Evidence supports taking down the Gardiner
Based on the EA Preliminary Results Evaluation Matrix, CodeBlueTO is in favour of the Remove option for the section of the Gardiner to the east of Lower Jarvis Street.
The status quo is not acceptable. It is significantly more expensive than the Remove option, and would sacrifice Toronto’s growth to shave a couple minutes off of the commute of a relatively small number of drivers during rush hour. To put any traffic concerns in perspective, it is important to note that the capacity of the King streetcar is the same as the number of people entering downtown from the DVP and Lakeshore Blvd during the peak morning hour.
Looking to the future of the city and the region, CodeBlueTO supports evidence-based transportation planning. In this case, the evidence supports removing this section of the Gardiner.
While it is important to obtain a defensible level of traffic efficiency, we cannot solve city-wide problems of gridlock with any of the options for this small section of the Gardiner. What we can do is set up the right conditions for therevitalization of the Lower Yonge, East Bayfront, Keating and Port Lands precincts. Development of these areas represents a footprint greater than that of the entire downtown core. They could be the largest potential driver of economic growth in the city over the next fifty years.
Given the low level of design detail that has been presented to date, it may be worthwhile to consider going to city council with a more flexible recommendation that would allow the EA process to continue, while giving an opportunity for further refinement of the preferred option, before making a final financial commitment.
As a city, Toronto cannot afford to waste money on crumbling 20th century infrastructure when we have the opportunity to unlock the value of our waterfront for this century. From aesthetics to economics – and just about everything in between – the choice is clear: Remove.
on behalf of CodeBlueTO
There’s still time for you to share your opinion with the City of Toronto! Today is the last day to “Have Your Say”: Future of the Gardiner East
Message to Toronto’s Executive Committee regarding airport expansion
Sent in advance of the December 5 meeting, where members of the committee voted to defer the item to the new year.
CodeBlueTO urges the City of Toronto’s Executive Committee to support staff recommendations relating to the proposed expansion of the Island Airport. We agree with Waterfront Toronto’s position on this issue:
The decision regarding the expansion of BBTCA is a generational question, with impacts that can potentially profoundly affect both the significant achievements that have already been made to transform the waterfront into a destination to live, work and play, and the future revitalization prospects for the entire Waterfront.
At this moment:
- The Toronto Port Authority has not released a master plan for the airport expansion. The Island Airport is alone in Canada for not having such a plan. It seems like this should be a basic starting point Council would require of a project with such significant implications related to City spending, possible opportunity costs, impacts on continued revitalization, and unknown positive and negative results for Toronto residents, as well as visitors.
- Transport Canada has not signed off on the proposed runway extension.
- The scope of infrastructure required to accommodate so many more passengers is prohibitive. The foot of Bathurst Street, and the surrounding area, would require an intensive overhaul in order to accommodate significantly increased traffic and possibly expanded, purpose-built transit. This work would likely be at odds with public investments to reclaim the waterfront – including the current transformation of Queens Quay into an iconic boulevard. It also has the potential to create an undesirable burden on the tax base, as the Toronto Port Authority has made no indication it wants to pay for this. It is unclear how such an investment would be in the City’s interests. Prior to this push for expansion, interested parties failed to submit a convincing, detailed business plan outlining the expansion’s viability (Porter), nor is there a comprehensive master plan for a sustainable, balanced expanded airport (Toronto Port Authority). Cart, meet horse.
- Health impacts of both the current operation as well as an even busier airport, are of concern. It is known that jets emit more nitrogen oxide than the turbo-prop planes now used by Porter Airlines. And Toronto Health indicates that the airport is already making people nearby sicker than people in the rest of the city.
CodeBlueTO is a group composed of concerned residents who come from different parts of Toronto – people who have had varying degrees of involvement in waterfront revitalization over the years. We are united in our commitment to the vision for a revitalized waterfront that Waterfront Toronto has developed together with its community partners. The vision, the revitalization that has been done to date, and plans for future work must be protected from encroachment by inappropriate developments that threaten a very fine balance.
We came together and formed CodeBlueTO to play a significant role in protecting the City’s approved plans for the Port Lands. We’d hate to see years of effort go to waste due to a hasty, ill-conceived rush to expand the airport. Clearly, an expanded airport and the addition of jet aircraft at this central location will have a significant economic impact on development, redevelopment and the value of waterfront lands.
From danger to wildlife to potential loss of green space, and from effects on harbour boating to limitation of urban design possibilities on the Port Lands, the threats to Toronto’s waterfront are real. Opening up the Island Airport to jet aircraft would transform it into a major international transportation facility that would dominate the waterfront and destroy the fine balance of activities that Waterfront Toronto and its community partners have been working so hard to create.
The staff report will be as accurate in January as it is now: there has not been sufficient time allocated to adequately study the potential, wide-ranging consequences of the jet and expansion proposal. CodeBlueTO agrees with City staff that the existing consultants’ reports cannot form a sufficient basis for Council to make a decision to go ahead with Porter’s proposal, and the Port Authority’s late-coming insistence that expansion be coupled with a new lease, locking the City into 50 more years of airport use. (It is both surprising and unfortunate that the TPA was unable to outline its requirement in the spring, before this exercise began.)
We understand that Porter Airlines has been busy at City Hall, lobbying Councillors to move the company’s interests ahead. This airport expansion has an extraordinary potential to reshape Toronto as we know it, and affect life on the waterfront for generations to come. As representatives of all residents, Council’s Executive Committee should not rush this decision based on the soothing words of one business, and in the absence of so much crucial information.
Members of CodeBlueTO know that the need to balance demands on the waterfront could lead the Executive Committee to support staff recommendations, allowing enough time to gather relevant data, as well as to consult both the public and specific stakeholders. However, we cannot support a decision to push through an approval for this expansion, even one with conditions. Too many facts are simply missing. A motion to defer the matter for another month does not change the good work and solid recommendations provided by our public servants.
Save Our Waterfront!
It’s time to be heard about the possible expansion of the Toronto Island Airport! Tell City Council how much our Waterfront – and the future of the Port Lands – means to you.
CodeBlueTO believes the changes being considered for the Toronto Island Airport could have a profound impact on our Waterfront. And we can all do something to stop it.
It feels like the struggle to save our vision for the Port Lands – and the whole City’s relationship to the lake – is being challenged once again.
You probably already know that Porter Airlines’ CEO, Robert Deluce, wants to open up the Tripartite Agreement, which governs the operations of the Island Airport, so that he can fly jets to YTZ. Right now, the City wants to hear what you think about it. The City is also working on a number of reports about the plan. Then, in December, Council will vote to support or reject extending the runway into our lake … and bringing jets downtown, with a long, low flight path over the Port Lands.
A call for action
Now’s your chance to get involved with residents from across Toronto, working together as NoJetsTO, which is dedicated to preserving the City’s mixed-use Waterfront, and ensuring the airport is in balance with that use. The core organizers of CodeBlueTO have agreed to support the work of NoJetsTO. We encourage you to do the same. Through NoJetsTO, you can:
- Sign a petition (sending an email directly to your City Councillor).
- Donate to NoJetsTO.
- Order a lawn sign.
Questions about the proposed expansion of the Toronto Island Airport, a longer runway, and the addition of jets to the Waterfront
- Do you want to see the future of the Port Lands, Exhibition Place, the Canadian National Exhibition, and Ontario Place damaged by low-flying jet takeoffs and landings?
- Are you prepared to sacrifice some of our island parks to commercial fuel storage tanks and other facilities to service jet airplanes?
- With the reduction of Queens Quay to a two-lane boulevard, would there be a practical way to make sure area traffic won’t become even more of a congested nightmare with a huge increase in the number of passengers coming to and from the airport?
- Do you feel there is an urgent need to extend the Island Airport runway into our harbour and bring jets downtown in light of the Province of Ontario’s quick link rail system, scheduled to start in 2015, which will take 25 minutes to get from Union Station to Pearson Airport?
- Can you give up more of the central harbour for the sake of longer runways and larger exclusion zones to keep boats away from bigger planes landing and taking off?
- Are you willing to see small watercraft – canoes, kayaks, paddleboards, dinghies, learners’ sail boats – hit by gale-force jet blasts?
- Would you be comfortable with increased air, water and noise pollution across southern Toronto?
- Does the increased danger from bird strikes bother you, with the knowledge that waterfowl and bird sanctuaries are in the area?
- Are you aware City Staff have already said that reopening the existing Tripartite Agreement for one aircraft would in fact allow a whole class of jets built by different manufacturers, and open our Island Airport to more airlines?
- Would it concern you to know that there would also be a risk of NAFTA and Open Skies Agreement-related lawsuits if international airlines are not given the same privileges as Porter?
Let the City know about your priorities for the Waterfront
One last thing – please take a moment to fill out the City of Toronto’s online survey: Future of Billy Bishop Toronto City Airport. (If you’d like background details about what’s being considered, you can visit the City of Toronto’s Airport Review section.)
CodeBlueTO thanks you!
Getting the balance right: NO to jets, YES to a renewed, revitalized waterfront
by Julie Beddoes
On Thursday May 23, 2013, Bathurst Quay Neighbourhood Association hosted a town hall discussion of Porter Airlines’ proposal to fly jet planes out of an expanded Island Airport. Julie Beddoes – representing CodeBlueTO – was one of the panelists. (Robert Deluce came along as well.)
Toronto has the great luck of featuring two large waterfont sites ready to transform into fabulous communities and amenities for all of southern Ontario. Both are close to the city’s downtown:
Exhibition Place has been rescued from the threat of a mega casino. It and Ontario Place could be refurbished into their former glory – but not with the end of a runway a few metres offshore and low-flying jets overhead.
Precinct planning on the Port Lands will soon be underway. Which community dreams can be realized there will depend on whether jet overflights have to be planned for or not. And Waterfront Toronto’s and the City’s anticipation of private-sector financing of flood protection and infrastructure might have to readjust to lower potential land values if an expanded airport goes through.
Planes and birds don’t mix
With jets, extended runways would mean wider areas subject to low-flying planes. That means Porter operations would affect a much wider swath of the city than now. Through their support for CodeBlueTO, Torontonians showed that they want a naturalized Don River and greenway across the Port Lands, leading to the Don Valley once more being recognized as a major migration flyway. Birds and planes are dangerous competitors for space – jets have even larger engine intakes than the planes that Porter is flying now. Slaughtered birds and malfunctioning planes would become frighteningly likely.
New deal, old deal: a big deal
A busier Island Airport flying jets would be a major change in the deal offered to developers in the three waterfront precincts already under construction. These areas are being built based on the airport operating under the existing Tripartite Agreement between the City, the federal government and the Toronto Port Authority. Where do the Porter Plans leave Waterfront Toronto as a signatory to land sales and development contracts made in the understanding that jets would not be flying overhead?
Before I spoke at the town hall last month, I spent an hour having coffee on the waterfront with fellow CodeBlueTO members Dennis Findlay and David White. Porter’s planes flew overhead every couple of minutes. I emailed others for suggestions, and then talked about the issues with NoJetsTO activists. Given the huge range of issues and the limited time panelists had to make their cases, we all felt that I should emphasize CodeBlueTO’s concern for overall waterfront development, and the ways such a radical change in context as a jet airport would affect it.
Many communities, many concerns
The night of the town hall, other panelists analyzed the many ways a jet airport would be a big problem for residents of Bathurst Quay and environs, as well as for boaters using the inner harbour and western gap. Mr. Deluce repeated endlessly that his jets would cause no trouble to anybody, both in his presentation and when answering questions. He rashly claimed that he had three consultants’ reports showing this. When challenged from the floor to produce them, the CEO of Porter Airlines didn’t answer; Councillor Adam Vaughan said they don’t exist.
If anyone in the room supported Porter’s expansion, they didn’t say so – or were perhaps in the lineup for the mike when time was up, and we had to hand over the Harbourfront Community Centre gymnasium to the basketball players.
- Councillor Adam Vaughan
- staff from Member of Parliament Olivia Chow’s office
- staff representing Member of Provincial Parliament Rosario Marchese’s offices
- a recreational sailor
- a resident
- Porter Airlines CEO Robert Deluce
Accountability is urgently needed before a new Build Toronto board is approved by Council
Re: Council Agenda Item CC36.7
Dear City Manager, Deputy City Manager, City Clerk, Members of Council and Waterfront Toronto:
You will recall that the grassroots organization CodeBlueTO worked closely with City Council to ensure that the plans for the Port Lands – many years in the making – were not derailed by a lack of due process. We are now concerned about the process that seems to be underway to select new leadership at Build Toronto. It is critical that residents of this city be consulted, and that the person heading this important agency is popularly supported within the various communities interested and involved in the evolution of Toronto.
As you know from media and other reports, Councillor Doug Ford is forcefully supporting the appointment of Mike Kraljevic for the position of CEO at Build Toronto.
How do we feel about it? The short answer:
“How is this okay?” — Cynthia Wilkey, chair of the West Don Lands Committee, member of CodeBlueTO, June 6, 2013, Doug Ford optimistic about search for city agency chief
The long answer:
To those of us who have been deeply immersed in Port Lands issues, there are some significant questions around Mike Kraljevic‘s leadership at the Toronto Port Lands Company that have never been answered publicly. These are questions that community activists and concerned citizens have raised with local Councillor Paula Fletcher directly, as well as with City Staff.
We feel strongly that Councillor Ford’s preferred candidate for the CEO post at Build Toronto cannot be considered unless he publicly and satisfactorily addresses a number of questions beforehand. Until that time, we do not consider him a suitable candidate, based on his past record of disregarding the will of Council, and this administration’s avowed commitment to transparency and accountability.
1. Why was it acceptable in early 2011 for Mr. Kraljevic – as CEO of TPLC – to spend public funds on planning and architectural services (hiring Eric Kuhne and Mark Sterling) to develop, in secret, an alternative vision for the Port Lands? This initiative was in direct conflict with the Council-approved plans for the Lower Don Lands, and in direct conflict with the City / TPLC (TEDCO) / Waterfront Toronto MOU giving Waterfront Toronto development lead status for those lands. We need to know why and how it happened.
(See the article First salvo in battle for waterfront launched in February: documents for further information)
2. Why was it acceptable for Mr. Kraljevic to include Councillor Ford in an August 2011 confidential briefing for the TPLC board on the Eric Kuhn Port Lands Plan, to which not even the the local Councillor, Paula Fletcher, was invited? Councillor Ford had been publicly promoting an alternative vision for the Port Lands, and disparaging the abilities of Waterfront Toronto. As the area’s representative, Councillor Fletcher had intimate knowledge of the file, and responsibility to act on its behalf. The public needs to know how this was allowed to happen, and a commitment by both this administration and Mr. Kraljevic himself not to act in such a manner again.
3. Why – in a year when he spent City funds on a secret project in conflict with Council-approved direction – did Mr. Kraljevic receive a $25,000 bonus from TPLC? Why, in the following year, was Mr. Kraljevic granted a further $50,000 bonus – when it was clear that the attempt to take development control from Waterfront Toronto had been misguided, and the essential soundness of the original Lower Don Lands Framework had been confirmed? If the answer is the sale of Corus, Mr. Kraljevic can hardly take credit for a project that was initiated well before TPLC emerged as the remnant of TEDCO.
4. Why has there been no public accounting of the costs resulting from this gambit? Why are the financial details of TPLC’s consulting contracts in 2011 going through Executive Committee and on to Council as confidential items? What are the specific rationales for any sole source contracts that came from this project (why would they be considered an “emergency” or “urgent”, for example)? Mr. Kraljevic and TPLC face no public accountability for what many see as an entirely offside waste of public funds. This is not transparent, nor is it accountable to the residents of Toronto. We deserve – and demand – better treatment.
“In 2011, TPLC procured professional services through processes specific to the type of service required. Most services were procured from pre-qualified rosters of firms using a Request for Quotation (RFQ’s) or sole source process. A number of contracts were awarded using an open RFQ or sole source process.”
- Executive Committee Item EX32.5: Toronto Port Lands Company - 2011 Professional, Technical and Consulting Fees
- Quote above from the Staff Report: Toronto Port Lands Company - 2011 Professional, Technical and Consulting Fees
5. How is it possible that TPLC was able to break free of its mandate with no censure? What was the particular role of Mr. Kraljevic in the August 2011 attempt to amend the MOU to transfer the development lead from Waterfront Toronto to TPLC, and the concurrent attempt to discredit the existing Lower Don Lands Framework plan developed through extensive public consultation over several years? What was the cost of the resulting reconsideration and review by Council, Staff and Waterfront Toronto of a unanimously approved Lower Don Lands plan? How much was spent on the Port Lands Acceleration Initiative – over and above the normal process that was already in place for the Lower Don Lands / Port Lands development through Waterfront Toronto?
If City Council Members truly believe in working with the people of Toronto as we develop our waterfront and other areas, they must be distressed by the way this entire episode was handled from the onset. If the primary instigators have learned nothing from it, they cannot be allowed to have a free hand with a critical organization such as Build Toronto.
This is a very worrying history, even if it were confined to the workings of the Toronto Port Lands Company. It becomes even more worrying as we see Councillor Doug Ford aggressively take the reigns at Build Toronto, given his past willingness to ignore Council’s vote, and the public consultation process with respect to the Port Lands. Build Toronto’s board is in obvious and extreme disarray, with six independent board members suddenly resigning. A new CEO needs to be selected. New board members are being considered in camera.
It is also suggested that, at this time of turmoil, we no longer need the expertise and dispassion brought to the board table by two City Staff. (“Staff were appointed to the Board on an interim basis to provide linkages between the City’s strategic direction and Build Toronto operations.”) The members of CodeBlueTO need more convincing that this is true, given the current circumstances.
Surely, this is a time requiring leadership that has earned the highest level of trust. That has proven itself to be accountable and transparent. That has the full backing of the residents of this city. Unless the past behaviour of the Toronto Port Lands Company is fully brought out into the light for all to see, CodeBlueTO must raise an alarm about what appears to be another lack of due process.
We raise that alarm now, and demand that Mr. Kraljevic respond immediately with a full and unambiguous accounting of what happened and why.
CodeBlueTO is a coalition of individuals, organizations, and groups who have come together in the shared belief that Toronto’s waterfront should be revitalized in the most beautiful, ecologically sensitive, and financially astute ways possible, using processes that are transparent and engage the broader community.
CBTO Email: firstname.lastname@example.org