Friday’s headlines

13 comments

1. Giambrone, Mammoliti and now Joe Pantalone say they are considering a run for mayor. I would say that every last one of them know they do not have a chance. But they know they can get ink with all this speculative talk, which can never hurt, and gives them cost-free, unearned credibility.

   When these guys formally announce, then write the story. Until then, this sort of thing is nothing but free publicity for their real campaigns, to be reelected as councillors. Meanwhile, any challenger has to wait until January to even begin raising money, and no Star reporter is calling them up for interviews.

   The Star and the Post have an ethical obligation not to act as press agents for sitting councillors.

2. Good point John.

3. Cameras do not make a city safer. They only help an invesigation AFTER the fact.

4. An article called ‘Why Toronto has an all-day rush hour’ showed up an hour or so ago at The Star.

   http://www.thestar.com/living/article/714303–why-toronto-has-an-all-day-rush-hour?bn=1

   Some of the pro-car comments are hilarious. Who are these people?

5. “Deficit slaps $1,891 for each Ontarian”

   How does a deficit slap for someone?

6. For those interested, here is what the City is saying about the budget:

   – – –

   City of Toronto Media Relations has issued the following:
   ==========================================

   News Release

   October 23, 2009

   Toronto highlights the value of investing in people, infrastructure, the environment and small business in pre-budget submission to federal Committee on Finance

   Toronto City Councillor Shelley Carroll appeared yesterday before the Federal House of Commons Standing Committee on Finance in Toronto and detailed a series of recommendations that will assist the federal government in preparing the next budget.

   The submission provided the committee with a full range of options to consider how best to meet the growing needs of Canada’s cities and highlighted how enhanced support to Canada’s largest City would contribute to the quality of life of all Canadians.

   “As you know, the economic security of Canada is inextricably linked to the economic strength and stability of its cities,” said Councillor Carroll. “The success or failure of local and regional economies contributes to the overall competitiveness of Canada within an international marketplace.”

   In recommending that the federal government continue to invest in cities, the Councillor noted that the strength of Toronto’s economy, with 16% of the national labour market, which generates 11% of the overall national GDP, significantly impacts the economic well being of Ontario, adjacent economic regions, and the country.

   The full submission, containing the details of the City’s recommendations can be read at: http://www.toronto.ca/budget2010/2010_federalbudget.htm

   Toronto’s submission to the Committee outlined the fundamental value of investments in people and public infrastructure and requested the federal government to:

   • Enhance the Employment Insurance Program to ensure equal access
   • Create a national housing strategy with predictable, long-term funding for affordable housing and homelessness services
   • Create a national transit strategy
   • Provide permanent support for early learning and child care system

   With respect to affordable housing, the City highlighted the continued need for a national housing strategy to ensure sustained and enhanced investment in affordable housing. The Councillor noted that building 1,000 affordable houses creates between 2,000 and 2,500 jobs. Availability of affordable housing attracts key workers and their families and encourages people to live near where they work – reducing pollution from long commutes.

   The submission also detailed the value of supporting the green economy. As the City of Toronto is implementing a sustainable energy strategy to help meet greenhouse gas reduction targets, which includes a component to help accelerate the retrofit of buildings, transportation systems and energy infrastructure in Toronto, the City recommends that the federal government supports the green economy in areas such as:

   • Labour market development and support programs for the green building and renewable energy sector,
   • Building retrofits
   • Investment in the agricultural sector and local food

   Councillor Carroll emphasized the need for the federal government, as part of its next budget, to develop a policy focus to support entrepreneurship, self-employment and small and medium-size enterprises (SMEs). SMEs will be a principle driver of employment growth in the future and governments need to implement public policy and programs that support this sector, which is a key source of employment growth in Toronto.

   The Councillor noted to the committee that the recession has hit Toronto hard and more Torontonians are relying on Employment Insurance and live in vulnerable situations. The Councillor highlighted the many actions the City has taken to help residents and business in Toronto, including:

   • Investing $25 B in capital spending over 10 years to create and protect over 300,000 jobs
   • Modernizing employment & social services to enhance labour market access
   • Stimulating local development
   • Creating green jobs
   • Launching the “Toronto Helps” program outreach initiative
   • Committing to match federal stimulus programs or in the case of the Infrastructure Stimulus fund, put two-thirds funding on the table.

   The City submission also recognized the public infrastructure initiatives the Government of Canada has undertaken in partnership with the City, including:
   • The federal Gas Tax Fund (GTF) and the Public Transit Fund
   • The Building Canada Fund, major infrastructure component
   • The Infrastructure Stimulus Fund
   • Recreational Infrastructure Canada program
   • Federal investment in Social and Affordable Housing

7. What a waste of time, I hope she mailed it in.

8. Obviously a camera can’t undo a crime, but if the criminal is put in jail he’s going to have a bit of trouble committing any more crimes (that don’t involve shanking).

9. Re: Gmania

   I think the biggest problem is that we haven’t done enough in BOTH transit in vehicle infrastructure to deal with increasing population. Solving congestion with only public transit or only highways is going to make things worse. Both must be implemented strategically to make urban transportation work.

10. Why would a transit only approach “make things worse” Ben? Rapid transit is much more efficient at moving large amounts of cars and we already have a huge network of highways.

11. Re: A.R.

    Because there are trips that transit is not suitable for. Downtown Toronto is not the center of the universe. It is the center of the largest urban area in the country (both area and population), and this country is the second largest nation on the planet. People don’t just need to get from suburb to downtown, but from suburb to suburb, rural to urban, region to region, and everything in between. Not everyone has the luxury to live and/or work in downtown. Some trips require stopovers, backtracking, etc. which would become very tedious by transit. And let’s not forget the movement of goods and services that cannot realistically be delivered by transit. Having these goods and services stuck in traffic costs our economy billions each year.

    Now, this does not mean spend everything on widening roads and building highways. As I said, we need a balanced approach to give people options. We need to make transit as attractive and efficient as possible to make it an option for a variety of trips and to minimize the number of potential trips taken by car when there are quality alternatives available.

12. No, our highway network is already unreasonable huge Ben. We have the QEW/Gardiner, 404/DVP, 407, 403/410 and the 401 which is 18 lanes at one point. There’s also the very wide 427. It’s this kind of investment which has promoted low density car-oriented city building, and transit will only remain inefficient in the suburbs if we continue the “balanced approach”. Sprawl and inefficient land use will continue.

    At this point, the suburbs have to receive rapid transit and intensify. Transit can work in the suburbs in this way. I’m quite aware that there’s a world outside of downtown. I’m confident that you could live in Willowdale, for instance, and get to your job in a zone of intensification in York region quite fast by subway line.

    You have to realize that land use is correlated to transportation infrastructure. If we keep the “balanced” approach, a lot more sprawl will occur with the highway investment, and transit will remain viable mostly only for downtown. We can certainly reverse the trend by skewing investment in favour of transit because our highway system has already been overbuilt. We decided to take “balanced” approach over the last 60 years, but it has only allowed highways to proliferate to near-American levels while the rapid transit system is a pitiable 68 kilometres and not a single GO line is electrified.

    We are the centre of the largest population region in Canada as you say, so let’s be the leaders in reducing sprawl and investing in efficient transit.

13. Re A.R.

    Our “unreasonably huge” highway network also allows transport of people, goods, and services between communities, regions, and provinces/states better than transit (with the exception of downtown and various core areas during certain times of day). Also, in terms of Toronto proper, I do not see any place or need to build any new highways. I do see an opportunity to vastly improve the infrastructure we have, such as rearranging lanes to minimize the need for rapid lane changes, improving traffic signal timing, etc. The same cannot be said for transit, which has not kept up with urban and regional growth. So we have not been taking on a “balanced approach.” What we need to do now is focus specifically on improving transit, while performing modest vehicle infrastructure.

    Also, I live one side street north of Steeles, so I am right on the Thornhill/Willowdale border. Besides the fact that I do courier deliveries of blueprint printouts to architects and contractors primarily in the Concord/Downsview area, to get to the printing press would take 3 buses over 2 zones and I estimate close to 2 hours. Compare this to a 20 minute drive on the 407. Also, for nearby deliveries I ride my bike, and on occasion when I have to go downtown I park at the subway and take the train down.

    Finally, some of the blueprints I’ve delivered are for GO and TTC projects, and they tend to be to contractors or locations that are virtually inaccessible by transit.