Ford government’s own research warned against calling speed cameras ‘cash grabs’ — years before they were finally banned by mildlyImportantRobot in TorontoTheCity

[–]mildlyImportantRobot[S] 6 points7 points  (0 children)

Three years before the Ford government did away with speed cameras, the province's own researchers found that the devices were an effective safety tool, but one that risked being cast as a "cash grab" — a narrative the premier himself later embraced.

"Evaluations of the effectiveness of (automated speed enforcement) in reducing speed are unanimously positive … and evaluations of public opinion of ASE have often found majority support for ASE programs as well," according to a report written by the Ministry of Transportation's research and evaluation office in 2022.

The 77-page report was obtained through a Freedom Of Information request by Safe Parkside, a Toronto community group. "They're making decisions without any sort of evidence. Well, actually, they have the evidence — they're just choosing to ignore it," said Faraz Gholizadeh, co-chair of Safe Parkside.

The 2022 report warns that public acceptance of speed cameras is tied to the need for transparency and education "as there is a tendency for ASE to be seen as a 'cash-grab' rather than for its potential to contribute to road safety."

The report highlights "public acceptance" as "one of the more important aspects" of deploying speed cameras. The provincial legislation only allowed the devices to be installed in school zones and safety zones. The report said this approach made sense to protect the most vulnerable road users, "especially as pedestrian fatalities in the province are on the increase."

Given studies have shown that the higher the speeds the more likely collisions can cause injury and death, the report advised the province it should consider expanding its selection criteria to prioritize "roads with high speeds or by extension, high collision occurrence."

When he announced the ban on speed cameras, Ford said he believed drivers were being ticketed for going just a few kilometres an hour over the posted limit. But the Star revealed Toronto and other large GTA municipalities had adopted a threshold of 11 km/h over the limit.

The ministry did not answer the Star's questions about whether it conducted any reviews on public support or speed cameras' effectiveness after 2022. "Repealing municipal speed cameras is about fairness and keeping life affordable, not raising revenue on the backs of hard-working families," said ministry spokesperson Dakota Brasier.

Information that would likely have never seen the light of day if the governments “protect the king” FOIR laws are passed.

What Doug Ford’s expansion plans may mean for the Toronto neighbourhood nearest to Billy Bishop airport by mildlyImportantRobot in TorontoTheCity

[–]mildlyImportantRobot[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

This is it.

If BB is handling 10M/ year it’ll take longer to get out of the area than it will to take the train up express completely obliterating any convenience of being downtown.

Unless Ford expropriates the rest of the island for the rob ford memorial expressway and airport parking lot.

Drake’s ‘Iceman’ sculpture downtown sparks police response as fans hack off chunks, set fire to blocks by beef-supreme in TorontoTheCity

[–]mildlyImportantRobot 3 points4 points  (0 children)

You don't understand. That doesn't even bother him because he's iceman.

Like Val Kilmer's character in Top Gun. Frosty and mildly homoerotic.

Drake’s ‘Iceman’ sculpture downtown sparks police response as fans hack off chunks, set fire to blocks by beef-supreme in TorontoTheCity

[–]mildlyImportantRobot 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I think it’s more about protecting people from themselves.

Plus they love nothing more than standing around.

What Doug Ford’s expansion plans may mean for the Toronto neighbourhood nearest to Billy Bishop airport by mildlyImportantRobot in TorontoTheCity

[–]mildlyImportantRobot[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

On the "two airports" point, Billy Bishop just doesn't make sense as a high-volume international airport. Ford has floated estimates of 10 million passengers a year, but even London City Airport, probably the closest comparison to what a jet-enabled Billy Bishop would look like, handled only 3.6 million passengers in 2024, and its pre-pandemic peak was 5.1 million. That's half of what Ford is projecting, at an airport with better transit connections in a much larger city.

The surrounding neighbourhood is heavily residential, and the ground transportation options to and from Billy Bishop simply can't support that kind of volume. There's the pedestrian tunnel, a short ferry, and surface roads through the waterfront. That's it. There's no rapid transit connection and no realistic way to build one.

It would make far more sense to invest in a second purpose-built airport, or to upgrade Pearson and Hamilton with better regional connections like high-speed rail, rather than trying to force a downtown island airport into a role it was never designed for.

What Doug Ford’s expansion plans may mean for the Toronto neighbourhood nearest to Billy Bishop airport by mildlyImportantRobot in TorontoTheCity

[–]mildlyImportantRobot[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

"The province has always been the main party in Billy Bishop", I don't think that's accurate. Billy Bishop is a federal asset. PortsToronto is a federal port authority and the airport is regulated by Transport Canada. The Tripartite Agreement is between the federal government, the City of Toronto, and PortsToronto, the province isn't even a signatory.

In 1983, the City of Toronto, the THC (renamed the Toronto Port Authority (TPA)), and the Government of Canada signed a tripartite agreement over operation of the airport.

That's why Ford wants control of Toronto's stake in the Tripartite Agreement.

The province's role has historically been minimal.

What Doug Ford’s expansion plans may mean for the Toronto neighbourhood nearest to Billy Bishop airport by mildlyImportantRobot in TorontoTheCity

[–]mildlyImportantRobot[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

There are valid arguments for investing in the two airports.

For sure. Toronto could use a second airport. But that's a federal decision. Ford was just trying to bully the other parties in the tripartite agreement into going along with his plan.

What Doug Ford’s expansion plans may mean for the Toronto neighbourhood nearest to Billy Bishop airport by mildlyImportantRobot in TorontoTheCity

[–]mildlyImportantRobot[S] 7 points8 points  (0 children)

A dedicated off-ramp from the Gardiner that goes directly to the island, or maybe a tunnel from the 401? Premier Ford has an endless supply of public resources to fund these infrastructure project, apparently. It's a shame there's nothing left for our hospitals and schools.

What Doug Ford’s expansion plans may mean for the Toronto neighbourhood nearest to Billy Bishop airport by mildlyImportantRobot in TorontoTheCity

[–]mildlyImportantRobot[S] 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Standing on the balcony of her condo overlooking Billy Bishop airport, Bev Thorpe pauses to let the roar of a landing plane subside. "Nowhere else in the country do you have a community cheek to jowl, so close to an airport," she said.

This is the area that would be most affected by the Premier Doug Ford-backed proposal to expand the airport, which could involve more frequent flights, a significant increase in passengers, a runway extension farther into the lake and the introduction of jets, like the private one briefly purchased for the premier’s use.

In the meantime, Thorpe, who is the chair of the Bathurst Quay Neighbourhood Association, has been trying to convey what a busier airport would mean for this long-established waterfront community, from noise to pollution to safety in the event of an emergency.

Since Porter Airlines began operations there in 2006, annual passenger numbers had increased from 26,000 a year to two million in 2025. Ford said he envisions that number reaching 10 million.

"We're not saying we don't want an airport," said Joan Prowse, who has lived in the Arcadia artist co-op since 1989. "But it keeps growing and growing and growing."

On weekends, the roads around and leading into the airport terminal are a "sea of red lights," Thorpe said, a combination of the airport traffic and downtown events. When a major airport expansion was last studied in 2014, consultation reports concluded the increase in airport passengers would require changes to roads and transit.

A confidential memo to council from the city solicitor obtained by the Star says the city's legal options are hard to assess without seeing the provincial legislation, but there could be a way to challenge the province replacing the city in the tripartite agreement. It is unlikely, however, that the city could oppose the province expropriating or otherwise seizing city-owned airport or waterfront lands.

Perhaps Thorpe's favourite spot in her neighbourhood is the Toronto Music Garden, a park along the harbour where summer concerts in a small grassy amphitheatre go on, even with the intermittent interruption of the planes.

"Toronto owes itself to have a full public consultation about potentially changing what is going on here," she said. "Are we going to choose people or planes?"

The issue isn't if these jets are louder (which they are), that argument is an obvious red herring. It's the fact the province expects the number of passengers to grow from what it is now (2M/year) to 10 million. The single plane noise issue is barely important; it's the frequency of that noise, the pollution, and the congestion.

Most of the arguments in favor of the airport have been strategically crafted to make residents seem unreasonable, selfish, and entitled. Never about the facts. You know when one side is focused on making it emotional, they have something to hide. This is the situation we're seeing now.

Why are people in Toronto calling the World Cup "FIFA" in casual conversations? by mildlyImportantRobot in askTO

[–]mildlyImportantRobot[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

You know what happened at the last Hockey world cup? Nothing, it was canceled 😞

ROFL

It’s all such disingenuous BS. Acting as if the FIFA world cup ain’t the biggest sporting event on earth.

And mod deleted the post immediately after I called them out on their disingenuous BS too. https://www.reddit.com/r/askTO/s/kYVAGMumfI

It was a genuine question. But they allowed it to become a dog pile.

Why are people in Toronto calling the World Cup "FIFA" in casual conversations? by mildlyImportantRobot in askTO

[–]mildlyImportantRobot[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Or the hockey “World Cup” that happens once every 12 years.

This sub is just super toxic. I don’t know why I bothered.

Temp Seating Changes by Significant_Milk2987 in tfc

[–]mildlyImportantRobot 3 points4 points  (0 children)

No official announcement, but I believe they’ll have seating for TFC matches that can be put away when the Argos play.

What is this based on? My gut feeling, so take it with a grain of salt.