Court Decision Expected Today
From the Star:
Oct. 11, 2005. 08:06 AM
Judges rule on St. Clair streetcar
$65M project set to start tomorrow
City violated Planning Act, critics say
KEVIN MCGRAN
TRANSPORTATION REPORTER
The future of St. Clair Ave. W. hangs on semantics.
Does the plan to run streetcars on dedicated lanes on St. Clair constitute the definition of "rapid transit" in an "exclusive" right-of-way, or is it merely a "surface transit improvement"?
A three-judge panel decision expected today will either allow the TTC to start as scheduled tomorrow to dig up parts of the road, or send city lawyers and councillors scrambling to find some way to save their much-touted $65 million project.
Opponents argued before a Divisional Court panel that the City of Toronto violated the provincial Planning Act by not amending its official plan to allow for "rapid transit" on St. Clair Ave. W.
Lawyers for the TTC and the city say there is no need to amend the official plan because the St. Clair project wasn't "rapid transit," but rather "surface transit improvement."
Lawyer Eric Gillespie, representing the group Save Our St. Clair, argued that if the city has its way, St. Clair is going to end up with the same kind of "rapid transit" enjoyed on Spadina, Queens Quay and the Harbourfront.
He said city maps on the 1994 official plan that guided the former Metro government designate streetcar lines on Spadina, Queens Quay and the Harbourfront as "rapid transit." He said the former Metro government amended its 1980 official plan to allow for these projects, complying with the Planning Act.
He argued the official plan passed by council in 2002 says rapid transit projects in "exclusive" rights of way require a more stringent process than the environmental assessment the St. Clair project had from 2002 to 2005.
TTC lawyer Jim Harbell said previous references to the Spadina and Queens Quay streetcar lines as "rapid transit" were "quirks of history," although he admitted they presented the judges with a "conundrum."
"It's not a perfect world," he added.
Harbell said none of the streetcar routes in Toronto qualify as rapid transit — despite the '94 maps that suggest otherwise — because the vehicles don't attain high speeds, have their stops too close together and don't carry enough passengers.
Therefore, he said, the part of the 2002 official plan that guided the St. Clair initiative was the part that dealt with "surface transit improvements" and was adequately dealt with in the environmental assessment process, which received final approval in June.
Gillespie's arguments seemed to gain some traction with the judges. Madam Justice Susan Greer said it appeared what the city was "attempting to do by the back door (was) create another RT like Spadina."
The city maintains the streetcar project will put more people on public transit and improve its reliability, meaning the streetcars will be able to maintain schedules and not bunch up the way they do now.
Opponents say trucks couldn't make deliveries by double-parking, businesses would lose customers and more road rage would ensue.
GB