Danforth Line 2 Scarborough Subway Extension

[steveintoronto]

That article says she tried to stop it in 2013. It does not mention, but my links show that she strongly supported the 1 stop SSE again in 2016. And there is no mention of the combined ECLRT/SRT, which was found to be the best in 2012 and would have been acceptable to all side if she truly cared about fact based transit.

I bite my lip, some of your posts from an engineering standpoint are excellent. Your political acumen isn't:

In January 2016, then-chief planner Jennifer Keesmaat presented the revised one-stop plan, claiming that cutting two stations would allow council to fund a different LRT line along Eglinton Ave. East, which would go north on Morningside Ave. to end at the University of Toronto Scarborough campus.

Council endorsed that plan, declaring it a compromise. But the ballooning subway costs soon priced out the Eglinton East LRT, creating the standoff at council in July 2016 over whether a single subway stop or a network of LRTs would better serve Scarborough residents.

https://www.thestar.com/news/city_h...ave-paid-for-scarborough-lrt-emails-show.html

Council gave staff direction in March 2017 to report back to executive committee when the project reached 30 per cent design and an updated cost was ready. At that time, council would decide whether to move forward with construction.

Keesmaat said the last cost increase — the estimate ballooned by $1 billion in 2016 — caused her to wonder if there is a breaking point. She noted it’s unclear whether the cost will continue to climb, though it usually does with major infrastructure projects.

“There has to be a threshold, there has to be a moment where you say, wait a minute, the cost-benefit analysis no longer works,” Keesmaat said.

The former chief planner was the one that introduced the new plan in early 2016 that saw the number of subway stops reduced to one from three. The savings from those eliminated stops, she and other staff said at the time, could fund the cost of extending the Eglinton Crosstown light-rail line from Kennedy to the University of Toronto’s Scarborough campus.

After it was reported the cost for the subway had climbed — effectively pricing out that LRT — Keesmaat maintained the network option was still the best recommendation for Scarborough. She told council the value for money question was one they had to grapple with.

To date, there has never been a cost comparison of the subway option and the previously-approved, seven-stop LRT option to replace the aging Scarborough RT.

That LRT was months away from being ready to go to tender for construction when it was scrapped by council under former mayor Rob Ford with staff analysis Keesmaat would later call “rushed” and “problematic.” [...]

https://www.thestar.com/news/city_h...scarborough-subway-costs-before-election.html

When do you get it? Keesmaat, as she's now detailed since Paglario's story and other disclosures, was forced into "presenting options" of a limited number determined by Tory and Council.

Keesmaat has detailed this in podcasts and other stories. I've linked them in another string last night, can't remember which one now. And the best thing?

There's a hell of a lot more to come out yet.

 

[Hopkins123]

Sounds like you just want more highways to make the burbs better in your no nimby utopia. Maybe you should try to get the Scarborough expressway built. After all really it sounds as if you are only advocating for subways, subways, subways, so that they won't be road blocking your car, car, car. ("The highest ratio of car ownership was in Etobicoke and Scarborough, where there was an average of 1.3 vehicles per property. The old City of Toronto had the least amount of cars, on average 0.9 per home." https://www.blogto.com/city/2014/07/how_many_cars_are_on_the_road_in_toronto/)And let's be as honest as you were in your previous statement when you said everyone "may even not desire to live downtown." Even if there was a subway in certain places everyone may not even desire to take public transit. Yet you are asking for everyone to pay for your subway. http://www.gettorontomoving.ca/scarborough-expressway.html By the way I live at Eglinton and love Cedervale Park and would not be happy if it was gone for the Spadina expressway. Also I did the Jazz half marathon last week where the Scarbrorough expressway would have been. I am also happy that it doesn't exist. Maybe I am the nimby you are complaining about.

Wrong, wrong, wrong! More like I want the cars and trucks out of the way of my bus or train. Grade-separation benefits the commuter most, that it also frees up space for other vehicles on the roadways is immaterial to my advocacy efforts. But were the Scarborough Expressway built maybe the "desperation" of Scarborough residents today would be less seeing as express bus routes linking UTSC, the Zoo and Malvern could connect directly to points downtown, mitigating the need for SSE now significantly.

 

[BurlOak]

I bite my lip, some of your posts from an engineering standpoint are excellent. Your political acumen isn't:

https://www.thestar.com/news/city_h...ave-paid-for-scarborough-lrt-emails-show.html


https://www.thestar.com/news/city_h...scarborough-subway-costs-before-election.html

When do you get it? Keesmaat, as she's now detailed since Paglario's story and other disclosures, was forced into "presenting options" of a limited number determined by Tory and Council.

Keesmaat has detailed this in podcasts and other stories. I've linked them in another string last night, can't remember which one now. And the best thing?

There's a hell of a lot more to come out yet.

I have no doubt that Keesmaat was not enthousiastic about the SSE. She was not some low level civic worker - she was the Head of Planning with great public exposure.
She could have come up with a better plan (combined ECLRT/SRT), or she could have stated firmly that this was not the best option - but acknowledged that it was a political decision. Instead, she maintained the perception that there were only 2 options (SSE and transfer LRT), and that she agreed that the SSE was preferred.
To me, this shows she was not much of a planner and not much of a leader.

 

[sixrings]

Wrong, wrong, wrong! More like I want the cars and trucks out of the way of my bus or train. Grade-separation benefits the commuter most, that it also frees up space for other vehicles on the roadways is immaterial to my advocacy efforts. But were the Scarborough Expressway built maybe the "desperation" of Scarborough residents today would be less seeing as express bus routes linking UTSC, the Zoo and Malvern could connect directly to points downtown, mitigating the need for SSE now significantly.

the SLRT would have been out of the way of cars yet youre arguing for a Subway. Also all of the LRT lines would be in their own lane so unless a intersection saw an accident the LRT would not be slowed down by vehicles. But sure youre advocating for more highways because it would improve transit. I don't think you can even convince yourself thats your motivation.

 

[syn]

A large part of that outer-core stagnation is precisely because rapid transit was not put into place concurrent with development. Development occurred in spite of the lack of mass transit connectivity. This phenomenon isn't unique to the outer-suburbs either if Humber Bay Shores, Liberty Village and CityPlace are any indication despite each being a stone's throw away from highways and railways.

There is no 'outer-core stagnation' - these were bedroom communities by design.

This is why Sheppard, which got a subway, has seen very little development relative to the downtown core.

Cityplace is certainly not perfect, but it's connected by streetcar and in a very walkable environment close to other major destinations.

What 'outer-core' communities compare to City Place?

But as I've said many times, everyone cannot afford or may even not desire to live downtown. More efforts should be made "densify" other areas of the city and region and if one wants to get from northern Scarborough or northern Etobicoke (or commute to those points from the outlying 905 areas) to connect to downtown: a trunk grade-separated mass transit system ought to be in place to accommodate those poor souls that really need it. In Scarborough's case we're only talking 3-4 more subway stops to fulfill this basic requirement (to Malvern or Finch/McCowan would be even better, but I digress), of which billion$ are already earmarked in the piggybank. Just build it already!

If you cannot afford or simply don't desire to live downtown, then you have to deal with the pros and cons that come with that decision.

Unfortunately suburban communities want to retain their suburban nature and get transit designed for dense urban environments.

Hurontario and the 403 is pretty to the geographic centre of Mississauga. Likewise, so is McCowan and Ellesmere relative to Scarborough's centre. So coming from all directions they are central focal points. I would certainly think more highly of city planners from the 1970s for not basing their city building strategies on the possibility of a faint subway connection from Toronto 50-100 years out.

So you respect them for planning blunders that you're now complaining about?

Forget building with the possibility of a subway connection - how about building a city that makes sense and integrates well with the core of the financial hub of the nation?

 

[steveintoronto]

I have no doubt that Keesmaat was not enthousiastic about the SSE. She was not some low level civic worker - she was the Head of Planning with great public exposure.
She could have come up with a better plan (combined ECLRT/SRT), or she could have stated firmly that this was not the best option - but acknowledged that it was a political decision. Instead, she maintained the perception that there were only 2 options (SSE and transfer LRT), and that she agreed that the SSE was preferred.
To me, this shows she was not much of a planner and not much of a leader.

Well Burl, you're welcome to your views on the Moon being made of cheese. But here's the accepted truth of events:

[...]
Ms. Keesmaat initially opposed the Scarborough subway extension, preferring light rail. She later produced a compromise plan that backed Mr. Tory's call for a subway, accompanied by the Eglinton East LRT line. And she enthusiastically supported Mr. Tory's call for a downtown Rail Deck Park.

But there is no question that her advocacy – usually on Twitter – landed her in hot water with the mayor and some on council more than once. (In 2012, she tweeted that she found councillors' speeches "insufferable.")

Her most serious clash with Mr. Tory appeared to come over the Gardiner and her repeatedly expressed opinion that the eastern portion of the crumbling elevated expressway should be torn down.

In June, 2015, she was called into Mr. Tory's office for a meeting after publicly contradicting the mayor on that issue. Mr. Tory's preferred option for the Gardiner, known as the "hybrid," called for realigning but maintaining the elevated eastern stretch. Council eventually sided with Mr. Tory.


Sources told The Globe at the time that at the meeting with Ms. Keesmaat, Mr. Tory made it clear that he thought having his chief planner debate him publicly was inappropriate. The incident led to speculation about her future at city hall, but she remained in her post.

City Councillor Joe Mihevc, who shares many of Ms. Keesmaat's views and once employed her as an aide, said she has been approached by international headhunters acting for other cities and planning firms for years. He called her loss a blow for the city.

"In the case of the Gardiner, she was speaking truth to power," Mr. Mihevc said. "We needed a provocateur. … She pushed us to think at a higher level."

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/new...n-chief-city-planner-resigns/article36101733/

"To me, this shows she was not much of ... a leader."

She wan't elected to be one. She was hired to be a Planner.

 

[OneCity]

Unfortunately suburban communities want to retain their suburban nature and get transit designed for dense urban environments.

So you respect them for planning blunders that you're now complaining about?

In additon to benefits of seamlessly connecting the heart for the Toronto tax paying citizens from an already heavily populated inner suburb the good news is we'll also be these building central connections to an inner suburb surrounded by large suburban park land. I hear building suburban style parks in areas which have made previous decisions to remove natural landscape is also quite expensive.

 

[steveintoronto]

In additon to seamlessly connecting Toronto tax paying citizens in this heavily populated inner suburb

Yeah, we're all going to be paying for 30 years for your aggrandized sense of entitlement.

Where's the audit?

That'll connect us alright, just not the way you think.

 

[BurlOak]

She wan't elected to be one. She was hired to be a Planner.

She wasn't elected to be leader, she was hired to be Leader of the planning department. In my opinion, she did a rather poor job as both a planner and leader.
Everyone is judged based on how they led in the past.

 

[syn]

She wasn't elected to be leader, she was hired to be Leader of the planning department. In my opinion, she did a rather poor job as both a planner and leader.
Everyone is judged based on how they led in the past.

Tory and Ford were her 'leaders' and she did what was asked of her - both went against her better judgement.

Interesting you don't hold Tory nor Ford to the same standards of leadership.

 

[steveintoronto]

Tory and Ford were her 'leaders' and she did what was asked of her - both went against her better judgement.

Interesting you don't hold Tory nor Ford to the same standards of leadership.

Ah, but you see, he's talking circles in the opposite direction for each, such that the meaning of "Elected Leader" is completely obfuscated as bafflegab.

Just like Dougie's "For the People"...Which people is that exactly? And which "Folks"? Not to mention Dougie had both fingers crossed behind his back, his socks didn't match, and he didn't say "Simon Says"...so it doesn't count anyway.

That's the kind of chicanery the anti-progressives spiel.

Meantime, on the Chief Planner's job:

Toronto's chief planner must articulate his vision for the city
By CHRISTOPHER HUMEStar Columnist
Mon., April 2, 2018
[...]
For all her brittleness and inexperience, Lintern’s predecessor, Jennifer Keesmaat, had lots to say about the kind of city she hoped Toronto would become. Indeed, in recent decades only she and Paul Bedford, chief planner from 1996 to 2004, grasped that the real purpose of the job is to be the face of urban planning and communicate a clear sense of where the city needs to be in the future.

And to be fair, city planners merely advise council, an admittedly thankless task. Though nothing the municipal bureaucracy does is more fundamental than planning, neither is anything more political. Toronto’s ward-based governance exacerbates this tendency, which makes the application of sound planning principles even more difficult to achieve. The appalling situation in which a scheme to civilize Yonge St. between Sheppard and Finch Aves. now finds itself — stalled indefinitely — is a depressing example of how the crass parochialism of local politics can trump the best of intentions and reality itself.
[...]

https://www.thestar.com/opinion/sta...-must-articulate-his-vision-for-the-city.html

 

[aquateam]

Well Burl, you're welcome to your views on the Moon being made of cheese. But here's the accepted truth of events:

[...]
Ms. Keesmaat initially opposed the Scarborough subway extension, preferring light rail. She later produced a compromise plan that backed Mr. Tory's call for a subway, accompanied by the Eglinton East LRT line. And she enthusiastically supported Mr. Tory's call for a downtown Rail Deck Park.

But there is no question that her advocacy – usually on Twitter – landed her in hot water with the mayor and some on council more than once. (In 2012, she tweeted that she found councillors' speeches "insufferable.")

Her most serious clash with Mr. Tory appeared to come over the Gardiner and her repeatedly expressed opinion that the eastern portion of the crumbling elevated expressway should be torn down.

In June, 2015, she was called into Mr. Tory's office for a meeting after publicly contradicting the mayor on that issue. Mr. Tory's preferred option for the Gardiner, known as the "hybrid," called for realigning but maintaining the elevated eastern stretch. Council eventually sided with Mr. Tory.


Sources told The Globe at the time that at the meeting with Ms. Keesmaat, Mr. Tory made it clear that he thought having his chief planner debate him publicly was inappropriate. The incident led to speculation about her future at city hall, but she remained in her post.

City Councillor Joe Mihevc, who shares many of Ms. Keesmaat's views and once employed her as an aide, said she has been approached by international headhunters acting for other cities and planning firms for years. He called her loss a blow for the city.

"In the case of the Gardiner, she was speaking truth to power," Mr. Mihevc said. "We needed a provocateur. … She pushed us to think at a higher level."

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/new...n-chief-city-planner-resigns/article36101733/

"To me, this shows she was not much of ... a leader."

She wan't elected to be one. She was hired to be a Planner.

The second sentence right there says it all "She later produced a compromise plan that backed Mr. Tory's call for a subway [...]" i.e. the one-stop subway is her plan. She wasn't just complicit in legitimizing it or in not speaking out against it, it originated from her and her department.

She doesn't deserve as much opprobrium as Karen Stintz does, but under her the subway extension plans became even more farcical and her "compromise," rather than improving the cost-benefit ratio (like with a combined grade-separated ECLRT, using the SRT alignment, cut and cover, etc.) just cut away everything except the bare minimum (STC station) to ensure that the extension gets built.

As a planner, her record is nothing to be proud of:

• Scarborough Subway Extension - created the one-stop plan to ensure it gets built, without considering real alternatives. Leadership from her front could have avoided this boondoggle, instead she aggravated it.
• "Heritage Conservation Districts" - cementing the yellow belt despite "Overhousing" and a desperate need for missing middle. A responsible planner would be up-zoning a growing city with an affordability crisis, not down-zoning it.
• King Street Pilot - botched roll-out of what should have been a simple concept, forcing cars into the path of the streetcars. Travel times are barely faster than before the pilot. You yourself have written several screeds about the pilot.
• Downtown Relief line - worst alignment according to ridership studies was chosen for political reasons. Continued focus on "placemaking" over transportation objectives (e.g. long transfer at Yonge due to a station at the "psychological heart" of Toronto.) Route of subway was downzoned, further reducing ridership potential.
• Waterfront - Confusing design results in cars frequently intruding on streetcar ROW. Streetcar travel times are actually slower than before the redesign. Again, place making seems to trump functional design and transportation objectives.
• Bike Lanes - as you've pointed out yourself in several tirades, the Bloor street bike lanes (and several other bikelanes, like on Adelaide) are designed dangerously. A cyclist recently died at Bloor and St. George in one of the lanes she designed, demonstrating just how unsafe they are.
  
• Rail Deck Park - an unfunded multi-billion dollar fantasy that precludes closing up the true barrier to the waterfront (the rail corridor) by excluding developers. As you yourself have pointed out, the city may not even have the legal authority to restrict air rights.

 

[TOareaFan]

 

[sixrings]

I truly believe she was in a situation that she was going to be fired if she didn't compromise. Perhaps she just wasn't ready for that. Similarly Andy Byford also wasnt super enthusiastic about the Scarborough extension but he was in a no win situation. Coincidentally neither person still maintains their position professionally. Personally speaking I work in an environment that I would prefer to do things one way. I have an assistant director role but at the end of the day the director trumps me and if i step out of line I should expect to be fired.

I would also like to point out that Jennifer came from NYC from a planning job and Andy Byford now left Toronto to work for the MTA (New Yorks TTC). I don't know how we can worship NYC so much but then be dismissive of employees they had working for them or employees they hired after us. Yet at the same time hire three Fords (Rob, Doug, Mikey). Direct the anger to the right place please. I'm sure some good workers are finding it very stressful trying to fulfill their jobs in what they believe is a responsible way while working under these people.

As for the rest of the complaints that Aquateam lists most are done as a compromise but each compromise is better than what the alternative was. Id rather a "botched" king street ROW role out then no role out at all. Id rather a bike lane where someone unfortunately meets their maker than no bike lane at all. A DRL alignment being chosen is great even if you think there are political motivations (none that I believe helped her career but more likely the Mayors career) Sure nothing was perfect but it was definitely an upgrade.

 

[steveintoronto]

As a planner, her record is nothing to be proud of:

• Scarborough Subway Extension - created the one-stop plan to ensure it gets built, without considering real alternatives

Rushed right now, I'll examine the rest later, but you're making things up.

I suggest you read the record as detailed by Pagliaro mostly through FOI. It's referenced diligently. There's been more to come out since Pagliaro's exposé. I have agreed many times in these strings that "Keesmaat compromised herself" bending to the pressure and constraint put on her by Tory especially. But better she quit later than not at all. She *did offer alternatives*...clearly. Maybe you didn't hear about them, but that's because it wasn't meant for public consumption, and was hidden until the FOI daylighting. That's because she was a *Planner*...not an elected rep.

I take it you don't like her, and have to construct a false itinerary?

• Rail Deck Park - an unfunded multi-billion dollar fantasy that precludes closing up the true barrier to the waterfront (the rail corridor) by excluding developers. As you've pointed out, the city may not even have the legal authority to restrict air rights

Huh? That wasn't my point, not even close. You seem to mangle much in recollection.

My point is that *no-one* outside of the "Parliament of Canada" has jurisdictional control of the USRC, specifically that which is referred to in binding legal documents and SCC judgements based on them. "For the Good of Canada" (gist) is the key reference in many rulings. And that certainly includes the air-rights above that corridor. *Ownership* appears to remain with the City of Toronto via Provincial Statute granted by the Parliament of Canada, (The "Esplanade Tri-partite Agreement", affirmed in SCC decisions since, not least
Grand Trunk Railway Co. v. City of Toronto - Supreme Court of ... ) but *jurisdiction* remains in Parliament.

Addendum: As an aside to the SCC rulings and the Tri-Partite Agreement, and more fitting to the Rail Deck Park and Keesmaat strings, there's been a shift in the interpretation of how directly Parliament can deal with cities, and Toronto is the case about to be closely examined again.

Before repatriating the Constitution, Statutes were typically enacted by the province on behalf of cities since that was the accepted jurisdictional process at the time, thus the "Tri-Partite Agreement", since Parliament didn't have the power *at that time* to deal directly for or on behalf of Toronto.

That's about to be profoundly challenged, and a certain sitting MP/former City Councillor is right at the centre of it. And it's all because the Ford is going to be sitting idle in the driveway, leaking what looks like oil, but perhaps something else, maybe the result of using fuel costing a "buck a can"...

Addendum:

As a planner, her record is nothing to be proud of:

• Scarborough Subway Extension - created the one-stop plan to ensure it gets built, without considering real alternatives

[...]
In her interview, Keesmaat also praised the democratic process and said once council made a decision, even if she disagreed, she couldn't speak out against it. She admitted that did lead to being put in the "awkward" position of having to implement ideas she didn't always agree with, such as the controversial one-stop Scarborough subway.

"I went away and created a network plan that was really about making the best that I possibly could out of that decision from city council," she said.
[...]

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/programs/metromorning/keesmaat-metro-morning-1.4278534