to develop the East Harbourfront. Yes, an eight-lane Lake Shore Boulevard won’t be the most pleasant street to cross, but it won’t be much different than University Avenue. If designed right, it could be a Grand Boulevard.

Council will be making a once-in-a-lifetime decision. There’s plenty of other, better ways that money spent on rebuilding the East Gardiner could be spent on. Hopefully council sees the wisdom of the remove option despite the myopic desires of the Mayor and Deputy Mayor.

Manhattan’s West Side Drive, which replaced an elevated freeway. New York is doing fine.
May 14, 2015
Mapping “Team Tory”

Back in September 2014, I created a series of maps for Matt Elliott, journalist at Metro, blogger, city council observer, and all-round great guy. Elliott’s City Council Scorecard tracked how each councillor voted on major decisions at city hall, along with a “Ford Nation” score that measured how closely each councillor voted with the mayor. Matt’s Council Scorecard was one of several inspirations for the work that I undertook so far on this blog, especially mapping the results of the 2014 municipal election.

On April 24, Elliott published a new edition of his excellent scorecard, a check-up on how Tory has been handling council so far. I wanted to map the new scorecard and compare it to Ford’s performance. You can read more about Elliott’s methodology here.

In 2011, newly elected Mayor Rob Ford was able to count on the support of 22 councillors — a slim majority on the 45-member council when the mayor’s vote is added. From that bloc, Ford was able to pick his executive committee, who helped push forward his agenda of cost-cutting and mucking up Toronto’s transit plans. That year, council voted with Ford over 70 percent of the time. But by December, Ford’s control was already slipping; several potential proposed service cuts were rejected, as well as Doug Ford’s ridiculous plans to take control of the Waterfront development and build a Ferris wheel and mega-mall in Toronto’s Portlands.

Many of the city councillors opposed to Ford’s agenda — but not all — were elected in wards representing the Old City of Toronto and East York. But six suburban councillors — Maria Augimeri, Anthony Perruzza, John Filion, Shelley Carroll, Glenn de Baeremaeker and Raymond Cho — were all reliable opponents. Except for Cho, who ran for the provincial Progressive Conservatives and lost in the 2014 election, the rest identified with either the Liberals or New Democrats and re-elected in 2010 despite their wards voting overwhelmingly for Rob Ford.

It’s important to note that the Ford brothers’ agenda and control over council fell apart even before the Garrison Ball debacle and the crack-smoking allegations and council meltdown of 2013. In 2012, Rob Ford was only able to count on the loyal support of 17 councillors; he only had a 32 percent success rate at council that year. By 2014, Mayor Ford could only count on two reliable allies — his brother Doug, and Ward 7’s Giorgio Mammoliti; council only voted with the mayor 24 percent of the time.

John Tory was elected in 2014 on an uninspiring, yet effective centre-right campaign, promising better governance, limited tax increases, and his own problematic transit plan. But after four years of Rob and Doug Ford, voters were looking for change. Sadly, candidates running on more substantive/progressive platforms, such as early front runner Olivia Chow and former councillor David Soknacki, either dropped out of the race or came far behind second-place Doug Ford, Rob’s obnoxious and bigoted enabler.

Those looking for a brave new era at City Hall were disappointed by the incoming mayor’s picks for committee chairs/executive committee, speaker and TTC Chair, all plum posts that help steer the mayor’s agenda. Denzil Minnan-Wong (Ward 34), one of council’s most conservative and divisive members was named Deputy Mayor, while Rob Ford’s enabler on the council floor, Frances Nunziata (Ward 12), was re-appointed Speaker. All but two of Tory’s executive committee members were reliable Ford allies in 2011, seven of whom were on Ford’s original executive committee. (It should be said that some of those councillors, notably Paul Ainslie (Ward 43) and Jaye Robinson (Ward 25), later quit or were kicked off the Executive Committee.)

Tory’s Team Score

Only five months into his term, John Tory had a good, but not stellar, record of getting his agenda through council. Matt Elliott found that 25 councillors have been reliable allies of Tory; voting with the mayor at least 70 percent of the time, including 5 of the 6 new councillors elected. Only six councillors — Gord Perks, Mike Layton, Joe Cressy, Kristyn Wong-Tam, Paula Fletcher, and Janet Davis, all representing “downtown” wards — have voted with the mayor less than 30 percent on all important votes. Other anti-Ford councillors, so far, find themselves part of the “mushy middle” or “mighty middle,” though they are at this point a minority of 13. Interestingly, Councillors Rob Ford and Giorgio Mammoliti are voting with Ford most of the time so far. So much for Ford leading an “official opposition” against Tory.

As expected, councillors that John Tory endorsed and supported in the last election — Christin Carmichael Greb in Ward 16, Jon Burnside in Ward 26, and Mark Grimes in Ward 6 — were among Tory’s most loyal votes on council, even though none got a plum appointment (Carmichael Greb and Burnside are rookies, Grimes a three-term councillor). All three faced challenges from qualified, less conservative opponents.

John Tory’s budget and early agenda has been less confrontational and ideological as what Ford pushed in 2011; this could be helping his score. Left-leaning councillors like Joe Mihevc (Ward 21) and Pam McConnell (Ward 28) are, for now, voting 35 percent with the mayor. The budget approved by council keeps tax increases low (I’d argue unsustainably low), but TTC cuts implemented by Rob Ford are being reversed; no services are being slashed. It’s true that council not doing enough on policing issues (especially carding/racial profiling; Tory doesn’t seem to have any interest here), nor is there enough action on the TCHC’s capital repair backlog, but so far, there haven’t been many divisive votes.

John Tory’s budget and early agenda has been less confrontational and ideological as what Ford pushed in 2011; this could be helping his score. Left-leaning councillors like Joe Mihevc (Ward 21) and Pam McConnell (Ward 28) are, for now, voting 35 percent with the mayor. The budget approved by council keeps tax increases low (I’d argue unsustainably low), but TTC cuts implemented by Rob Ford are being reversed; few services are being slashed. It’s true that council is not doing enough on policing issues (especially carding/racial profiling; Tory doesn’t seem to have any interest in this important matter), nor is there enough action on the TCHC’s capital repair backlog. But so far, there haven’t been many divisive votes. With upcoming labour negotiations and more big-ticket budget items (the decision on what to do about the crumbling and under-capacity east Gardiner Expressway, for example), this will change.

At times, Tory has seen to be either ignorant or dismissive of how City Council works; had he known better, there would be someone else in the Speaker’s chair, a less polarizing deputy mayor, and a few more centrist or left-leaning councillors in key positions to unite council. Mid-term, in early 2016, there’s an opportunity for Tory to revisit his committee appointments if necessary.

It’s very possible that Tory will lose political capital as the term goes on, though it is nearly impossible to imagine him losing control of the agenda so dramatically as Ford did. In any case, it will be interesting to see if Tory learns on the job and continues to have the confidence of council, or if he starts to lose his grip as most mayors experienced later in their terms.

May 5, 2015
Exploring the downtown federal election races: New ridings, new candidates

Note: On October 2, I wrote a follow-up to this post, including a few new maps, some additional insights. All three races — Toronto Centre, University-Rosedale, and Spadina-Fort York, remain interesting and close Liberal-NDP battles.

As I mentioned on this blog previously, describing the “Drawing the Lines” ward boundary review now underway, there are new federal electoral district boundaries for the upcoming Fall 2015 election. Toronto will have 25 Members of Parliament (MPs) after the next election; Downtown Toronto and North York both get an additional seat and Scarborough gets half a seat (it currently shares a electoral district with Pickering).

As a downtown resident, I wanted to explore how the new electoral map might look like in the next election, and see whether the New Democratic Party (NDP) would have a chance at picking up one of those three downtown seats, as both Toronto Centre and Trinity-Spadina are currently represented by high-profile Liberals.

(An aside: my politics have long leaned left and towards the New Democrats; though I am not my any means a strict or loyal partisan. I have friends who are loyal Liberals, New Democrats, and Greens; my own voting decision depends on the race – in the 2011 general election, I voted Liberal, as I lived in York Centre, a riding held by NHL Hall of Famer, lawyer and great Liberal Ken Dryden, who sadly lost to Conservative Mark Adler. I soon moved to Davenport, joking that I had traded Dryden for [newly elected NDP MP Andrew] Cash. Brampton West Liberal MP Colleen Beaumier earned my very first vote when I was 18 years old, but I have since voted NDP provincially and federally in most other elections.)

2011 General Election

In the 2011 general election, in which Stephen Harper’s Conservatives won a majority government (and Jack Layton led the NDP to its greatest federal victory, winning 103 seats and official opposition status), both Toronto Centre and Trinity-Spadina re-elected their popular incumbents – Olivia Chow in Toronto Centre, former Toronto city councillor and Layton’s spouse, and Bob Rae, former New Democrat and Premier of Ontario, later a Liberal MP and leadership candidate. Chow won with 54.5% of the vote in Trinity-Spadina; Rae won with 41.0% of the vote in Toronto Centre.

As you can see in the map below, Chow placed first to most polls in in Toronto Centre, except for a few polls near the Waterfront (the Conservatives came in first in the Harbour Square condo complex), in the east Annex closest to Yorkville and a few condominium and seniors’ residences buildings elsewhere. Christine Innes, running for the Liberals, came in a distant second with 23.4% of the vote.

In Toronto Centre, Liberal Bob Rae won with 41.0% of the vote; the NDP’s Susan Wallace took a respectable 30.2%, while Conservative Kevin Moore took 22.6% of the vote. In Toronto Centre, the Conservatives took several polls in the wealthiest parts of the riding; the “old money” Rosedale neighbourhood and several polls in Bloor-Yorkville, home of many of the most expensive condominium high-rises in Canada. The Liberals did well in polls throughout the riding (in Rosedale, Yorkville, Cabbagetown and St. Lawrence), while the NDP came in first most polls in Church-Wellesley, St. Jamestown, Moss Park, and Regent Park.

Results by poll in the 2011 federal election in Trinty-Spadina and Toronto Centre

(more…)

April 21, 2015
The genesis of Mayor John Tory’s SmartTrack

I was recently browsing Urban Toronto‘s forums (a great resource if you’re interested in keeping up with construction updates and development proposals here in Toronto), when I came across a post written by “AlvinofDiaspar” in a thread discussing SmartTrack.

Alvin’s post linked to an interesting report written by the Strategic Regional Research Alliance, a consulting group based in Toronto that I had never heard of until recently. The report, entitled “The Strategic Case for the Regional Relief Line,” was published in October 2013, just before the mayoral race began for the 2014 election.

John Tory unveiled his “SmartTrack” plan, promising a “London-Style surface rail subway” (whatever that meant), on May 26, 2014. The transit service, using frequent, electric multiple unit trains (like those used for commuter/regional transport in many European cities) would mostly follow existing railway corridors from Markham to Mississauga, via Union Station.

On the east end, the route would follow GO Transit’s Stouffville Line from Union Station as far as Unionville Station, making more frequent stops, serving the Unilever plant (which will be replaced by a massive commercial/office redevelopment by First Gulf, first announced in 2012), as well as additional stops at Queen St East, Gerrard/Carlaw, Lawrence East, Ellesmere, Finch and 14th Avenue, in addition to existing GO Transit stops at Danforth/Main, Scarborough Junction, Kennedy/Eglinton, Agincourt (Sheppard), Milliken (Steeles) and Unionville.

To the west, the line would follow GO’s Kitchener Line from Union Station as far as Mount Dennis (Eglinton Avenue, near the western terminus of phase one of the Eglinton-Crosstown LRT), with stops at Spadina, Liberty Village, the existing GO/UP Express station at Bloor, and at St. Clair Avenue. At Mount Dennis, the SmartTrack corridor follows a routing via Eglinton Avenue into Mississauga’s Airport Corporate Centre office district, which of course has no existing rail infrastructure to capitalize on.

Tory promised to have SmartTrack operational in seven years, by 2021, putting other approved and/or proposed transit projects (the Downtown Relief Line, the Sheppard East and Finch West LRTs, among other plans) on the back burner.

John Tory’s “SmartTrack” map

Back in 2014, transit observers were taken aback by this new “bold” transit idea (John Tory kept using that word to describe SmartTrack), as his campaign had recently taunted Olivia Chow’s hesitancy to prioritize the Downtown Relief Line (DRL) in her transit platform. At the time, Chow, the presumed front runner in the mayoral race in April 2014, promised to increase TTC bus service and build the Scarborough LRT while planning for the DRL continued.

The DRL is a long-proposed subway line under review by the City of Toronto and by Metrolinx that would connect downtown Toronto to the Bloor-Danforth Line east of the Don River, thus relieving the the Bloor-Yonge subway interchange from overcrowding, while offering improved transit access to east end Toronto, and addressing overcrowding on Yonge subway trains. Further extensions to the north, towards Thorncliffe Park, Flemingdon Park and Don Mills, would re-direct many current and potential transit riders from the Yonge Subway, allowing for an extension of that line from Finch to Richmond Hill.

But to some degree, Tory’s promise of frequent, regional electric rail on GO’s corridors dovetailed with provincial plans for electrification of part of GO’s services and the Airport Rail Line (now branded as the Union Pearson Express). Improved services on GO’s corridors, if paired with fare integration with local transit (GO’s fares are very expensive for short trips), would provide useful rapid transit to many areas not served by the subway, and could provide some relief to the existing subway network. John Tory was endorsed by many provincial cabinet ministers; it appeared that he had the support of the Liberal government itself, though Premier Kathleen Wynne never endorsed any mayoral candidate directly.

The only hint of this SRRA report that I could find in the mainstream media was in an interesting article written by Tess Kalinowski, the transportation reporter at the Toronto Star after Tory’s win on October 27, 2014. In an article published on November 17, entitled “The evolution of SmartTrack,” a report entitled “The Business Case for the Regional Relief Line” was mentioned. Also mentioned in the article was John Duffy, a political strategist who worked on the provincial Liberal leadership campaign of former transportation minister (now environmental minister) Glen Murray, and had ties to Wynne’s leadership and election campaigns. Kalinowski wrote that Duffy also was acquainted with Iain Dobson, a property developer and Metrolinx board member. Other people involved in putting SmartTrack together and mentioned in the article were the Canadian Urban Institute’s Glenn Miller (who is listed as a SRRA contact on its website, as is Iain Dobson, a real estate executive and Metrolinx board member), former Toronto chief planner Paul Bedford and businesswoman and urban expert Anne Golden.

Transit advocate and friend Steve Munro picked up on this report before I had – you can read his posts which are more detailed and far better than my short analysis in this post:

Munro: The Dubious Planning Behind SmartTrack Part I Part II Part III

It’s unfortunate that John Tory decided to make this concept the centrepiece of his transit platform. Easily, the biggest flaw, mentioned by others, including Steve Munro and mayoral rival Olivia Chow, is the Eglinton section between Mount Dennis and the Airport Corporate Centre. The corridor already had a proposed rail transit project, the western leg of the Eglinton-Crosstown LRT line, a project first proposed in 2007 as part of a larger city-wide LRT plan known as Transit City, and confirmed in 2009 when the provincial government announced funding for it and three other LRT lines. (In 2010, funding was deferred for the section west of Weston Road). The once-available right-of-way that would have allowed for a surface-running heavy rail transit project was already disappearing.

But in the SRRA-authored report, we see why Tory went along with the problematic Eglinton routing, rather than having SmartTrack continuing along the GO Kitchener/UP Express corridor towards the transit desert of northwest Toronto. It was part of a larger plan to connect suburban office parks to Downtown Toronto.

The Regional Relief Line, as envisioned by the SRRA, would have included a third phase, from the Airport Corporate Centre to Meadowvale Business Park, another large, although sprawling, employment centre near Highway 401 and Mississauga Road. The “Phase Three” of this proposed regional rail route would follow Highway 401 on a new alignment.

The map from the SRRA report, published on page 4. Note the use of Google Maps to create the map.

The SRRA planning exercise appears to be one where well-educated planning experts were engaged in a game of “connect the dots.” Sure, the Regional Relief Line connected several major employment nodes in Markham, Toronto, and Mississauga, with the nodes in Mississauga lined up along Highway 401. But this error on page 6 of the report makes me wonder how many of the facts and assumptions the authors simply got wrong or didn’t fact-check:

This phase will take a little longer to complete than the Markham phase because there are no tracks on the section from Mt Denis to the Airport Corporate Centre. This right of way will take longer to design and obtain approval in an EA process. It is owned by the Province and was intended to be an expressway. There is ample room for the dedicated right of way.

In fact, the Richview Corridor, the right of way mentioned, was owned by the city, not the province, reserved in the 1960s for an expressway linking Highways 401 and 427 to the proposed Highway 400 extension, part of a much larger highway plan for Metropolitan Toronto. The 400 extension was cancelled and the at-grade Black Creek Drive was built instead; the Richview lands along Eglinton Avenue West in Etobicoke remained dormant for decades. But in 2011, the city started selling off the land for residential development, making the right of way unusable for any transportation corridor. (This did not matter in plans for the Eglinton-Crosstown LRT connection to the airport; there was still room to build a median LRT corridor along this section.) In 2013, pre-eminent local transit and planning experts should have been aware of this development and be able to identify the proper owner of this former right of way.

It also strikes me as a little backwards looking to link auto-dependent office parks together with a new transit line, especially without a detailed origin-destination study. Shouldn’t urban planners be promoting dense urban employment clusters in areas well-served or potentially well-served by transit? Does it make sense to build expensive transit lines to serve low-density office complexes that come with large parking lots and garages, such as those in Mississauga’s Airport Corporate Centre? Or am I confused?

In December 2014, mere weeks after Tory’s election, Council voted 42-1 to accelerate the work plan for the rail line, awarding up to $750,000 for early analysis and modelling work. The consultants awarded the funds? A group from the University of Toronto and Strategic Regional Research Associates. In February, council approved an additional $1.65-million towards studying SmartTrack, at least taking a closer look at the Eglinton West section of the corridor.

To me, it seems just a little bit odd that Tory’s campaign advisers were awarded this contract to study a project, that until Tory’s election, wasn’t even on any transit planning maps. Steve Munro picked up on this as well, questioning whether Iain Dobson, a member of the Metrolinx Board, has a conflict of interest due to his involvement with the SRRA and a member of the Advisory Board to the University of Toronto Transportation Research Institute. After all, Metrolinx is supposed to be the expert, disinterested provincial agency charged with evaluating and implementing various transit plans. Meanwhile, the need for a Downtown Relief Line hasn’t gone away.

Tory and his connections in academia and the private sector have managed to change the course of Toronto’s short-term transit planning, and I can’t help but feel a bit suspicious of the behind-the-scenes planning that went into SmartTrack. This is a story very much worth following.

February 26, 2015