[smallspy]

But it used to be 18 years before? Or did the Orion Vs last 6 years beyond their design life?

The last buses that the TTC bought that were designed to last 18 years were the Orion VIIs, and even then there was a pretty big asterisk attached to it.

But even prior to that, most buses just weren't designed to last that long. That goes for Novas, New Flyers, and even GMs. In the US, the replacement cycle since the 1970s was fixed at every 12 years, so that's what the manufacturers built to.

Dan

 

[turbanplanner]

This is concerning

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/transit-crimes-canada-9.6991533

 

[Monarch Butterfly]

Would like to see all transit routes have no on-street parking. However, the automobile disciples (like Mayor Doug Ford) would be upset. So how about no parking, no standing, and no stopping on the days or nights when get garbage collection? That would be a start.

 

[Bordercollie]

This is concerning

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/transit-crimes-canada-9.6991533

To be fair in cities such as Winnipeg and Edmonton they are seeing a huge growth in population. Hence an increase in transit usage.
It should take into consideration vs the increase in ridership. That would be more accurate.

 

[SubHuman]

... Maybe instead of wasting millions on re-naming stations. They could spend that money on safety instead?..

This is concerning

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/transit-crimes-canada-9.6991533

I would prefer that the province spend millions to open and staff more psychiatric institutions, if there aren't enough.
From what I can see, the main problem here seems to be that the individuals with severe mental issues repeatedly causing the problems and delays on the TTC are apprehended under the Ontario Mental Health Act, then apparently (and otherwise inexplicably) released almost immediately. That's not the city's responsibility. And if they weren't left to freely wander around, there wouldn't be the need for so much security and police presence.
https://ca.news.yahoo.com/off-rails-data-exposes-crime-182739381.html

... Nearly all Mental Health Act cases list the name of a specific hospital the person in question was taken to, often the Centre for Addiction and Mental Health...
... a person was said to have been apprehended three times under the Mental Health Act in a span of 24 hours ...
... "hospital keeps releasing them" ...

 

[Bordercollie]

I would prefer that the province spend millions to open and staff more psychiatric institutions, if there aren't enough.
From what I can see, the main problem here seems to be that the individuals with severe mental issues causing the problems and delays on the TTC are apprehended under the Ontario Mental Health Act, then apparently (and otherwise inexplicably) released almost immediately. That's not the city's responsibility. And if they weren't freely left to wander around, there wouldn't be the need for so much security and police presence.
https://ca.news.yahoo.com/off-rails-data-exposes-crime-182739381.html

You would need to overhaul the interpretation of the mental health act. People have free will which is interpreted as such that it's their free will to refuse treatment.

Just like if I have a terminal illness I have the right to refuse treatment. The problem arises when that person doesn't have the mental state to make their own decisions. How do you force them to get treatment?

I deal with this struggle on a daily basis with a family member and just because they are not a functional human being doesn't mean you can force them to get treatment.

They have to specifically be a danger to themselves or others and it has to be clearly defined.

So until they pick up a knife and stab someone there is nothing you can do, and at that point it's too late.

Even saying I will stab you is not enough because the court could interpret it as they were not going to actually stab you.

This is why police won't take action unless it's 100% clear. Otherwise they can get in trouble for overstepping their boundaries.

 

[SubHuman]

I would say someone climbing down onto the subway tracks (particularly multiple times) is clearly dangerous to themselves.
I'm not sure what the supposed effective "treatment" would be, other than not letting them freely wander around to keep doing it. Star Trek isn't real. Unfortunately there isn't some magic device or pill that cures brain damage.

As pointed out here before, New York has changed their enforcement away from a "culture of abandonment", which in part existed similarly because of a common apocryphal misinterpretation of the law (as opposed to the actual law).
https://archive.is/1wwld
https://www.city-journal.org/article/new-york-budget-mental-health-reform-involuntary-commitment-law

... longstanding culture of abandoning the mentally ill stems from a misreading of state law. For years, police and other frontline workers have believed that they couldn’t intervene—even when encountering a visibly psychotic individual on the subway—unless that person was suicidal or violent. But, as explained in a state Office of Mental Health guidance issued in February 2022, that notion of “imminent dangerousness” as a prerequisite to action was not rooted in state law...

 

[Bordercollie]

I would say someone climbing down onto the subway tracks (particularly multiple times) is clearly dangerous to themselves.
I'm not sure what the supposed effective "treatment" would be, other than not letting them freely wander around to keep doing it.

You can lock them up but after the 72 hour hold and they still refuse to take their medication you can't keep them.

Now if they tried to jump infront of a train then because they tried to harm themselves they have to get therapy. But even that they can skip out on.

Unless it's mandated by a court and then the police can come and take you back. But who's keeping track of the thousands of people who are doing that now?

Plus your medication is not free unless administered by the hospital. So if you don't have a job you don't have money for meds, or you spend it on drugs. Etc.


There needs to be a more proactive approach. Try to stop it or treat it before it gets to that point regardless of their individual freedoms. But then you are changing the way the freedom of Rights is interpreted.

The number 1 goal should be housing first. Not housing if you are clean or if you abide by the rules. They did this in Europe and reduced homelessness to 1%.

 

[DSCToronto]

You can lock them up but after the 72 hour hold and they still refuse to take their medication you can't keep them.

Now if they tried to jump infront of a train then because they tried to harm themselves they have to get therapy. But even that they can skip out on.

Unless it's mandated by a court and then the police can come and take you back. But who's keeping track of the thousands of people who are doing that now?

Plus your medication is not free unless administered by the hospital. So if you don't have a job you don't have money for meds, or you spend it on drugs. Etc.


There needs to be a more proactive approach. Try to stop it or treat it before it gets to that point regardless of their individual freedoms. But then you are changing the way the freedom of Rights is interpreted.

The number 1 goal should be housing first. Not housing if you are clean or if you abide by the rules. They did this in Europe and reduced homelessness to 1%.

I do not doubt that having more housing (with support services) would reduce homelessness but from my experience there are still LOTS of homeless folk in Europe (though countries differ greatly there too. It was almost certainly not reduced to 1% of the formerly homeless population and I do not know how much it reduced homelessness itself as a percentage of the whole population but doubt it used to be 100 times worse. Where did your 1% figure come from, which country does it refer to, and 1% of what?

 

[Bordercollie]

I do not doubt that having more housing (with support services) would reduce homelessness but from my experience there are still LOTS of homeless folk in Europe (though countries differ greatly there too. It was almost certainly not reduced to 1% of the formerly homeless population and I do not know how much it reduced homelessness itself as a percentage of the whole population but doubt it used to be 100 times worse. Where did your 1% figure come from, which country does it refer to, and 1% of what?

How did Denmark solve homelessness?
It is clear that providing housing first to the homeless individual is a strategy that is implemented in many different areas of the social services process in Denmark, and has also been successful in lowering the rates of homelessness to the small number of 0.1 percent.

Now that is one country but it says a lot.

 

[turbanplanner]

How did Denmark solve homelessness?
It is clear that providing housing first to the homeless individual is a strategy that is implemented in many different areas of the social services process in Denmark, and has also been successful in lowering the rates of homelessness to the small number of 0.1 percent.

Now that is one country but it says a lot.

I’m speaking out of my ass here, but I feel like in a lot of cases that would lead to ruined housing? The other problem also is you don’t really want to have ghettos. That’s why Toronto community housing is pushed for mixed income develop developments etc

 

[Bordercollie]

I’m speaking out of my ass here, but I feel like in a lot of cases that would lead to ruined housing? The other problem also is you don’t really want to have ghettos. That’s why Toronto community housing is pushed for mixed income develop developments etc

There needs to be a multi step approach. But this "you have to be clean to get housing" Doesn't work because you need an address to get a job, you need a place to sleep, otherwise how can you get clean?

 

[txlseries4]

How did Denmark solve homelessness?
It is clear that providing housing first to the homeless individual is a strategy that is implemented in many different areas of the social services process in Denmark, and has also been successful in lowering the rates of homelessness to the small number of 0.1 percent.

Now that is one country but it says a lot.

When I hit reply to respond I really thought this as well, but thinking about it and looking more up, I'm not so sure. They certainly have a model we should follow, but I don't think it's true that they solved it, and it is clear it is something that disproportionately affects non-Danes people -- between 2012-2022 only 6% of those prosecuted for begging in public were Danish nationality [source]. I don't know how much we can take from their scenario and apply it here because some of their variables are much different.

I've been to Copenhagen twice during the winter, most recently in 2022, and it was shocking to not see (or notice) homeless people -- in or outside the city centre, on transit, or otherwise. I spent just over a week there that trip and only saw one person panhandling. The nordic countries do spend a lot on their social programs and their taxes reflect it. The safety net to catch people before they hit the street is robust. From this wikipedia article on homeless population, Canada's rate (2023) of homeless people is 29.02 per 10,000 compared to 9.8 per 10,000 in Denmark (2022). From the 2024 Street Needs Assessment, Toronto's rate is 54 per 10k (rate is 49 sheltered, 6 unsheltered). I couldn't find a rate specific to Cph. This article notes "As of 2024, Denmark counted 5,989 homeless people. According to Emhjellen, the country only has about 3,000 emergency shelter beds."

There was legislation passed in 2017 I learned about while writing this found this 2023 article from the European Journal of Homelessness, that flies in the face of my understanding of how homelessness has been approached in Denmark. I don't want to expand on it too much and take things too off-topic, but that article is illuminating to even just skim through. That 2017 law made begging illegal and is more strictly enforced in particular locations -- like on transit, and public encampments were made illegal (tent, tarp, bonfire), however some advocacy reporting indicates the encampment law has not been enforced after 202 when homeless became exacerbated just about everywhere; 2017-2019 there were 550 instances of police charging someone, and only 5 in 2020-2021. Earlier this year the city partially lifted the ban, permitting people to sleep in parks, but still prohibiting it in cemeteries and playgrounds.

Seems clear that just like in Toronto, the issue is complex and worsened significantly because of the pandemic. I'm certain there's details and nuance I've missed.

 

[Undead]

Getting real OT folks

 

[Bordercollie]

When I hit reply to respond I really thought this as well, but thinking about it and looking more up, I'm not so sure. They certainly have a model we should follow, but I don't think it's true that they solved it, and it is clear it is something that disproportionately affects non-Danes people -- between 2012-2022 only 6% of those prosecuted for begging in public were Danish nationality [source]. I don't know how much we can take from their scenario and apply it here because some of their variables are much different.

I've been to Copenhagen twice during the winter, most recently in 2022, and it was shocking to not see (or notice) homeless people -- in or outside the city centre, on transit, or otherwise. I spent just over a week there that trip and only saw one person panhandling. The nordic countries do spend a lot on their social programs and their taxes reflect it. The safety net to catch people before they hit the street is robust. From this wikipedia article on homeless population, Canada's rate (2023) of homeless people is 29.02 per 10,000 compared to 9.8 per 10,000 in Denmark (2022). From the 2024 Street Needs Assessment, Toronto's rate is 54 per 10k (rate is 49 sheltered, 6 unsheltered). I couldn't find a rate specific to Cph. This article notes "As of 2024, Denmark counted 5,989 homeless people. According to Emhjellen, the country only has about 3,000 emergency shelter beds."

There was legislation passed in 2017 I learned about while writing this found this 2023 article from the European Journal of Homelessness, that flies in the face of my understanding of how homelessness has been approached in Denmark. I don't want to expand on it too much and take things too off-topic, but that article is illuminating to even just skim through. That 2017 law made begging illegal and is more strictly enforced in particular locations -- like on transit, and public encampments were made illegal (tent, tarp, bonfire), however some advocacy reporting indicates the encampment law has not been enforced after 202 when homeless became exacerbated just about everywhere; 2017-2019 there were 550 instances of police charging someone, and only 5 in 2020-2021. Earlier this year the city partially lifted the ban, permitting people to sleep in parks, but still prohibiting it in cemeteries and playgrounds.

Seems clear that just like in Toronto, the issue is complex and worsened significantly because of the pandemic. I'm certain there's details and nuance I've missed.

The deployment of social or crisis workers on the subway is a good start. Also having police patrol the U portion of line one is also good.

But the core issue is that these people who use the TTC for shelter on cold days have social issues, mental issues, addiction issues and homelessness. So unless you can start to tackle some of these issues, kicking them off the TTC and leaving them on the street is only moving the problem somewhere else.

And using buses for homeless to sleep on cold nights was a good intended start but didn't address the other issues.