Report October 2012 Tunnel Vision: An Investigation into the Toronto Transit Commission Second Exit Project at Donlands and Greenwood Stations Fiona Crean Ombudsman TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 Executive Summary ................................................................................................ 4 2.0 The Complaint ........................................................................................................ 7 3.0 The Investigation .................................................................................................... 7 4.0 The Facts 8 4.1 History of the Second Exit Project .................................................................. 8 4.1.1 TTC Reports ................................................................................................... 8 4.1.2 TTC's Preferred Options ................................................................................. 9 4.1.3 TTC Policy – Property Acquisition & Notification Protocol .............................. 9 4.2 Notice to Councillor and Community ............................................................. 10 4.2.1 Community Response to Notice ................................................................... 14 4.2.2 TTC's Response to Notice ............................................................................ 16 4.2.3 Community's Request for Information ........................................................... 17 4.2.4 TTC Meeting with the Owner of Property Y .................................................. 18 4.3 Community Information Meeting - June 29, 2010 ......................................... 19 4.4 Properties A and B ........................................................................................ 21 4.5 Request for Information ................................................................................ 24 4.5.1 The Property D Proposal .............................................................................. 24 4.5.2 Information from TTC .................................................................................... 24 4.5.3 A Concerned Resident .................................................................................. 26 4.5.4 Public Consultation Meeting - July 12, 2010 ................................................. 27 4.5.5 Owner of Property D Notified - July 13, 2010 ................................................ 31 4.6 Commission Meeting - July 14, 2010 ............................................................ 33 4.7 Construction Liaison Committee Meetings .................................................... 37 4.8 Commission Meeting - August 23, 2010 ....................................................... 38 4.9 The Owners of Properties X and Y ............................................................... 38 4.10 Public Consultation Meeting - September 16, 2010 ...................................... 39 4.11 Safety Issues and Compromise of Rules ...................................................... 41 4.11.1 Consistent Rules and Information ................................................................. 42 4.11.2 Exit Evacuation Time Rule - 2-Minute Rule .................................................. 42 4.12 Letters to Residents ...................................................................................... 45 2 4.13 Architecture and Urban Design Firm ............................................................. 45 4.14 Donlands Church Option ............................................................................... 48 4.15 Request for Information ................................................................................ 48 4.16 Construction Liaison Committee Meeting - January 20, 2011 ....................... 49 4.17 The Firm's Report Revisited.......................................................................... 50 4.18 Requested Clarification of Criteria ................................................................ 52 4.19 City Council Budget Meeting & Cancelled Public Meeting ............................ 53 4.20 Public Consultation ....................................................................................... 54 5.0 Engineer's Expert Report ...................................................................................... 55 6.0 Status of Donlands Station.................................................................................... 57 7.0 Status of Greenwood Station ................................................................................ 57 8.0 Woodbine and Coxwell Station – A Comparison ................................................... 58 9.0 Ombudsman Findings ........................................................................................... 59 10.0 Ombudsman Conclusions .................................................................................... 66 11.0 Ombudsman Recommendations .......................................................................... 67 12.0 City and TTC Responses ..................................................................................... 68 Appendix A – History of the Second Exit Project ....................................................... 71 Appendix B – TTC July 12, 2010 Matrices ................................................................. 76 Appendix C – TTC September 16, 2010 Matrices ...................................................... 78 Appendix D – History of the TTC Design Principles and Criteria ................................ 79 Appendix E – Comparison of Evacuation Times of TTC Options ............................... 82 Appendix F – Firm's Matrix, December 2, 2010 ......................................................... 83 Appendix G – Firm's Revised Matrix, December 16, 2010 ......................................... 84 Appendix H – TTC Matrices, January 20, 2011 .......................................................... 85 Appendix I – City Response ..................................................................................... 88 Appendix J – TTC Response ..................................................................................... 90 3 1.0 Executive Summary 1. In June 2010, the Toronto Transit Commission (TTC) informed area residents near Donlands and Greenwood stations of its intention to construct two second exits on Strathmore Blvd (Strathmore). The TTC indicated in an unaddressed flyer, delivered to most properties, that four residential houses on the street, two from each neighbourhood, would be torn down to build a second TTC exit (Project). The flyer also notified residents of a public meeting, scheduled less than two weeks later, to discuss the design and construction implications of the Project. 2. The Ombudsman received complaints from a group of residents questioning the TTC's policies and procedures relating to notice of the Project, lack of public consultation and differential treatment between the two communities affected. 3. The Ombudsman initiated an investigation to inquire into these complaints, issuing a notice of investigation on December 21, 2011. 4. The investigation revealed that although the TTC began evaluating options for the second exit location in early 2004, residents impacted by the Project were only notified in mid 2010 - a few months before the TTC planned to begin construction. As a result, neither Donlands nor Greenwood communities were afforded the opportunity to adequately review the TTC's plans and participate in a public consultation process. The Ombudsman concluded that the TTC failed to meaningfully engage in a public consultation. 5. In addition to providing minimal notice, the TTC's communication with affected residents was very poor. The investigation found that the TTC failed to notify two of the four property owners, whose homes it planned to acquire, in advance of delivering the general flyer to the community. It did not initiate face-to-face contact with any of the four property owners prior to the first public meeting. Subsequently, the TTC failed to notify a fifth property owner that it planned to acquire his home in advance of the second public meeting at which it revealed these plans. 6. The TTC was reluctant to provide information about the Project with residents. It shared its newly selected exit location for Greenwood station at the second public meeting without first consulting the affected property owner. The Ombudsman found it particularly egregious that the TTC only contacted the property owner on the day of the Commission meeting where it would be requesting the Commission's approval for the acquisition of the property. The property owner received an hour's notice to prepare a deputation before the TTC Commission. 4 7. Two days after the second public meeting, the TTC Commission meeting was held in which the TTC requested that the Project for both stations be approved for construction. Residents deputed at the meeting and asked that the matter be deferred. The Commission did not defer the Project, but ordered the TTC, in moving forward, to engage in a public consultation process with the two communities. 8. The Ombudsman noted that the TTC treated the two communities differently. This was evident when the TTC agreed to return to the Commission with recommendations for Greenwood, but not for Donlands. It also provided a package of information to one community and not the other. In making its decisions, it appeared as though the TTC used its discretion at Greenwood, but not at Donlands. 9. Although public meetings took place with TTC staff and experts were retained