METROTOWN EXCHANGE DRAFT FUNCTIONAL PLAN March 22, 2012
with Durante Kreuk, Perkins + Will, and Vector Engineering Services ii METROtown exchange draft function plan Table of Contents
1 BACKGROUND______1 Figure 1-1 Project Team______1
1.1 Existing Conditions______1 Figure 1-2 Site Context______2
1.2 Previous Plans and Site Studies______1 Figure 2-1 Goals and Objectives for Metrotown Exchange Plan______3
1.3 Team______1 Figure 3-1 Intersection at East End of Exchange______7
1.4 Project Scope______2 Figure 3-2 Intersection at West End of Exchange______7
1.5 Document Structure______2 Figure 3-3 Central Boulevard Design______9
2 Charrette process______3 Figure 3-4 Straight Bus Bay Alignment______10
2.1 Process Overview______3 Figure 3-5 Layover Facility Image______11
2.2 Goals and Objectives______3 Figure 3-6 Option 1 from Design Charrette______12
2.3 Revised Options: Round One______4 Figure 3-7 Option 1 Plan and Section______13
3 eVALULATION OF OPTIONS______7 Figure 3-8 Option 2 from Design Charrette______14
3.1 Common Recommended Elements______7 Figure 3-9 Option 2 Plan and Section______15
3.2 Central Boulevard Rechannelization______9 Figure 3-10 2011 Stantec Plan______16
3.3 Straight-curb Bus Bay Alignment______10 Figure 3-11 Evaluation Summary______17
3.4 Layover Facility Redesign______11 Figure 4-1 Preferred Option Plan and Section______18
3.5 Option 1: Separated Beresford______12 Figure 4-2 Primary Pedestrian Flow Diagram______19
3.6 Option 2: Shared Beresford______14
3.7 Option 3: Stantec Plan______16
3.8 Evaluation of Options______17
4 pREFERRED OPTION______18
4.1 Landscape Recommendations______19
4.2 Pedestrian Flow______19
5 NEXT STEPS: RESOLUTION OF OUTSTANDING ISSUES & DESIGN DEVELOPMENT______20
5.1 Traffic Analysis on Central Blvd______20
5.2 Discussion with Metrotown Mall Management______20
5.3 Station Building Design Modifications______20
5.4 Bus Re-routing at Willingdon/McKay______20
5.5 Pedestrian Access______20
5.6 AutoTurn Modeling Assumptions______20
Appendix A Meeting Minutes______21
APPENDIX b WORKING ASSUMPTIONS______39
APPENDIX C BUS SWEEPS______40
METROtown exchange draft function plan i ii METROtown exchange draft function plan 1 BACKGROUND Figure 1-1 Project Team
1.1 Existing Conditions
The Metrotown exchange is one of the most significant bus exchanges in the SkyTrain system, along with Surrey Central, Lougheed Mall and downtown Vancouver. As TransLink seeks to implement its vision Project TransLink – Project Lead to have 50% of all trips in the region by walking, biking, and transit Oversight Moreno Rossi, Marco Bonaventura, Liana Evans by 2040, the importance of Metrotown will continue to increase. For TransLink to achieve its overall mode split goals, the regional town centres will be expected to achieve a higher mode shift away from private automobile use. TransLink City of Burnaby Coast Mountain Bus Company Metrotown SkyTrain Station offers unusual ridership patterns, due to Key Matt Craig Stu Ramsey the unique mix of land uses surrounding the station, including regional Rachel Jamieson Ian Wasson Harjit Sidhu-Kambo Stakeholders retail, major employment and increasingly dense residential. Due to the Joanne Proft Leah Libsekal Ken Chow area’s retail strength, Metrotown experiences peak ridership on weekend Vikki Kwan Doug Louie Barry Hogue and midday periods. The bus routes that serve Metrotown are important Lou Pelletier regional connections, with eleven routes terminating there. Ed Kozak Jeremy Rennie 1.2 Previous Plans and Site Studies
Three prior studies have been conducted of the Metrotown station and exchange in preparation for station redevelopment and expansion Nelson\Nygaard Consultant of the bus exchange. In 2007, Perkins + Will and Nelson\Nygaard Transportation Design produced the “Metrotown SkyTrain Station Transit Village Plan – Site Lead Assessment & Design Concepts Report.” This report was followed Jeffrey Tumlin, Tim Payne, Michael Moule, Emily Ehlers, Danielle Rose in the same year with a report to explore the recommendations from the site assessment in more detail, the “Metrotown SkyTrain Station Transit Village Plan – Options and Evaluation.” In 2010, TransLink moved forward on finalizing the station building design with the Durante Kreuk Vector Engineering Perkins + Will expectation of refining the design for the bus exchange following that Key Landscape Stormwater & Civil Architecture process. The 2011 station plan by Stantec (the “Stantec plan”) was Consultants Jennifer Stamp Vic Sagorski Martin Nielsen accompanied by a functional plan for the proposed exchange, detailed in the “Summary Report – Metrotown Station Upgrades Concept Design Confirmation and Schematic Design.”
1.3 Team
This report is the result of a stakeholder interview and design charrette process that involved the following key participants as shown in the chart on the right.
METROtown exchange draft function plan 1 1.4 Project Scope 1.5 Document Structure
This project aimed to address the concerns of key stakeholders, The body of this final report is organized as follows: primarily relating to the design and operational details of the Stantec plan. Following the presentation of the Stantec plan, the City of • Chapter 2 provides a brief summary of the project background and • Chapter 5 provides additional detail on the preferred option that Burnaby raised several specific concerns with the proposed plan, scope was developed after the charrette. including: • Chapter 3 summarizes the charrette process, including all the goals • Chapter 6 describes additional next steps that are necessary before and objectives that were developed, as well as most of the ideas • A desire for better public open space and event spaces at the finalizing the project. that emerged in the charrette. station • Chapter 4 summarizes how each of the options that emerged in • A desire for Beresford street to be a neighborhood retail centre, the charrette were evaluated, and describes how the charrette team a civic art corridor, and a memorable place at the heart of the arrived at one preferred option. city, as well as concerns that the bus facility as designed would compromise their vision for Beresford • Concern that the real estate consumed by bus functions was Figure 1-2 site Context excessive and disruptive to the pedestrian realm and overall vision for the area • Concern that the exchange created a barrier between the Maywood neighbourhood and areas north of Central Boulevard In addition, since the development of the Stantec plan, the City has developed a more detailed vision for significant changes to the Public Library Maywood neighbourhood. The first of these changes will occur with
the development of to the parcel on the south side of the station, civic square known as MetroPlace development, which will be the first major redevelopment in a series of planned projects for Beresford Street and the Maywood neighbourhood.
In order to address these concerns and others, TransLink initially asked the consultant team to evaluate the following options: Metrotown Stn. • Option 1: Shared Beresford: Focus the bus exchange around the station, with buses and cars sharing Beresford Street. site • Option 2: BC Parkway in Beresford: In order to avoid routing the BC Parkway through the exchange, this option had bicycles and cars sharing the Beresford right of way, which effectively separated Bonsor recreation the bus exchange. It included two sub-options: complex 1. Sawtooth curb
2. Straight-curb Maywood Bonsor school park • Option 3: Stantec Plan, with the BC Parkway separating the bus 5 min/ exchange from Beresford. 400m During the charrette process, any option merging the BC Parkway into Beresford was dropped completely due to concerns about interrupting the BC Parkway, and new alternatives emerged that are described in detail in this report. The option numbers were re-used, however. Later in this report references are made to option 1 and option 2, these are new options arising from the charette process and are not related to the above options. 10 min/ 800m Royal Oak Stn.
greenway / park skytrain / BC parkway mall complex bikepath tower walking radius 0 50 100 200m
The context map from the Metro Place development shows the overall Metrotown context, including the BC Parkway, Metropolis, Maywood neighborhood, and recent office and residential tower developments. Source: Metro Place Project, Perkins + Will. Context
2 METROtown exchange draft function plan 2 CHARRETTE process Figure 2-1 Goals and Objectives for Metrotown Exchange Plan
Goals Objectives 2.1 Process Overview Usability: • Wayfinding at Metrotown Exchange should be simple and intuitive, with a legible layout for bus-to-bus, bus-to- The functional plan development was structured around a four-day people first train, and bus-to-neighbouring development connections. charrette held in October 2011 in Burnaby, near the station site. • The exchange is transparent and permeable, creating a clear view along key north/south street corridors in the On 11 October 2011, the consultant team arrived and held separate station area. stakeholder interviews, one with Coast Mountain Bus Company (CMBC) and another with the City of Burnaby later that same day. • The exchange is a universally accessible, safe, and secure environment. The waiting environment provides adequate In the morning of October 12th, the entire group met to set goals and queue space, protection from the elements, transparency and high quality lighting, comfortable furnishings for agree on evaluation criteria for the charrette process. The afternoon of passengers, and CPTED design elements. October 12th included two teams studying two design options, with a • The exchange addresses the needs and hierarchy of all modes, including pedestrians and cyclists, transit, goods pin-up presentation in the late afternoon. A full day of design charrette movement and vehicular travel, and is coordinated with the overall vision and future plan for the Burnaby City was held on October 13th, with a pin-up in the late afternoon. On Centre. October 14th, designs were refined among the consultant team and representatives from the City of Burnaby, CMBC, and TransLink, and • The exchange embraces a human scale with high quality furnishings, general amenities, and artistic elements. a final presentation of the refined design solutions was made in the late afternoon. • The exchange maximizes pedestrian connectivity north/south across the exchange while considering pedestrian safety issues and operational/functional needs. • The exchange balances multi-modal levels of service in the station area, addressing the needs of all modes of 2.2 Goals and Objectives transportation, while prioritizing pedestrians and cyclists.
The workshop group agreed on the goals and objectives for the bus Operations: • The exchange protects and prioritizes bus turning movements while minimizing congestion delay for all modes exchange, which are presented in Figure 2-1. transit efficiency and excessive bus circulation through the exchange area. • The exchange provides functional layover and operator change-out space. • The facility allows for effective management and maintenance of the exchange, while meeting pedestrian and cyclist safety requirements. • Bus service is fully integrated with other modes • The BC Parkway improves travel “through” and “to” the exchange, including secure storage facilities and convenient bike-on-transit integration. Additionally, all streets in the exchange area will provide a safe and comfortable space for cyclists.
Placemaking: • Metrotown exchange is a community asset, integrated with the public realm and iconic in form. The exchange area great places supports the City’s streetscape vision for an active and lively public realm, while maintaining the connection to the Metropolis at Metrotown Mall. • The exchange utilizes sustainable infrastructure, distinct, memorable and iconic architecture, and high quality, long-term materials. Additionally, soft landscaping and transparency create a human scale environment. • The exchange offers a consistent and integrated palette of colours, materials and surface treatments to create coherence across the network and to foster a distinctive identity for the facility. • The exchange is a community amenity, not just a basic functional space. • Individual transit facilities are designed to foster a distinctive identity that respects the local context while still conforming to network wide standards through the use of common, standardized components for a consistent passenger experience.
Environment: • Lighting is dark sky compliant that also creates a safe and transparent exchange. leader in sustainability • Negative environmental impacts and energy consumption are reduced in exchange construction and operations, including on-site stormwater management. • The exchange is designed to minimize absorption and radiation of solar energy, lowering its contribution to temperature increases in surrounding areas and minimizing its contributions to local and regional heat island effects. Accountability: • The exchange aims to minimize ongoing maintenance and operational costs, including labour, materials and fiscally responsible training, as well as consumption of natural and energy resources. • High quality design and revenue-generating opportunities are integrated into the exchange facility and the public realm. • The exchange has a resilient, responsive, and flexible design capable of aging gracefully and scalable to accommodate for future growth. METROtown exchange draft function plan 3 2.3 Revised Options: Round One Beresford Street Vision
During the 11 October stakeholder meeting with the City of Burnaby, During the course of the charrette process, the City articulated the options to be evaluated in the charrette were slightly modified. its vision of a new town centre for the entire Metrotown area. The Discussion during the stakeholder meeting centered on four decisions: City has two key visions for Beresford Street immediately south (1) location of the BC Parkway, (2) bus bay curb alignment, (3) Busway of and adjacent to the station: as an art walk and as a celebration and Beresford Street design, and (4) design of Central Boulevard. The street. The Beresford art walk will include several rotating public art refined concepts that were developed and evaluated in the charrette are installations. The first planned development on Beresford, Metro as follows: Place, will include public art. The art will be predominantly on the south side of the street. The development will provide a continuous 2.3.1. BC Parkway Options facade along the street, with a 6-10 foot setback. There is the Two options were evaluated for the BC Parkway alignment: through opportunity for displays, street trees, outdoor seating, and weather the bus exchange or as a separate path along the south edge of the protection. busway separating Beresford from the busway. The “celebration streets” vision will provide Burnaby with a new 2.3.2. Bus Bay Curb Alignment Options gathering place to celebrate events and national holidays. Beresford The charrette evaluated both a sawtooth and straight-curb alternative Street will act as an outdoor living room, and will accommodate for the exchange busway. formal and informal gatherings. The City acknowledged that there is a challenge in developing a one-sided street, and would like to extend 2.3.3. Beresford Street Options the art to the north side, with details such as pavement patterns and The charrette evaluated two alternatives: a shared busway and vehicle sculptures within the exchange. right of way on Beresford, and a version with the busway and Beresford right of way separated by the BC Parkway (a refined version of the Stantec plan).
Art installation along the Canada Line in Richmond. Source: City of Burnaby
Celebratory street Beresford Art Walk. Source: Metro Place Project, Perkins + Will.BeresfordCelebratory art Street. walk Source: Metro Place Project, Perkins + Will.
An Outdoor Shopping Street
Beresford as a Great Street
4 METROtown exchange draft function plan Currently, the Metropolis entrance from Central Blvd. is hidden Central Blvd is a pedestrian obstacle, but could be improved behind the bus exchange. Relocating most boarding and with corner bulges, and, if supported by traffic studies, a alighting functions across Central Blvd to the SkyTrain station potential “road diet.” could allow the mall to move its front door to the street.
2.3.4. Central Boulevard Options At the end of the stakeholder interviews, there were strong sentiments During the stakeholder interviews, the group decided to look further towards limiting pickups and drop-offs to the proposed exchange, into the possibility of narrowing and modifying the travel lanes on thereby removing most foot traffic from the existing exchange. See Central adjacent to the exchange in order to be able to widen the section 4.4 for more detail. This alternative was studied with the sidewalks and passenger waiting zones on the northern edge of the understanding that connectivity to the mall must be maintained. exchange, and potentially enhance the mall façade. 2.3.5.2. Pedestrian access/crossing issues The charrette evaluated several modifications to Central Boulevard, The Metrotown exchange is an active pedestrian environment, with including variations in lane width, number of lanes, on-street parking complex movements to, from, within and across the exchange, as shown and bus pull-outs, an on-street bicycle lane, and removal of the center in the pedestrian flow diagram in Figure 4-2. New development in turn lane/median. the Maywood neighbourhood will add additional foot traffic to the area. Making the area legible, comfortable and safe for the additional Specifically, the group studied three concepts: pedestrian demand is one of the primary project goals. (For detail on how pedestrian flows were addressed, see Section 4.2.) 1. Narrowing the lanes but maintaining the current layout (2 westbound lanes + 2 eastbound lanes and a center turn lane). The City is interested in pavement treatments that would unify the multiple pathways and create a visual connection across Beresford Landscaping reinforces the linearity of the site and enhances station identity without interrupting pedestrian views or circulation 2. Reducing the number of lanes on Central Blvd, with one lane in Street and through the exchange. This also connects to the need to across the site. Source: City of Burnaby each direction and a center turn lane. This would potentially create create a strong visual corridor across the exchange, in line with the ends more room for the sidewalk and bus stop waiting area on the of Silver Avenue and Telford Avenue, which currently dead end at the southern curb of Central Blvd through the exchange. This option exchange. The City would like to explore the options of moving station would also potentially include parking on the north curb of Central buildings to improve visibility north/south through the exchange. Blvd alongside the mall. The pedestrian needs of the site must also be balanced with the 3. Removing the center turn lane to gain sidewalk width on the south operational requirements of transit vehicles moving through the site. side of Central Blvd (north side of the exchange) while maintaining Due to the high volume of buses that will travel through the exchange, two through lanes in each direction. it is critical that crosswalk design meet TransLink standards for operator sight lines. 2.3.5. Other key issues addressed in the charrette 2.3.5.1. Layover facility needs and passenger pickup/drop-off at the mall During stakeholder interviews, CMBC expressed concerned about the operational challenges of picking up and dropping off passengers at both the mall and the new bus exchange. There is also concern that high ridership routes with already long queues will lead to passengers preferring to wait at the layover facility.
Other concerns relate to the undesirable pedestrian environment of the existing layover exchange. The mall’s “front door” is hidden from street view, tucked in behind a long walkway. Access to the existing exchange does not meet TransLink Accessibility Guidelines and passengers with a disability cannot easily cross from the SkyTrain to the existing bus exchange. Crosswalks on Central Boulevard are limited, and there are high incidences of jaywalking.
METROtown exchange draft function plan 5 2.3.6. street-level environment The City has been working to improve the form of the built environment at the street level, and would like the station and exchange to enhance and encourage this vision. In addition, the mall contributes to half of the transit ridership at Metrotown and it is important to provide a more inviting entrance to the mall on the street level, particularly with the removal of passenger pickup and drop-off from the existing exchange on the mall side of Central Boulevard. The City is interested in seeing designs that would enhance the mall’s prominence along Central Boulevard, potentially by widening the existing pathway. While not entirely meeting the goals of encouraging street-level pedestrian activity, the existing passarelle provides weather protected access between the SkyTrain station and the Metropolis at Metrotown.
The Metro Vancouver area has several excellent examples of SkyTrain stations and bus exchanges that are also engaging and high-quality pedestrian environments.
2.3.7. high quality materials A key value emphasized by representatives of the City of Burnaby during stakeholder interviews and the design charrette is the use of high-quality design materials. There is also a strong desire from the city to see pedestrian barriers designed in a way that does not obstruct views or disrupt the aesthetics of the station area.
Pervious landscaping integrated with seating areas flank the elevated guideway in Richmond. Landscape and stormwater treatment enhances pedestrian environment under guideway in Source: City of Burnaby. Richmond. Source: City of Burnaby.
Community news boards surround structural column in Richmond. Source: City of Burnaby. Guideway seating and other pedestrian amenities. Source: City of Burnaby.
Source of photos: Ian Wasson, City of Burnaby. Location of photos: Canada Line, Richmond.
6 METROtown exchange draft function plan 3 EVALULATION OF OPTIONS Figure 3-1 Intersection at East End The exit of the exchange on the west end must also be designed with Figure 3-2 Intersection at West End of Exchange great care, allowing buses to reliably exit the exchange and continue of Exchange This section provides a detailed description of each element considered either east or west on Central, or north on McKay, with minimal in the design charrette for the Metrotown exchange, including issues, congestion delays. At the same time, it will be important to design the options, and conclusions. This section starts with a description of the BC Parkway and other pedestrian crosswalks in such a way to minimize design elements where consensus was readily achieved, followed by a conflicts between buses and non-motorized travelers. thorough analysis of the more controversial issues. Detailed meeting minutes are available in Appendix A. There is concern that northbound traffic at McKay and Central will block the busway exit. Signal pre-emption, whereby transit vehicles could manipulate signals for priority access, will likely be necessary 3.1 Common Recommended Elements to move buses smoothly out of the exchange. Heading northbound on McKay and approaching Central, there would need to be a right 3.1.1. exchange connections to Beresford and Central turn and thru traffic lane. Buses would not be limited to a single lane In all options, roadway connections are made between Beresford and but would use the entire northbound approach to turn westbound or Central, both at McKay west of the exchange, and across from the eastbound onto Central Blvd. (refer to Appendix C for bus turning Metropolis parkade entry, immediately east of the exchange. Both of movements at this location). McKay southbound approaching these connections interrupt the BC Parkway and must accommodate Beresford would be one lane, and would widen to include an extra left high volumes of buses, bicycles, and pedestrians, so great care must be turn lane to keep traffic moving. taken in their design. Prohibiting left turns off eastbound Beresford onto McKay may prevent To minimize transit delay, there should be a transit-only lane at the vehicles from queuing in the BC Parkway crossing when the signal at east entry to the exchange, along with a protected (signalized) left-turn Central and McKay is red. The intersection at McKay and Beresford lanes with transit priority, allowing buses to safely and efficiently access would be signal-controlled. the exchange.
Note: only Option 1 shown. Option 2 has similar configuration. Note: only Option 1 shown. Option 2 has similar configuration.
METROtown exchange draft function plan 7 3.1.2. Accommodating private passenger drop-off/kiss and ride 3.1.6. Green design strategies to manage onsite storm water runoff In the first few years after the exchange is rebuilt, it may be practical Large rain gardens are included in the planned development on the to have the kiss and ride in a lay-by on Central, west of the bus stops. south side of Beresford to control runoff. These rain gardens could When the HandyDART needs to move onto the north side of Central be mirrored along the south edge of the exchange, potentially under in that space, it may be necessary to move the kiss and ride to another the guideway. Landscaping under the station mezzanine would have location. One potential location might be the curb space east of the southern exposure and could be watered through rainwater collection exchange on Beresford and Central. Taxi stands could also be located at the station. The location of BC Hydro ducts will determine the final along Beresford, east of the transit exchange. Realistically, passenger orientation of rain gardens and plantings. drop-offs will happen anywhere on the curb, but if passenger pickups, which take longer, are housed in a convenient location, compliance will 3.1.7. Adjustment of station buildings to improve view corridors be more likely, and enforcement more acceptable. through the exchange If possible, station buildings should be positioned to allow for openings 3.1.3. pedestrian access to the exchange that correspond with the termini of Silver and Telford. Raised crosswalks within the busway create operational challenges and passenger discomfort, and should not be used within the exchange. The The bike parking station should be moved to the west adjacent to the crosswalks would be treated with a consistent paver design that would elevators and stair access to the station. The planned retail near the extend beyond the crosswalks to designate pedestrian crossings. The west entrance can also be shifted over to clear the visibility from Silver goal is to create an environment that feels urban and comfortable for through the station. The BC Parkway is currently shared by cyclists and pedestrians, The current bus platform is functional but uninviting. pedestrians and protects transit from unpredictable pedestrian crossings but in the future would have separated paths. without the use of restrictive fences surrounding the busway.
On Beresford south of the busway, there would be crosswalks on all sides of the three-way intersections, provided adequate bus spacing and bus clearance from the crosswalk can be achieved.
Operationally, buses need to be six meters behind the pedestrian crosswalks in the busway in order for one bus to see the crosswalk around another bus. However, to optimize operations and safety, 12.5m between buses and the crosswalk is ideal. Within the exchange, this 12.5m buffer has been maintained, except at crosswalk locations with a stop bar, where at least 6m is attained. In the bus bay, there should also be 21 meters between the nose of one articulated bus and the tail of another articulated bus.
3.1.4. enhance passenger waiting environment The passenger waiting environment should shelter riders from the elements, without obstructing bus operations or reducing visibility across the exchange.
Bus shelters near bus bays will be the length of articulated buses. It is important to keep trees back from bus loading zones to retain flexibility. The existing passarelle connects passengers directly from the Pedestrian connections between the station and current bus Three meters is the optimal distance between tree plantings and busway station mezzanine to the second floor of the Metropolis Mall. exchange are poor. curb edge. It is also important to keep trees two meters from the mezzanine to avoid conflict. Large, gracious trees with high canopies will improve sightlines from crosswalks and maximize the visibility of pedestrians crossing the busway.
3.1.5. Design details for BC Parkway The BC Parkway would remain eight meters wide throughout the length of the exchange, with a four meter wide bikeway and a four meter wide pedestrian-only path. A 50 centimetre cobble/rumble strip and signage should separate the bikeway and the pedestrian path to prevent crossovers by cyclists or pedestrians. The bikeway will be broken with a strip of contrasting paving to alert bikers of an upcoming pedestrian crossing.
8 METROtown exchange draft function plan Figure 3-3 Central Boulevard Design
3.2 Central Boulevard Rechannelization may reduce the need for 3.5 meter wide lanes to accommodate bus 3.2.5. Recommendation The approach to Central Boulevard is largely independent of the through movements. Lane widths along Central could be adjusted to: recommendations that follow. Future analysis determining if lanes may Central Boulevard is classified as a primary collector by the City of The City of Burnaby has not performed an analysis on the number • 3.5 meter curb lane of lanes necessary to maintain adequate level of service (LOS), or be reduced along Central would not invalidate the recommendations Burnaby. The street is 20 meters wide, curb-to-curb, and currently has for the layover facility, bus bays, or Beresford Street. two travel lanes in each direction, as well as a median/center turn lane. transit and automobile through-put, on Central Boulevard. The only • 3.3 meter through (inside) lane data available shows peak hour peak direction volume on Central to The pedestrian realm along the north side of Central ranges in width 1 from 1.5m to 6m. The sidewalk on the south edge is narrow, particularly • 3.1 meter left-turn lane be about 600 vehicles. The City believes there is the potential for a at the SkyTrain guideway columns. There are several approaches for significant increase in total trips on Central and Beresford due to future improving Central for pedestrians, all of which are applicable to each of 3.2.3. Option C: Lane reduction on Central development. An additional 5,000-10,000 people are expected to reside the exchange options: in the Maywood neighbourhood in the near future. It is also important Removing one lane in either travel direction from Central would to realize that this will also increase the number of pedestrians in the maximize the amount of space for pedestrian travel and queue space at 3.2.1. Option A: Eliminate bus pull-out lane area significantly. There is a great need to accommodate pedestrian the exchange, and would make Central less of a pedestrian barrier. By If buses need to pull out of the outside travel lane to reach their movements and access to the station and the Metropolis at Metrotown moving to a three-lane configuration, there would be room for bike mall. stops along Central, the transit passenger queue space is limited to lanes on the street, or parking and an additional three to six meters for 2.5 meters, making it tight for passengers and very difficult for other pedestrian queue space on the south side of Central at the station site. For the purposes of this report, two through lanes in each direction and pedestrians circulating across the exchange. If buses stopped in-lane, one center, shared left turn lane are assumed, pending further analysis operations would be more efficient. Buses would not have to merge While there is ample width for bike lanes on Central under the three- from the City. The existing north curb of Central will remain, and the back into traffic, then cross into one more lane to the left in advance of lane configuration, such facilities might be undesirable due to conflicts south side of Central will be utilized for curb-side drop-off west of the left turn into the layover facility, which is a distance of less than one with buses pulling away from the curb and crossing an on-street bike the west station house for three articulated buses. To lay over, buses block. If buses stop in the curb lane, the sidewalk could be widened to lane and the eastbound travel lane to get to the northbound left turn will utilize a facility on the north side of Central within the current approximately 6.5 meters. At the charrette, the City agreed to allow pocket and enter the layover facility. exchange, crossing only one lane of traffic to enter the left turn pocket drop-off in the curb lane, but not boardings or layovers, so it may and into the layover facility. In subsequent design phases, the travel be possible to concentrate all boardings on the Beresford side of the While this option would be advantageous to pedestrian accommodation lanes should be reduced to the minimum practicable width agreeable to exchange until there is no more capacity, and bus pull-outs added to on site, the City would need to perform further study to determine the City and TransLink. Outside travel lanes are assumed to be 3.5m Central later. if removing vehicular functionality on Central would meet their wide, while inner travel lanes and the shared left turn lane/median are requirements, particularly given the significant growth planned for the 3.3m wide. The eastbound bus-only lane is 4.5m wide. 3.2.2. Option B: Narrow travel lanes town centre. The travel lanes on Central are currently 3.5 meters wide. By narrowing The rest of the south curb of Central at the exchange will feature two 3.2.4. Option D: Eliminate center turn lane on Central, maintain the inner travel lanes, additional width could be gained for queue space pull-in bays. Drop-off, layover, and pickup activities for community two lanes in either direction and sidewalks at the exchange. Lane widths require the agreement of shuttles and HandyDART will take place in the west bay flanked by both the City (they control the streets) and TransLink (to ensure they This option was not considered in depth because it was determined two curb extensions, which shorten the distance for pedestrians to cross are adequate for bus operations). Bus operators prefer 3.5 meter lanes to that a center turn lane on this segment of Central is critical for bus Central. A second pull-in bay at the east end of the exchange will minimize damage to mirrors and ease operations. However, 3.5 meters operations. The median also provides an essential pedestrian refuge in facilitate independent drop-off, layover, and pickup activities for two may not be necessary for all lanes on Central. The City also noted that crossing Central. 12.3 meter long standard buses. the buses pulling out of the drop-off only stops on the Central side of the future exchange will not operate substantially in either lane as they will be crossing the inside lane only to enter the left turn lane. This 1 Stuart Ramsey, City of Burnaby, Stakeholder Meeting with the City of Burnaby, October 11, 2011.
METROtown exchange draft function plan 9 Figure 3-4 Straight Bus Bay Alignment
3.3 Straight-curb Bus Bay Alignment also provide additional space for pedestrians, and curb bulb-outs along Central Boulevard shorten the street crossing distance. Analysis performed during the charrette showed that a straight-curb bus bay alignment for the Metrotown exchange can serve all of the In the long term, the Community Shuttles could be shifted onto necessary bays in the exchange, while improving passenger queue space Central, as shown in Figure 3-3, which would not be necessary until and urban design elements and maintain future transit operations there are six routes operating with articulated buses. In the meantime, flexibility. The sawtooth bay design proposed in Stantec 2011 does not shuttles can operate on Beresford in the same lay-by for pickup and provide any operational advantages over straight-curb bays. Given the drop-off as the HandyDART. Figure 3-4 shows the long-term scenario length of the exchange between Telford and McKay, five articulated with five articulated buses and one standard bus within the exchange independent arrival / independent departure bus bays plus one standard and shuttles and HandyDART picking up and dropping off along independent arrival / independent departure bus bay are able to be Central Boulevard. accommodated (i.e. buses may enter the exchange, pull into any bus bay regardless of whether adjacent bays are full, and exit the bay as scheduled). A straight-curb alignment provides the operator with the most flexibility to alter vehicle size or stop location, as demand warrants. The straight curb alignment also makes the pedestrian space within the exchange deeper, meaning a gentler sweep of the bus turning westbound on Beresford. Instead of continuously turning 180 degrees, buses will make two 90 degree turns separated by a longer straight-away section. This will increase operator sightlines and improve pedestrian and bicyclist safety.
A deeper exchange also creates more space for pedestrians. While still providing full flexibility and meeting transit operational requirements, the straight-curb allows for a narrower pavement footprint. Compared to a sawtooth bay configuration, this arrangement allows Beresford to appear more “street-like,” with a 7.5 meter wide lane for buses to lay-by at the curb as well as safely bypass another bus. The straight- curb alignment also holds advantages for urban design; not only does it widen the available pedestrian realm, but it makes the exchange feel like an enclosed urban street. The east side of the proposed exchange will
10 METROtown exchange draft function plan 3.4 Layover Facility Redesign 3.4.2. Issue: Maintain excellent transit access to the mall while 3.4.3 Issue: Meet current and future demand for bus layover space. By redesigning the interior of the exchange and wrapping the space promoting a street-level urban environment and providing an TransLink predicts a demand for 11 operational spaces, including seven between the layover facility and the sidewalk on Central, retail frontage During the charrette, the team’s study of the operational needs for intuitive and clear layout for bus pickup and drop-offs. spaces for articulated buses, two spaces for standard buses, and space for could be developed. Central would become more of an urban street and the exchange led to a groundbreaking shift from the Stantec 2011 The narrow pedestrian way west of the layover facility would be two trolleys at the Metrotown exchange.2 The layover facility redesign less of a bypass route. This would potentially have the effect of moving plan’s functional concept. Previous plans envisioned two bus stops at expanded to three times wider than its current width. The barrier would accommodate the minimum functional design requirements, the front door of the mall out to the street, and could be enhanced by Metrotown for each route—one north of Central at the mall and one at between that path and the layover facility would be a low wall, to mirror providing a total of 14 operational spaces, including four articulated the presence of on-street parking, if the City of Burnaby chooses to the SkyTrain station. New analysis re-envisions the existing exchange as the one used between the BC Parkway and the exchange busway and bus spaces with independent arrival and independent departure; five modify Central. This location would also be especially convenient for a layover facility with passenger drop-off and pickup of only the electric help differentiate the pedestrian realm from the transit realm. This will articulated bus spaces with sequential arrival independent pull out; pedestrians traveling between the SkyTrain station and the Mall. trolley (Route 19). An option to relocate the trolley was considered; serve to funnel foot traffic to the north wall of the layover facility, to a and three articulated bus spaces for first in / first out operations. There however, relocating Route 19 would be prohibitively complicated and mall entrance and pickup/drop-off for Route 19. The alley that is west would also be , pickup and drop-off and layover space for two Route 19 3.4.5. Recommendations costly due to the need to construct overhead trolley wire throughout the of the layover facility could be separated from the walkway with low trolleys, operating in a first in / first out fashion similar to operations • Concentrate all boardings and alightings around the new proposed exchange on the south side the new island. The remaining bollards, to send a message about pedestrian priority in that space, or within the current exchange. Note that the location of the route 19 Metrotown exchange under the SkyTrain station, with the routes can be accommodated fully in the proposed exchange, with the alley and pedestrian walkway could be converted into a generous operating area does not require and passenger/pedestrian mixing with exception of the #19, which will board and alight in the current layover taking place in the redesigned existing exchange north of shared space. The pedestrian way east of the layover facility extending transit operations traffic. The operating area is located against the exchange. Central. from the Central Blvd crosswalk connects the mall and SkyTrain north edge of the re-designed exchange. Refer to Figure 3-5 and the • Improve pedestrian connections to the mall with This redesign will allow a clear and consistent operational scheme to station. A retaining wall separates the layover facility and the walkway appendix for full operational assumptions of the layover facility. There pedestrian crossings. be communicated to passengers. It will also increase passenger safety, east of the layover facility. Between the retaining wall and colonnade, a would also be an operators’ facility on (what is currently) the pedestrian reduce pedestrian exposure to buses making complicated turning minimum clearance of 3m is provided, refer to Figure 3-5. island in the layover facility. • Develop façade options for the mall. movements, and increase predictability among both bus operators and Patrons traveling between the mall and the bus exchange or SkyTrain 3.4.4. Issue: Create an enhanced pedestrian environment on pedestrians. Pedestrians will have little cause to dart between buses station would likely cross Central at the ground level, though some Central by developing retail frontage along the southern edge in the layover facility, as only the electric trolley will utilize this area may still use the passarelle. For passengers crossing at ground level, the of the planned layover facility. for drop-off and pickup activities and that operation will be at the pedestrian environment could be improved as described in Section 4.1. north curb face, meaning passengers do not need to cross the pathway of any moving vehicles to reach the passenger pick-up and drop-off bay for route 19 . Assigning each route to a singular drop-off and 2 13 December 2011 Translink Metrotown Functional Design Criteria pickup location will improve wayfinding and eliminate possible Central Boulevard crossings by passengers making SkyTrain to bus transfers. Figure 3-5 Layover Facility Image
In this new concept, routes coming from the east would drop off passengers on the south side of the proposed exchange, loop around and layover at the existing exchange, and would go back into the proposed exchange to pick up passengers. Routes coming from the west would drop off on the Central side of the proposed exchange, cross one lane of traffic, turn left to enter the layover facility, and then go back into the proposed exchange and pick up on the south side of the exchange. In total, the facility can accommodate the layover of 12 articulated buses and the pickup, drop-off and layover of two Route 19 standard trolleys. Full operational assumptions for the layover facility are detailed in the appendix. Design vehicle specifications can be found in Appendix B.
It must also be pointed out that the re-design of the facility envisions a complete re-build of the center island including removal of the escalator from the second level of the mall as the island would no longer serve a transit passenger function.
There are several attendant issues that the relocation of the layover facility and passenger drop-off/pick-up addresses. These issues are discussed below:
3.4.1. Issue: Simplify transit operations from the proposed Stantec 2011 concept, minimizing the need for buses to loop around the exchange and cross unsignalized pedestrian crosswalks. If each line only has one boarding location in the Metrotown station area, operations will be more efficient and less confusing to passengers. It may be desirable to have buses stop and layover in the same place to avoid looping. However, the City of Burnaby desires not to have buses in layover on Central Boulevard thus occupying a travel lane. This option would also imply a need for curb adjustments on Central to accommodate bus layover space out of traffic, rather than performing passenger pick-up and drop-off in lane.
The proposed new layover facility accommodates future bus improvements. For more details, see the Appendices.
METROtown exchange draft function plan 11 3.5 Option 1: Separated Beresford 3.5.3. Issue: Safely accommodate BC Parkway and pedestrian operator concerns and conflicts with pedestrians crossing the bike sidewalk without causing potential interference with bus way. In this option, the busway and Beresford are separated by the BC operations or compromising the standard of a four meter Parkway. It should be noted that the option numbers represent new wide separated bikeway and four meter wide pedestrian 3.5.4. Issue: Prevent undesired pedestrian crossings through the options conceived at the charrette and are not synonymous with the way. busway without installing unattractive barrier fencing. option numbers outlined in Chapter 2. This arrangement allows for a four meter bikeway and four meter Between crosswalks, there is a need for some form of barrier between the sidewalk, BC Parkway, and the busway. A fence would prevent 3.5.1. Issue: Provide enough independent arrival / independent pedestrian way, adjacent to a 7.5 meter straight-curb busway. There crossing, but would also be an unwelcome and unsightly physical departure bus bays to accommodate current and future needs, would be 1.8 meters remaining for separation between Beresford barrier in the neighbourhood. The aim is not to sequester residents on while supporting an active pedestrian environment. and the bicycle and pedestrian pathways, which could accommodate a row of small trees, and a one meter zone for separation between one side of the fence and transit riders on the other. This project will This arrangement would create a seven to nine meter deep pedestrian the busway and the paths. This 1.8 meter area would not be follow the best practice examples for pedestrian barriers. A low stone waiting area on the south side of the exchange. While the optimal sufficient to accommodate a functional rain garden, since at least wall between the bikeway and the busway is an optimal solution, if it depth depends on the amount of furniture, nine meters provides two meters are recommended for this location. is well-designed (see image at right). more flexibility for design of shelters, wind screens, and trees. The 7.5 meter wide busway is sufficient to allow buses to bypass each other for The pedestrian way could be designed to mirror the sidewalk on A rumble strip should be used to create separation between the independent arrivals and independent departures. bikeway and pedway. The pedestrian pathway would have benches the south edge of Beresford, creating a more two-sided urban Through the Olympic Village in Vancouver, bicyclists and environment. The bikeway and pedestrian way should be separated and furniture to create a more inviting environment and effectively 3.5.2. Issue: Allow Beresford Street to be closed to motor vehicles pedestrians have separated paths. to discourage modal conflicts. This option allows for each leg of channel pedestrians into intersections at designated crosswalks. for public celebrations. the intersections along Beresford to have a crosswalk, but more Low bollard lighting is a solution to provide maximum visibility of This option allows the City to shut down Beresford without effectively channelizes the pedestrians into designated crossings of pedestrians in crosswalks without excessive overhead lighting. significantly impacting bus operations. the bikeway and busway at Telford and Silver. This minimizes bus
Figure 3-6 Option 1 from Design Charrette
12 METROtown exchange draft function plan 3.5.5. Recommendation This option has efficient bus operations and improved roadway safety by minimizing conflicts among different users. While the separated exchange requires more total impervious surface or roadway space, it allows Beresford Street to feel more like a “street,” and to be closed for special events without requiring extensive rerouting of the transit system. During the charrette, it was decided that the pedestrian way should be on the southern edge of the path, to give pedestrians maximum sunlight exposure and to mirror the sidewalk on the south side of Beresford. Figure 3-7 Option 1 Plan and Section
METROtown exchange draft function plan 13 3.6 Option 2: Shared Beresford 3.6.1. Issue: Provide enough independent arrival / independent the Burnaby Civic Plaza and the public library, located west of McKay, This option does not allow for all legs of all intersections to have departure bus bays to accommodate current and future needs, between Willingdon and McKay, to reduce conflicts between the crosswalks across Beresford, which is seen by the city as a disadvantage In this option, the northernmost lane of Beresford Street would while supporting an active pedestrian environment. community event and transit operations . of the plan. In order to accommodate six bays with appropriate spacing function as part of the Metrotown bus exchange. Bus bays along Bus operators would prefer to have a straight-curb alignment for between the bays, crosswalks across Beresford could only be installed on Beresford would accommodate pickup and drop-off movements. bus bays when operating on a general purpose street. In this option, 3.6.3. Issue: Accommodate passenger drop-off space and discourage the eastern side of the intersections along Beresford. In this option, the BC Parkway would run east-west through the straight-curb orientation is especially desirable, allowing Beresford to illegal stopping / parking in the busway. exchange plaza. The width of Beresford Street would be 13 meters to function like a standard street with a bus-only lane. If a straight-curb on Bus operations in this configuration would be complicated by the There is concern that pedestrians will be drawn away from the southern accommodate a four meter wide outside lane for buses, a 3.5 meter the north side of Beresford is used (instead of the sawtooth curb shown presence of private automobiles in the busway, and there would be an edge of Beresford by the presence of the pedestrian path of the BC wide westbound lane for through traffic, and 5.5 meters for a travel lane in the Stantec 2011 plan), there would be a larger buffer between the increased potential for illegal stopping along the curb in the bus only Parkway, as it will have better solar exposure. This is problematic only eastbound plus parking. Landscaping would accommodate stormwater pedestrian way along Beresford and the bikeway, while still maintaining lane. Signage and enforcement would be necessary to combat this issue. in as much as it creates more congestion in the bus pickup and drop-off and provide thermal comfort and visual separation of the bike lane from five meters of passenger queue space. This option also allows for a larger areas. other uses. plaza immediately south of the station (and north of the bikeway). 3.6.4. Issue: Safely accommodate eight meter wide BC Parkway and pedestrian sidewalk through the exchange without 3.6.5. Conclusions This option would provide eight meters of passenger queue space along 3.6.2. Issue: Allow Beresford Street to be closed to motor vehicles interference with bus operations. Discourage jaywalking From a service delivery perspective, the shared Beresford option will Beresford’s north curb, separated from the four meter wide bikeway for public celebrations. across Beresford. be more challenging to implement and involve additional safety issues by two meter wide planters. There would be a remaining five to seven This option requires buses to interact with the BC Parkway at the such as increased conflicts between buses and pedestrians, buses and meters for pedestrian circulation between the BC Parkway buffer While closing the entire Beresford right of way for special events would intersections on the east and west ends of the exchange. Depending autos, and bikes and pedestrians. A bus operating on Beresford shared landscaping on its north edge and the station buildings. Issues related be logistically challenging, it might be possible to close most of the on the volume of bicycles and pedestrians on the parkway, this could with traffic is operationally more challenging than the independent to the option are discussed below. street while maintaining access for the busway. It might be preferable in this option to shift the focal point of Celebration Streets westward to significantly hinder bus operations and lead to safety concerns from the busway in the separated Beresford Option 1. Routing the BC Parkway operators due to the increase in conflicts with non-motorized traffic on through the exchange also results in increased conflicts. BC Parkway.
Figure 3-8 Option 2 from Design Charrette
14 METROtown exchange draft function plan Figure 3-9 Option 2 Plan and Section
METROtown exchange draft function plan 15 3.7 Option 3: Stantec Plan
The 2011 Stantec Plan is shown as reference in Figure 3-10.
Figure 3-10 2011 Stantec Plan
16 METROtown exchange draft function plan 3.8 Evaluation of Options o Improved pedestrian crossings and walkways to the mall will be necessary to ensure that this major transit destination remains Figure 3-11 below provides an overall evaluation of how well each easily accessible with an intuitive pathway for bus transit option supports the goals and objectives described in Chapter 3. The customers. specific advantages of the preferred option, Separated Beresford, are provided below. It should be noted that the option numbers represent 3.8.2. Operations new options conceived at the charrette and are not synonymous with • The preferred option significantly improves bus circulation the option numbers outlined in Chapter 2. throughout the exchange area, and provides enhanced driver facilities in the improved bus layover area at the mall. In all categories, Option 1: Separated Beresford performance as well or better than the other options studied, making is the preferred • The design provides an optimal level of separation among buses, alternative. More detail comparing Option 1 to the other options is cars, through cyclists, through pedestrians, crossing pedestrians provided below. and transit passengers, while allowing the entire exchange area to be sufficiently permeable to pedestrians. Figure 3-11 Evaluation Summary • Further work is required to define the operational feasibility of this concept given CMBC concerns with the layover facility. Option 1: Option 3.8.3. Placemaking Separated 2: Shared Option 3: Goals Beresford Beresford Stantec Plan • The functional plan identifies significant opportunities for improved station facility design and public realm, along with Usability: Good Fair Poor sustainable infrastructure including full mitigation of on-site people first stormwater. Operations: Excellent Fair Fair • As discussed in the charrette, both designs could facilitate major transit community celebrations, allowing for the full closure of Beresford efficiency Street, as well as a major public open space to the west of the Placemaking: Good Good Poor exchange. great places • Potential concerns to be mitigated: Environment: Good Good Good leader in o Significant additional work must be conducted beyond this sustainability functional plan to ensure high quality design details. Accountability: Very Good Fair Fair o Funding must be identified to pay for a high level of design, fiscally including partnerships among different public agencies and responsible private developers.
3.8.1. Usability 3.8.4. Environment • From a transit passenger, path user, nearby resident, and visitor • The plan supports daylighting, stormwater management strategies, perspective, the preferred option is a significant improvement on energy management and climate comfort recommendations. both the 2007 Metrotown SkyTrain Station Transit Village Plan— • Potential concerns to be mitigated: Options and Evaluation and 2010 Summary Report—Metrotown Station Upgrades Concept Design Confirmation and Schematic Design, o Significant additional work must be conducted beyond this and represents the optimal choice among the different options functional plan to ensure high quality design details. evaluated in this study. o Funding must be identified to pay for a high level of design, • Potential passenger confusion – including having some passengers including partnerships among different public agencies and rush across Central to be assured of a seat by boarding the bus at private developers. its first pick-up – is significantly reduced by having buses board at only one location in the consolidated exchange. 3.8.5. Accountability • Due to more time efficient operations, the preferred concept • Crosswalks are provided along all key pedestrian desire lines, and significantly reduces bus operating costs compared to the Stantec by moving various station elements, sightlines are improved across Plan, allowing for more sustainable bus operations. The preferred the exchange. option results in somewhat improved operating costs compared • The exchange is widened as much as practicable to increase to Option2 due to reduced bus delay due to traffic interference on passenger queue area. Beresford. • By routing the BC Parkway separately, conflicts among modes are • The plan considers reduced energy costs, along with better options minimized. for revenue-generating uses in the exchange area. • The plan proposes a high level of urban design amenity, in keeping • Potential concerns to be mitigated: with the City’s vision for the area. o Funding must be identified to pay for a high level of design, • Potential concerns to be mitigated: including partnerships among different public agencies and private developers. o Improved wayfinding will be necessary to help passengers find the stop for Route 19, the one bus that will not serve the consolidated exchange.
METROtown exchange draft function plan 17 4 PREFERRED OPTION The following figures incorporate all of the technical recommendations above, along with additional precedent images to highlight design qualities.
Figure 4-1 Preferred Option Plan and Section
18 METROtown exchange draft function plan 4.1 Landscape recommendations 4.2 Pedestrian Flow
The BC Parkway would remain eight meters wide throughout the As shown in the Pedestrian Flow diagram, Figure 4-2, the preferred length of the exchange, with a four meter wide bikeway and a four option accommodates a complex array of pedestrian patterns, including: meter wide pedestrian-only path. A 50 centimetre cobble/rumble • From surrounding land uses to and from SkyTrain and the strip and signage should separate the bikeway and the pedestrian path exchange to prevent crossovers by cyclists or pedestrians. The bikeway will be broken with a strip of contrasting paving to alert bikers of an upcoming • Between buses and SkyTrain pedestrian crossing. Custom wood slat benches at the BC Parkway • Transfers among different buses crosswalk interfaces, directs pedestrians to crosswalks and prevents them from entering the bikeway. A planted strip separates the Parkway • Across the exchange between Maywood and the mall and the Bus loop. It is suggested that a combination of a public art fences and a low concrete walls will provide safety/ separation/ and a unique opportunity for human scaled public art. Consistent integrated palette of colours, high quality materials and surface treatments’ are used throughout to create a coherent and distinct identity for the Figure 4-2 Primary Pedestrian Flow Diagram exchange. Public art is also proposed in key locations throughout to further enrich the transit exchange.
The north/south relationship is essential for efficiency and safety in the Legend Primary Pedestrian Flow Diagram Metrotown exchange; this is achieved by maintaining permeable and Metropolis at Metrotown Mall 9826 Average Weekday transparent views throughout the site. A contemporary paving pattern SkyTrain boardings oriented in the north/south direction also encourages this pedestrian Avg Weekday connectivity experience. Crosswalks are treated with a consistent paving 5737 Bus Loop boardings design that extends beyond the crosswalks to prioritize pedestrian Primary Bus Connec- crossing and accentuate the north/south correlation. Not only is the tions north/south connection important, but also the bicycle and pedestrian Primary Skytrain and Station Square Mall parkway through the Metrotown exchange will link seamlessly into the Neighborhood 20 km long BC Parkway, providing further regional connectivity. Connections Passarelle The preliminary landscape design for the exchange is thoughtful and sustainable. Narrow crowned trees on the north side of the exchange Bike Path have been located 3m from the curb to allow for passengers exiting buses, while still providing a green buffer from the platform above. Key Pedestrian Sight- Rain gardens are used on the east and west sides of the exchange to lines mitigate the on-site storm water. The paving of the exchange is sloped to a central slot drain that in turn feeds the rain gardens, which would otherwise be dry under the platform during the winter. The pedestrian path is buffered from Beresford traffic by a 1.5m boulevard with street Central Boulevard trees and modern lighting fixtures. Shelters that extend the length of an articulated bus are proposed along the south side of the exchange to BAY 7 BAY 8 SHUTTLE provide rain protection for waiting passengers. Trees on the south side of the exchange have been located to allow for clear site lines for bus Stairs Elevators Stairs manoeuvring and to provide greenery and shade for transit users. BAY 1 BAY 2 BAY 3 BAY 4 BAY 5 BAY 6 Busway BC Parkway
Beresford Street
Lane
Silver Avenue
McKay Avenue Avenue Telford
Slot drain collects water run-off to redistribute on-site. Source: Marshall’s Water Management
METROtown exchange draft function plan 19 5 NEXT STEPS: • In the layover facility, the AutoTurn design speed is 10km/hr, except for parked buses. Where buses are stationed 5m apart, RESOLUTION OF turning movements have been modeled at an initial starting speed of 3km/hour; however, it is not the TransLink operational OUTSTANDING ISSUES & standard. DESIGN DEVELOPMENT • Bus clearances through the exchange and layover facility may require closer scrutiny to ensure they meet minimum distances required by TransLink engineering. 5.1 Traffic Analysis on Central Blvd
Steps to reach decision on lane modifications for Central Blvd: • Constraints from the surrounding network to limit vehicle growth • Increased vehicle connections between Central and Beresford • Signal phasing changes • Discussion with City Council
5.2 Discussion with Metropolis at Metrotown Mall Management
Discuss reconfiguration of layover facility, moving bus service out of that facility, and the potential for new retail development.
5.3 station Building Design Modifications:
TransLink to update station designs to incorporate changes to accommodate viewsheds off Telford and Silver.
5.4 bus Re-routing at Willingdon/McKay
CMBC pointed out that Route 106 comes from the east but enters Metrotown from the west, so it may make sense to adjust its routing. The design of the exchange accommodates buses approaching from all directions.
5.5 Pedestrian Access
Investigate wayfinding improvements to help passengers find the stop for Route 19, the one bus that will not serve the consolidated exchange.
5.6 AutoTurn Modeling Assumptions
• AutoTurn analysis has been conducted throughout the exchange and layover facility with 18m-long articulated buses. • Standard bus turning movements have been analyzed throughout the exchange and for Route 19 buses entering and exiting the layover facility. A full AutoTurn test should be conducted using a standard bus, which has a greater outside turn radius than an articulated bus, for all movements in the layover facility. • Bus turning movements throughout the exchange have been modeled at a design speed of 15km/hr. Bus turning movements require closer scrutiny to ensure they can be performed at 30km/ hour, as well.
20 METROtown exchange draft function plan Appendix A Meeting Minutes
Charrette Notes | October 2011 TransLink
1 MEETING MINUTES The following memorandum documents an intensive workshop held 11-14 October, 2011 in Burnaby to shape a design for the bus exchange at the Metrotown SkyTrain station. This document is intended to capture the input and comments received at that workshop. Some of the M E M O R A N D U M concepts and agency input have changed since the time of the workshop, and those changes will To: Marco Bonaventura, TransLink be reflected in the project final report. From: Nelson\Nygaard 1.1 STAKEHOLDERS MEETING WITH CMBC Date: December 15, 2011 October 11, 2011 Subject: Meeting Minutes and Notes from Metrotown Charrette 10:00 am – 12:00 pm Anmore Room, 15th Floor, TransLink Offices
Table of Contents Page 1.1.1 Attendees 1 Meeting Minutes ...... 1 TransLink 1.1 Stakeholders meeting with CMBC ...... 1 Moreno Rossi 1.2 Stakeholders meeting with City of Burnaby ...... 6 1.3 Objective-setting session ...... 10 Marco Bonaventura 1.4 Design Pin-up 10/12 ...... 16 Liana Evans 1.5 Pin-up 10/13 ...... 20 1.6 Pin-up 10/14 ...... 27 Matt Craig 2 Working Assumptions ...... 31 Rachel Jamieson 3. Outstanding Issues for Verification ...... 35 Joanne Proft Vikki Kwan CMBC Harjit Sidhu-Kambo Ken Chow Barry Hogue Nelson\Nygaard Jeff Tumlin Tim Payne Danielle Rose
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc. | 1
116 NEW MONTGOMERY STREET, SUITE 500 SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94105 415-284-1544 FAX 415-284-1554 www.nelsonnygaard.com METROtown exchange draft function plan 21 Charrette Notes | October 2011 Charrette Notes | October 2011 TransLink TransLink
1.1.2 Background than queuing at the new exchange under the SkyTrain. This may lead to additional pedestrian ground level crossings of Central Blvd. There were several significant issues raised by the City during the 2006/2007 planning process. The City had hoped to see a public plaza space incorporated into the station area, there were The group discussed limiting the existing exchange to only passenger drop-off, with all pick-ups issues with the layout of Beresford (disconnected by a now-demolished building), and there were occurring at the new facility, as well as a discussion of moving all passenger pick-up and drop-off concerns about the interaction between buses and the BC Parkway through the facility. While functions to the new facility. This may be a concern for the City, which is interested in wanting the exchange to be a quality public space, TransLink was not supportive of designing the maintaining connectivity with the mall, a significant activity centre. It is important to note that station to also serve as a major public gathering place. In the 2006 Transit Village Plan, the team Metrotown Station has very different weekday and weekend ridership patterns. This is less of a had also discussed the potential for future mall redevelopment and creating an enclosed layover commute-oriented station, with more ridership on weekends and midday. The routes that serve facility with a commercial façade on Central Blvd. Metrotown are important regional connections, with 11 routes terminating at Metrotown, and over 50 trips departing from the exchange every hour (a little under one per minute) at peak with The 2010/2011 Stantec plan developed a concept to use both the existing and new exchange for 800 to 900 boardings in the hour, an average of 17 boardings per trip. passenger drop-off and pick-up. The new facility would only provide two bus layover spaces on Central, and would otherwise contain layovers in the existing facility. The new exchange was 1.1.3.3 Accommodating potential future expansion intended to be a through facility, with passenger drop-off primarily on Central Blvd, and pick up primarily on Beresford, but no layover on Beresford. CMBC noted that the existing exchange is currently at capacity for layover needs. The City does not want any bus layovers to take place on Beresford. This was discussed in the 2006 planning The Stantec plan station design creates three main station access points: a staircase and escalator process, and the City rejected any proposed use of the segment east of the station (East of McKay) in a similar site as the existing stairs on the east side, a new west entry with stairs and escalators, for layover space. and a new elevator facility with two elevators, relocated east of the current single elevator. New crossing points across Central are intended to align with entrances, discourage midblock There are still numerous issues with space allocation for buses in the exchange that need to be crossings. Station entry points are somewhat fixed and TransLink is hoping the pedestrian resolved. The 2010/2011 Stantec concept will have all routes coming from the west going into the crossings stay somewhat fixed as well. existing exchange, while routes arriving from the east would not use the existing exchange. It still seemed unclear how the Stantec functional plan would accommodate certain high capacity routes. The current planning process will look in detail at the Stantec functional plan and develop three CMBC and TransLink both expressed concern about the need for buses to loop several times additional options, one of which narrows the Stantec design using a straight-curb alignment for around the new exchange to pick up/drop off at the new site, and layover in the existing facility. the bus bays in the new exchange, and one that merges Beresford with the bus exchange and routes the BC Parkway through the exchange. This process will also look at an alternative where CMBC also noted that there is already overcrowding for bus layover space in the existing the BC Parkway is routed onto Beresford for the length of the exchange. exchange and that it is critical to resolve this issue to maintain the current service frequency. It was pointed out by CMBC that there will be washrooms at the new SkyTrain facility for use by 1.1.3 Issues discussed in the meeting operators. The original (Stantec) concept has routes coming from the east would drop off passengers on the 1.1.3.1 Wayfinding and signage: Best practices for helping passengers south side of the new exchange, loop around and layover and pick-up on Central. An option is to find their way also have these routes layover in the old exchange. There was still some discussion as to whether The biggest issue is communicating the proposed split exchange function to people and ensuring it would be best to also still provide pick up and drop off in the existing exchange. they will know where to find their bus and where to transfer. To identify the facility, there are a CMBC pointed out that Route 106 comes from the east but enters Metrotown from the west, so number of different elements that can be used. The best are the vertical ‘T’ marker and station there will need to be some thought given to detailed reroutings on the streets surrounding the entrance signs (on each part of facility). The plan will also need to find real estate for journey station to make everything balance. One thought was that all routes could route down McKay planning information on the plaza floor to explain the whole system. Beyond that, effective instead of Willingdon. Since Willingdon has more oncoming traffic (four-way intersection), and signage, communicating a consistent and coherent identity and legibility are key. McKay is currently a three-way intersection (and if connected to Beresford would still have lower It will be most challenging to ensure that passengers understand what is over on the existing volumes), a left turn at Willingdon is harder than at McKay, and these details should be exchange and what is available in the new island exchange. The function of each part of the considered. exchange should be obvious to people, with separate functions if possible. 1.1.3.4 Future expansion growth projections 1.1.3.2 Operations of mall layover facility and passenger circulation The group discussed the growth projections for bus operations at the exchange. The City and CMBC brought up the concern that some routes with very high ridership queues will lead to CMBC have different expectations for the site, but the City has begun to understand why the passengers going over to the layover stop at the existing exchange to get a seat on the bus rather exchange has lengthened from the 2006/2007 designs.
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc. | 2 Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc. | 3
22 METROtown exchange draft function plan Charrette Notes | October 2011 Charrette Notes | October 2011 TransLink TransLink
TransLink discussed several key factors that will make Metrotown a significant bus exchange in It was noted that many cyclists already use the bypass route on Maywood to avoid the Metrotown the transit network. It is a regional town centre with a significant activity centre. The Metrotown area. TransLink is working to upgrade the BC Parkway to make it a comfortable through route exchange is one of the most significant exchanges in the entire system, along with Surrey Central, and provide station access. If the BC Parkway goes through the station area, there will be a lot of Lougheed Mall and downtown Vancouver. TransLink’s vision is to have 50% of all trips in the “cyclists dismount” signs. TransLink is working to promote cycling, so forcing cyclists to share region by walking, biking, and transit by 2040. The regional town centres will have to share a space with bus passengers does not really meet their level of service goals for cyclists. larger percentage of this goal. The Stantec plan accounts for a phased expansion of bus bays to BC Parkway is intended to provide a 4 meter wide path for cyclists and a 4 meter wide path for accommodate short and long-term needs. pedestrians for 26 kilometres from Surrey to downtown Vancouver. There is already very high 1.1.3.5 Straight-curb or sawtooth bays ridership, even in the rainy season. If the pathway though Metrotown is improved, then cyclists would not be forced to ride on Maywood to avoid the crowds. It is important also to provide The group discussed nose-to-tail dynamic allocation of bus bays with a straight curb alignment. station access for people who live between Patterson and Royal Oak. The path design at the TransLink expressed concern in making decisions dependent on new investments in technology Olympic Village is certainly best practice, but it consumes a lot of real estate. without a well-developed business case, and the challenges of introducing a new system to passengers. CMBC also raised concern about accessibility, and the need for fixed bay assignments 1.1.3.8 Pedestrian access to the exchange to accommodate people with visual impairments. There is also concern about the long queues for Decision: CMBC is concerned about the easternmost crosswalk on the southern side certain routes getting in the way of other routes’ operations. of the exchange (roughly at Telford). The crosswalk appears too close to the turn, Decision: To introduce dynamic assignment, there would need to be more study and and will cause concerns with the union about pedestrians in a blind spot. the design charrette format does not allow time for this. NN suggested that the solution Pedestrian access will be a particular challenge because pedestrian movements and desire lines may be logically grouping certain routes together in bays in a straight curb alignment, rather than must be accommodated or they will accommodate themselves. There are SkyTrain stations in the a technology based solution. The Stantec plan does already group into bays, but could not fit all of system where pedestrians cross fences to reach the station. However, there is also the concern the necessary buses into a straight curb alignment. that excessive crosswalks will limit bus efficiency, which is frustrating to passengers. 1.1.3.6 Constraints along Central Blvd Buses stopping on the north side of the new exchange will have to merge into traffic and make a left into the layover facility in a relatively short distance. CMBC is concerned because diesel bus drivers prefer not to layover in the bay. The group discussed signalization modifications at Central and McKay to prioritize bus movements through the road segment. Currently, the pedestrian phase across Central is not protected and overlaps with the left turn, but this could become a protected phase to allow for buses to move across to the left lane and into the layover facility. Route 130 travels on a 5 minute headway and signal pre-exemption for an all red phase would probably make the intersection very congested. This issue will be studied more in the charrette. Should routes from the east be laying over at the bays on the north side of the exchange to avoid going into the layover facility? CMBC is concerned because diesel bus drivers prefer not to layover in the bay. There was also a discussion about traffic volumes on Central and the number of lanes needed to accommodate traffic. With the new development planned for the area, this will likely be a key issue with the City. A straight-line projection for traffic volumes will not aid in working towards TransLink’s 2040 goal. 1.1.3.7 Bike conflicts: Specific concerns about BC Parkway interaction with bus exchange There are concerns with routing the BC Parkway through the exchange (option 3 in the charrette). It will mean widening the exchange significantly, and that the BC Parkway will need to cross the bus loop at two locations, where buses are making turning movements or queuing to leave at McKay. There are also long passenger queues that may spill over into the BC Parkway.
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc. | 4 Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc. | 5
METROtown exchange draft function plan 23 Charrette Notes | October 2011 Charrette Notes | October 2011 TransLink TransLink
1.2 STAKEHOLDERS MEETING WITH CITY OF BURNABY Now that Beresford will be a through street, the City has a strong vision for the character of the street and the development planned for that area. Beresford is viewed as a major link for the Tuesday, October 11, 2011 community, for all modes. The Maywood school is at the eastern terminus and Central Park at the 1:30 pm – 4:00 pm western terminus of Beresford. Burnaby City Hall 1.2.3 Beresford The City has two key visions for Beresford: as an art walk and as a celebration street. Beresford as an art walk would have several public art installations at any time that are captivating, interesting 1.2.1 Attendees and accessible. The art would be both local and international. The first planned development on TransLink Beresford, Metro Place, will include public art. The art will be predominantly on the south side of the street. The buildings developed there will have a continuous street wall with a 6-10 foot Marco Bonaventura setback. There is the opportunity for displays, outdoor seating, and weather protection. Liana Evans The celebration streets vision will provide Burnaby with a new gathering place to celebrate events City of Burnaby and national holidays. It will act as an outdoor living room, and will accommodate formal and Stu Ramsey informal gatherings. The City acknowledged that there is a challenge in developing a one-sided Ian Wasson street, but would like to extend the art to the north side, with details such as pavement patterns and sculptures. Leah Libsekal The City is envisioning a new town centre plan for the entire Metrotown area. Central Blvd and Doug Louie Beresford are two very different classes of streets. Central is a primary collector, maintaining 4 Lou Pelletier moving lanes of traffic at all times, and a significant number of dedicated left turn lanes. Ed Kozak Beresford is a local collector (two levels below Central), and the City would expect to see only one moving lane in either direction and on street parking on the south side only. Jeremy Rennie The Maywood neighbourhood has very few access points. The City is hoping that in the future the Nelson\Nygaard mall can be broken up from a super block to reintroduce the grid street network. This would Jeff Tumlin connect Maywood across the SkyTrain corridor and ease the heavy reliance on arterial streets. Tim Payne The Maywood neighbourhood also has very long blocks, so the City is looking for locations to establish pedestrian pathways east/west through the neighbourhood. Danielle Rose Perkins + Will 1.2.4 Central Blvd Martin Nielson The vision for Central Blvd is one of a garden street, to provide a contrast to the urbanity of the Durante Kreuk Metropolis Mall development. The goal is to create a comfortable outdoor space on Central as Jennifer Stamp well. The road allowance on the north side of Central Blvd (from McKay to the existing bus intersection) cannot be widened in the short- to medium-term because the tenants on that site Vector Engineering Services have certain legal rights. Victor Sagorski The City has not yet performed analysis on the number of lanes necessary to maintain adequate LOS on Central Blvd in the future. The only data available shows peak hour peak direction volume 1.2.2 Background on Central at about 600 vehicles/hour. The City believes there is the possibility of a large increase The City Council is familiar with the 2007 “Metrotown SkyTrain Station Transit Village Plan – in total trips on Central and Beresford due to future development. An additional 5,000-10,000 Site Assessment & Design Concepts Report” and the “Metrotown SkyTrain Station Transit Village people are expected to reside in the neighbourhood in the near future. It is also important to Plan – Options and Evaluation,” but the City is concerned that the new 2010/2011 Stantec scheme realize that this will also increase the number of pedestrians in the area significantly, and that will raise significant concerns with the Council, in terms of the length of the facility, the character there is great need to accommodate pedestrian movements and access to the station and the of the plaza, and the connection to the Maywood neighbourhood. Since this is now a funded Metropolis Mall. The City feels it would be necessary to develop and analyze traffic projections project (recent approval of TransLink’s financial Supplement), there is urgency for all parties to before making any decisions for modifications of the number of lanes on Central. find the optimal solution.
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc. | 6 Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc. | 7
24 METROtown exchange draft function plan Charrette Notes | October 2011 Charrette Notes | October 2011 TransLink TransLink
The idea of operating Central and Beresford as a two-way couplet was suggested. The City felt To make Beresford seem more two sided, the group showed interest in looking into rain garden concerned that this would force a mixing of residential and commercial uses, and introduce too and street tree treatments on the north side of Beresford, and a sidewalk on the Beresford edge of much of the regional center/CBD atmosphere of Central to the Maywood neighbourhood. the pathway. At present, Willingdon at Central is the governing intersection for capacity on Central. Willingdon To pursue the design of a shared busway/vehicle use on Beresford, the City would have to be okay spans the north/south distance of the city and will always be a primary arterial. One suggestion with certain modifications needed to close the vehicle lanes for public celebrations while from NN was to maintain the number of lanes at the intersection, but to reduce the number of permitting buses to still move through the street. Rerouting might be possible. This option would lanes on Central between Willingdon and McKay. also route the BC Parkway through the bus exchange. For the charrette, the team could evaluate three options on Central: two through lanes and a There was concern from the City about the linear aspect of movement through the exchange, and centre turn lane, two through lanes with no center turn lane, and 4 through lanes and a central the need to consider north/south pedestrian access, including widening the crosswalks or a turn lane (current). The City was willing to see the three-lane option evaluated, as long as the potential pedestrian scramble if warranted at certain intersections. The City is interested in team acknowledged that further analysis of future traffic volumes may show that this is not a pavement treatments that would unify the multiple pathways and create a visual connection viable option for the city. The City agreed that the pedestrian environment along the south side of across Beresford and through the exchange. This also connects to the need to create a strong Central, and the width of the sidewalk, needs significant improvement, and that increasing width visual corridor across the exchange, in line with the ends of Silver Avenue and Telford Avenue. and pedestrian comfort is a key issue. The City also discussed plans a concept to create a civic space west of McKay and the exchange on There was also some discussion of the potential for reducing the width of the lanes on Central to Central, under the guideway. There is interest in pursuing a festival space extending out from the increase the sidewalk width, without having to modify the current number of lanes. Buses require library and adjacent park across Central, under the guideway, and onto Beresford. 3.5 meters to readily pass another large vehicle while remaining in a travel lane with a reduced risk of clipped mirrors or other safety problems. However, 3.5 meters may not be necessary for all 1.2.6 Mall to SkyTrain Passarelle lanes on Central. The City’s standard is 3.5 meters for a curb lane, 3.3 meters for inside lanes, and 3.1 meters for a left turn lane. Central is 18 meters curb to curb, so there may be some width to be Decision: The City does not want to see any additional passarelles built between the gained by narrowing the lanes. The City also noted that the buses pulling out of stops on the mall and the SkyTrain station, and would eventually like to see the existing Central Blvd side of the future exchange will not travel in any of the lanes, but rather move across passarelle decommissioned. the lanes to merge into the left turn lane (On the following day, it was discovered that these The City has been working to improve the form of the built environment at the street level, and comments about bus movements are not consistent with the bus routings that TransLink and would like the station and exchange to enhance and encourage this vision. It was also CMBC are currently proposing). This may reduce the need for 3.5 meter wide lanes to acknowledged that based on a recent survey and passenger counts, the Mall accounts for accommodate bus through movements. The City agreed to look into the issue of lane widths, approximately 30% of the transit ridership at Metrotown. The passarelle also provides weather while also noting that 3.0 meters in all lanes, particularly the curb lanes, is too narrow for them to protection for SkyTrain to mall access. feel comfortable with. Decision: The City is interested in seeing designs that would enhance the mall’s The City feels it would be necessary to study the traffic projections in more detail before making street level entrance, potentially by widening the existing pathway that runs along any decisions for modifications of the number of lanes and lane width on Central. The City is also the east side of the existing bus exchange. interested in exploring the implications of maintaining 2 through lanes in each direction and removing the left turn lane. The group also talked about the mall’s frontage onto Central, including a potential retail wrap on the bus exchange/layover space in the future. It was noted that the current access to the exchange 1.2.5 BC Parkway is not universally accessible. Decision: The City does not want to see the BC Parkway designed as an on-street 1.2.7 Quality of materials and design facility on Beresford for the length of the exchange. There is a strong sentiment that the City and TransLink have a duty to maintain the high-quality design standards of The City is concerned about the potential use of low quality design materials and unsightly a separated facility generally consistent with TransLink’s 2009 conceptual design. pedestrian fences. The City’s strongest feelings are about the quality of the materials and urban design. Since the City has changed the zoning for this area, doubling the permitted residential This leaves the two options of accommodating the facility through the exchange, or on a separated density, they would like to see a public plaza that is not integrated with the station, which was pathway between the busway and Beresford. There is also the issue of whether a parallel their hope for the 2006/2007 plan. pedestrian sidewalk, also of 4 meters, should be accommodated in the same space, or if it’s okay to expect pedestrians to walk either on the south side of Beresford or through the transit exchange.
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc. | 8 Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc. | 9
METROtown exchange draft function plan 25 Charrette Notes | October 2011 Charrette Notes | October 2011 TransLink TransLink
1.3 OBJECTIVE-SETTING SESSION and high quality lighting, comfortable furnishings for passengers, and CPTED design elements. Wednesday, October 12, 2011 The exchange is transparent and permeable, creating a clear viewshed along certain 10:00 am – 1:00 pm north/south street corridors in the station area. Salon A, Holiday Inn Metrotown The exchange addresses the needs and hierarchy of all modes, preventing conflicts and prioritizing pedestrian desire lines for exchange access. Attendees 1.3.1 The exchange addresses the needs and hierarchy of all modes, including pedestrians and CMBC, City of Burnaby, TransLink, Nelson\Nygaard, Durante Kreuk, Vector Engineering cyclists, transit, goods movement and vehicular travel, and is coordinated with the overall Services, Perkins + Will vision and future plan for the Metrotown area. Note: some attendees were not present for the full day. The exchange invokes a human scale with high quality furnishings, general amenities, and artistic elements. TransLink – Liana Evans, Marco Bonaventura, Moreno Rossi, Rachel The exchange maximizes pedestrian connectivity north/south across the exchange while City of Burnaby – Stuart Ramsey, Leah Libsekal, Lou Pelletier, Jeremy Rennie, Ian Wasson, Doug considering pedestrian safety issues and operational/functional needs. Balance multi- Louie, Ed Kozak. CMBC – Barry Hogue, Ken Chow, HarjitSidhu-Kambo modal levels of service in the station area, addressing the needs of all modes of 1.3.2 Agenda transportation, while prioritizing pedestrians and cyclists. . Goals and objectives agreement Operations: transit efficiency . Key tensions (Issues and Needs) Meets facility operational needs to allow for effective management and maintenance of . Performance requirements for station the exchange, while meeting pedestrian and cyclist safety requirements. . Larger vision for station area Integrates bus service with other modes Design the BC Parkway to improve travel “through” and “to” the exchange, including 1.3.3 Goals and objectives agreement secure storage facilities and convenient bike-on-transit integration. Additionally, all The City envisions Maywood becoming a higher density and pedestrian oriented neighbourhood. streets in the exchange area will provide a safe and comfortable space for cyclists. Beresford is seen as a place to serve the community, a busy pedestrian area with low volumes of Protect and prioritize bus turning movements while minimizing congestion delay for all vehicular traffic. It will also be a place to bring Burnaby into the next level of artistic expression modes and excessive bus circulation through the exchange area. and architecture, with high quality design details extending into the station and exchange. It will also be important to establish Maywood as a distinct neighbourhood with a safe and activated Develop functional layover and operator change out space. street on Beresford, highlighting sustainable transit access and green building practices. Placemaking: great places Key tenets Metrotown Exchange is a community asset, integrated with the public realm and iconic in Linkages form. The exchange area supports the City’s streetscape vision for an active and lively Community public realm, while maintaining the connection to the Metropolis at Metrotown. Town centre integration The exchange utilizes sustainable infrastructure, distinct, memorable and iconic Outdoor shopping street: Beresford as a Great Street/High Street architecture, and high quality, long-term materials. Additionally, soft landscaping and Creative and exceptional urban design and architecture transparency create a human scale environment. Usability: people first Adopt a consistent and integrated palette of colours, materials and surface treatments to create coherence across the exchange area and to foster a distinctive identity for the Wayfinding at Metrotown Exchange should be simple and intuitive, with a legible layout facility. for bus-to-bus, bus-to-train, and bus-to-neighbouring development connections. The exchange is a community amenity, not just a basic functional space. The exchange is a universally accessible, safe, and secure environment. The waiting Design the exchange to foster a distinctive identity that respects the local context while environment provides adequate queue space, protection from the elements, transparency still conforming to network wide standards through the use of common, standardized components for a consistent passenger experience.
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc. | 10 Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc. | 11
26 METROtown exchange draft function plan Charrette Notes | October 2011 Charrette Notes | October 2011 TransLink TransLink
Environment: leader in sustainability Issues with Stantec plan: Use of lighting that is dark sky compliant that also creates a safe and transparent . Size of the exchange exchange. . Lacks space for people in the design Reduce negative impacts and energy consumption of exchange construction and . Narrow width operations, including on site stormwater management. . Sawtooth versus straight curb The exchange should be designed to minimize absorption and radiation of solar energy, . Phasing -- Ability to meet needs for long term or build for current needs lowering its contribution to temperature increases in surrounding areas and minimizing . Will all routes continue to provide service to new loop and existing exchange? Split its contributions to local and regional heat island effects. service between old and new loop? Accountability: Fiscally responsible . Length determined by: signalized intersections The exchange will aim to minimize ongoing maintenance and operational costs, including labour, materials and training, as well as consumption of natural and energy resources. rail station need for articulated buses Integrate high quality design and revenue-generating opportunities into the exchange facility and the public realm. increase in Community shuttles room for bus manoeuvring and bus sightlines The exchange has a resilient, responsive, and flexible design capable of aging gracefully and scalable to accommodate for future growth. limited access opportunities from Central Blvd to south side of exchange . New exchange doesn’t have two L/O spaces on Central 1.3.4 Key Tensions . Concern about interconnectivity to Maywood neighbourhood . Ability to develop shared queues? Needs . Queuing problems for high ridership routes- crossing into exchange. Layover and pickup . Future service levels to meet increasing transit use throughout region in the old exchange or only pickup in new exchange? More frequent bus service, articulated buses, increased passenger queue space 20-30% of bus customers going to the mall 4 routes that provide very frequent service and experience high ridership . Trolley pick up in the new exchange requires costly trolley overhead infrastructure Ridership increases from UPass program . Reduce bus bays and create more public plaza space on the East end? Massive increase in ridership since 2007 plan . BC Hydro’s ownership of the corridor, what is their position? Not at odds with our . Transit vehicle needs intentions for the station . Staff facilities Utility covers can be raised but not lowered (currently not higher than Beresford) . . Vibrant people places TransLink functional requirements: . Bicycle accommodation Exchange must address current capacity and accessibility constraints of the SkyTrain station, and interactions with bus loop . Integrated mixed-use developments Need to shift passenger access and egress to more evenly balance on East and West . On-site stormwater management ends of the station (Emphasize West for exchange access and neighbourhood access) . Wayfinding and passenger information Simple and legible layout for user . Accessibility . Current exchange lease: SRW, can assume it will continue Issues . Does the Stantec plan serve future needs or have the capability to expand? Anticipates 20 years of growth in ridership across the region, hard to predict network . Current exchange limited in bus space (limited for articulated buses) and passenger beyond then or at the station level queue space Can it meet pop and employment growth and transit mode share from Transport . Route #49 has seen significant growth with opening of Canada line 2040 goal? . Shared bays with such frequent service is a non-starter . Negative consequences of making it too small: spilling onto Beresford in the future . 11 bus routes terminate at Metrotown currently, require layover space . Current exchange: inadequate and no room for expansion
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc. | 12 Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc. | 13
METROtown exchange draft function plan 27 Charrette Notes | October 2011 Charrette Notes | October 2011 TransLink TransLink
. Current exchange is a pedestrian safety concern, especially backing buses into layover . Phasing/lifespan space . Connection to the surrounding environment 1.3.5 Performance requirements for the exchange Operational needs . Separate operation functions half into old loop and half into new loop, limiting bus movements through the area. . Avoid left turns except at a signalized location Pedestrian needs in the greater context . Serve desire lines with designated crosswalks to ensure safety . Align streets and crosswalks through exchange . N/S pedestrian connectivity . Avoid bike/pedestrian conflicts Bicyclist needs . Continuity of the BC Parkway . Avoid bus/bike conflicts Central Blvd . If Kingsborough eventually connects through the mall site, Central may change in its functional requirements . For now, maintain as a primary collector with 2 through lanes in each direction . City does not have formal standard for Level of Service . No standards or expectations for pedestrian LOS, though trying to shift towards a higher LOS . It was suggested that existing conditions are LOS A for cars and F for pedestrians . Process to reach decision for potential lane number reduction? Constraints from the surrounding network to limit vehicle growth Increased vehicle connections between Central and Beresford Signal phasing changes Need to discuss with Council Mall entrance . Potential shift to ground level entry and away from passarelles . Future development at the mall site, breaking up the superblock Evaluation criteria . Safety . Permeability
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc. | 14 Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc. | 15
28 METROtown exchange draft function plan Charrette Notes | October 2011 Charrette Notes | October 2011 TransLink TransLink
1.4 DESIGN PIN-UP 10/12 Central Blvd Move ground level station retail space to create the view from the residential area on 1.4.1 Option A: Straight curb bus bays on Metrotown Station Silver through the station to Central site Minimized lane dimensions on Central (while maintaining existing lane configuration) to provide additional pedestrian travel and queuing space on the north side of the station In Option A, the bus exchange is housed within the Metrotown Station site. Beresford Street, and south side of Central. Currently, there is very little (less than 3m) of sidewalk depth south of the exchange remains a two-lane road; however, north-south connection is provided between the station columns and Central. from Beresford Street to Central Boulevard at McKay and just east of Telford (mall parkade entry) Streets. The BC Parkway skirts the south edge of the transit exchange. Crosswalks across Minor lane reductions only pushed Central’s south curb north 1m. However, it only needs Beresford, the BC Parkway, the busway and Central Boulevard connect the station to the mall to be widened where the buses are stopping (with heavy off loads) and these could be north of Central and the Maywood neighbourhood south of Beresford. Attributes of each spaced to avoid columns transportation facility are described below: In this concept, buses primarily drop passengers off on Central, north of the station. Question: Do buses need to pull into a separate drop-off and pick-up space BC Parkway on the south side of Central? It may be more efficient (in terms of time) to simply 4m-wide for bikes, 4m-wide for pedestrians with a tree-lined or landscaped buffer drop-off passengers from the travel lane. In this case, we can bump out the curb on the between the busway and the BC Parkway south side of Central to provide additional pedestrian space. This may also be better from a bus operations perspective, because buses would then only need to cross one lane of BC Parkway located south of the busway and north of Beresford Street traffic to get to the current exchange (future layover facility) on the north side of Central. Separate busway from BC Parkway with plantings and trees Vehicular Traffic Busway Open up the Mall’s driveway and McKay from Central to Beresford for auto through Straight curb bus bay alignment for six articulated buses traffic Pair buses (tandem bays) into three zones in a busway south of Metrotown Station. Each Decision: Need signal on McKay for pedestrians & transit ops zone would have sequential arrivals w/independent departures Use signal phasing to minimize northbound vehicles queuing at Beresford at the These zones need to be coordinated with Beresford and BC Parkway crosswalks (ideally, intersection of McKay and Central. Perhaps ban right turns on red (or use a flashing red buses would stop 12.5 m from crosswalk to maximize sight lines so buses will not have to beacon) from westbound Beresford onto northbound McKay. stop at each crosswalk and look for pedestrians; the minimum is 6 m.) The Mall’s driveway through the exchange should have three lanes: 2 southbound lanes Could probably still fit two community shuttles and more flexible 40’ buses in this (the westernmost lane bus only) and one northbound lane. busway Alternatively, this road could be bus only southbound into the exchange and Sussex (half Bus queuing area takes advantage of the entire plaza and would potentially be covered a block to the east) could punch through from Beresford to Central. with a uniform overhang Trees on both sides of Beresford to help create a sense of enclosure and enhance comfort Information: Straight curb holds advantages for urban design, not only does for pedestrians it widen the available pedestrian realm, but it makes the exchange feel like an enclosed urban street. 1.4.2 Option B: Shared Beresford Street (sawtooth bus bays) Pedestrian/bus conflict In Option B, Beresford Street south of the station functions as the bus exchange. Buses circle the o Information: Raised crosswalks should not be allowed in the station via two new connections. Just east of Telford, buses enter southbound and turn exchange due to bus passenger safety concerns. From a pedestrian- westbound on Beresford. Sawtooth bays along Beresford accommodate pick-up and drop-off first perspective, there will be a consistent paver treatment at busway movements before buses turn northbound on McKay and then either continue northbound on pedestrian crossings to designate pedestrian crossings McKay to Kingsway or turn to travel eastbound on Central. The BC Parkway runs east-west through the station site, north of the shared Beresford busway and through traffic street. Central Easternmost busway pedestrian crossing may be jeopardized by turning buses with poor is modified to a three-lane, plus dedicated eastbound transit lane. visibility around the corner. It would be better to move that easternmost pedestrian crosswalk further west along the busway to allow better visibility and enhance pedestrian Combined Beresford/Busway: safety
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc. | 16 Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc. | 17
METROtown exchange draft function plan 29 Charrette Notes | October 2011 Charrette Notes | October 2011 TransLink TransLink
Future curb alignment on south side of Beresford includes a parking lane. North of the With the existing 18m curb to curb dimension on Central, bike lanes could fit on Central. parking lane is an eastbound through lane, then westbound through lane, then Moving to a three lane configuration, plus bike lanes would open up 3-6 m for pedestrian westbound sawtooth bus bays waiting area on the south side of Central at the station site. Minimum depth at sawtooth bays for pedestrian queuing is 5m Decision: While there is ample width for bike lanes on Central under the However, 5m is not enough to accommodate weather protection and seating. The nicest three-lane configuration, they might not be desirable due to conflicts with place to walk would be under the guideway buses pulling out and trying to cross the on-street bike lane and the EB travel lane to get to the NB turn pocket and enter the layover facility. Sightlines for Information: On the other hand, people will walk on the north side of buses could inhibit bike safety Beresford due to solar exposure and this is more feasible with a straight curb. Decision: Could also accommodate bikes on Central with a two-way cycle track on the north side of Central. This was rejected because it doesn’t Information: Sawtooth bays take up a lot of depth and interrupt the curb provide a significant improvement (in terms of comfort, convenience or line. The straight curb would have more benefit in Option B—straight curbs would make safety) above the BC Parkway through the station site and poor sightlines for Beresford function like a real street. If a straight curb on the north side of Beresford were buses entering the layover facility on the north side of Central. The problems used (instead of the proposed sawtooth curb), there would be a larger buffer between the with a two-way cycle track on Central would be greater than getting bicyclists pedestrian way along Beresford and the bikeway, and still maintain 5 m of pedestrian through the exchange. space/queuing space and a bigger plaza immediately south of the station (and north of the bikeway) Information: The problem with Central is that is has no “friction,” i.e. nothing to slow traffic. A bike lane or on-street parking would ameliorate Information: Operators would prefer a straight to sawtooth curb on a this and improve the street. The solar aspect / southern exposure of Central general purpose street (like Beresford) is great. Information: Buses on Beresford shared with traffic is operationally more Information: On-street parking would also encourage retailers to rethink challenging that independent busway in Option A. their Central frontage BC Parkway Can there be 8 hour meters for commuter parking in the area? Information: 4m bikeway through exchange, using landscaping for storm Some concern for the traffic operations on Central if there are increased pedestrian water, thermal comfort, and visual separation of the bike lane from other crossings uses Vehicular Traffic Information: 4m pedestrian way south of the 4m bikeway Pedestrian crossings of Beresford on both sides of Telford and their intersection with the 50 cm cobble on north edge of bikeway, break with rumble strip into 1.5 m queue areas bikeway are still unresolved. Information: 5m minimum between bikeway and columns, for seating and waiting and traversing 1.4.3 Layover Facility Central Blvd Complexity of drop-offs and pick-ups at both the old and new exchange is inconvenient, but the mall is a significant destination One WB travel lane, one EB travel lane, and a left turn lane/median space + bike lanes (potentially) as well as an EB bus only lane Information: If Central’s dimensions are reduced, it becomes less of a barrier to people trying to access the mall from the station area. Push Central north by eliminating a lane and extending the station-side, south curb of Central for more pedestrian space The current exchange on the north side of Central could become exclusively a layover facility, with the exception of the trolley. Information: Hold north curb of Central static. There is already a fairly generous (6m), if underutilized and oddly configured, sidewalk along the o Buses could be parked nose to tail for layover. north side of Central. o Opportunity to widen the currently narrow walkway to the main entrance to the Along the north curb line, insert parking pockets adjacent to the hotel and proposed retail mall in front of the existing exchange o Barren Central Blvd frontage at the existing exchange could be transformed into Normalize northern curb edge of new exchange by removing some of the bulb-outs active retail frontage, moving the front door of the mall out to the street.
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc. | 18 Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc. | 19
30 METROtown exchange draft function plan Charrette Notes | October 2011 Charrette Notes | October 2011 TransLink TransLink
o Central becomes more of an urban street and less of a bypass route 4m pedestrian way could also function as a mirror of sidewalk on the south side of Beresford. Bikeway and pedway should be separated to discourage modal conflicts, at least with a rumble strip or other visual separation. 1.5 PIN-UP 10/13 At least 2m is necessary to accommodate a functional rain garden, which would be located on the south edge of the bicycle and pedestrian paths, along Beresford. 1.5.1 Bus Operations: Sawtooth vs. Straight Curb This Option more effectively channels the pedestrians at pedestrian crossings at each Decision: Wednesday evening breakthrough: The sawtooth bay design does not street serving Maywood, minimizes bus operator concerns. provide any operational advantages over straight curb bays. Option A could be seen as a Parisian multi-way blvd, with the bikeway passing through it. Information: Given length of the south side of island and north of Beresford The distinction between Metrotown looking like a transit exchange or a multifaceted blvd between columns and curbs cuts able to get 6 articulated independent pull- is in the details in/pull-out bays Information: In Option A, the City could shut down Beresford without With a straight curb, can also do tandem bays, mixes of 40s and 60s. affecting bus operations. Bus operations curb line broken only by crosswalk locations. Busway Information: While still providing full flexibility, the straight curb allows a Buses would have a separated entrance east of the station plus a two-way street at Mall narrower pavement footprint. Under the sawtooth scenario, there would be an parkade/new exchange entrance expanse of concrete when buses aren’t there. Information: On the west edge of the station site at McKay, 2 signalized intersections. Straight-curb reads more like a street with 7.5m wide pathway for buses to lay at curb and The challenge is opening McKay to two-way traffic, cars might queue and block busway bypass, which is adequate. Given length and bus frequency, straight curb works out well. exit, will need signal pre-emption on McKay for this to work. (i.e. a vehicle Longer term looking at shifting community shuttles onto Central side, which won’t be detection loop at the bus exit will clear queuing on northbound McKay then give the bus a necessary until there are 6 routes with artics being operated. For now, shuttles can be on green light.) Beresford. This space is shared for pickup and drop-off, rather than separating pickup 7m for pedestrians in bus waiting zone plus same depth on the other side by narrowing and drop-off in two separate areas. Central a bit. Two layover bays on Central won’t be occupied all of the time because of lower frequency Information: 8-9m depth is better for a pedestrian waiting area, depends on operations. amount of furniture, 9m gives more flexibility for design of shelter, wind screen, trees, Information: Because so many buses coming in and out on the west end of will be hard to get trees in, except maybe match to column spacing. Could play off that the station area, there will be a bus at the curb the (Beresford side) busway with landscape that matches with spacing of buses. all of the time, and cars won’t pull into the curb lane. Allows for comfortable passenger accommodation without providing too much extra Decision: Straight curb bus bays can better meet Metrotown station’s needs; space. Efficient, functional convivial space, comfortable but not empty. therefore, both Option A and B will feature straight curb bays. Information: Option A has smoother bus operations by minimizing potential vehicular interference and random pedestrian crossings, but on the other 1.5.2 Option A Straight curb bus bays on Metrotown site Part hand, it will make Beresford look less like a typical street and more like a bus 2 exchange, by widening its overall dimension, and separating vehicles and buses. Building on the work from 12 October 2011, Option A was further refined: Information: Central Blvd could stay the same or reduce lanes without Bus/pedestrian conflicts significantly altering bus operations, BC Parkway configuration or Between crosswalks, there is a potential for barrier fencing between the sidewalk/ BC Beresford. Parkway and the buses. Have enough space for 4m bikeway and 4m pedestrian way in this zone to accommodate A fence would prevent crossing, but also be an unwelcome, ugly physical barrier in the bikes and pedestrians, 7.5m straight curb busway, 1.8m landscaped separation between neighbourhood Beresford and BC Parkway, .8m shrub zone on north edge of bikeway
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc. | 20 Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc. | 21
METROtown exchange draft function plan 31 Charrette Notes | October 2011 Charrette Notes | October 2011 TransLink TransLink
Information: TransLink has concerns about people crossing the busway/bus Information: Hard to close Beresford for celebrations, but could close half only lane in a disorganized way, there has to be predictability for the the street, or maintain the celebratory aspect but not focus it in this area. At passengers on the bus. There have to be some limits. Fencing is done poorly one point there was a civic plaza part of this scheme, rather than fit that onto here, and yet there are counter examples. Low stone wall at English bay, the Metrotown site, move it west of McKay, between Willingdon and McKay there is a win-win through good design. Doesn’t make pedestrians feel along Beresford. The celebration street would then be related to the park criminalized but addresses driver sight angle concerns. and plaza at the library. There is some concern about the busway being fully permeable, kiss and ride, will happen Buses closer to residents in this setup, hard to have a shopping street, unpleasant. all along Beresford and those people will jaywalk. Shelters to be provided for north side of Beresford for pick-ups. A shelter wouldn’t be Combination of low fence and the rain garden would inhibit random crossing of the needed at sites reserved for drop-offs (south side of Central). Green roof on the shelter? busway because people won’t step into the muck, Bus/car conflicts Decision: A low wall may be a compromise to aesthetically corral Potential for illegal drop-offs in the bus loop in this setup, pedestrians. The low wall could be seating (if it doesn’t hinder BC Parkway o or busway traffic flow). Artists could set up against the wall (since the o At King George Station, people pull in and still use the bus way even with signs bikeway will be on the north side this will interfere with bikeway operations, and bollards, want to avoid that design. so let’s not suggest artists can set up here). o Ticket cars that drive in the busway. Design features should be used to encourage appropriate behaviour. o Differentiated pavement to keep cars off busway? 1.5.3 Option B Shared Beresford Part 2 Concern about mixing bus and travel lane, can use curb space on eastern side of Mall driveway on Central for Kiss and Ride. Combined Beresford/Busway Bus/people conflicts Shared with bus ops and thru traffic. o A shared Beresford may also encourage jaywalking and people crossing in the Information: Width of street would be 13m to accommodate 7.5m for buses blind spots’ of bus operators. (and through traffic) WB and 5.5 for travel lane EB plus parking. Narrows 2- o Buses would have to cross the BC Parkway and depending on bike and pedestrian 2.5m at crossing points- bulges on south side of street (in place of the flow this could significantly hinder bus operations and/or lead to safety concerns parking), none on north side. o People may not stick to the crosswalks once Beresford is built out Crosswalks should be located at each of the streets intersecting Beresford (i.e. Teleford, Silver) to accommodate major destinations such as the station entrances and crosswalks o Pavement patterns will help to communicate where people will cross, and provide at Central to access the mall. It is also necessary to limit the number of crosswalks so as openings along bike way not to reduce the possible number of bus bays. o Information: To accommodate sightlines on the eastern edge of the Prioritized desire lines and modified pedestrian connections across the transit lane and transit exchange, the straight curb makes the exchange deeper so the BC Parkway to increase safety and predictability sweep of the bus turning WB on Beresford will be gentler. Instead of making essentially a continuous turning 180, buses will instead make Nudging the station house at Silver slightly to the east to maintain visual street two 90 degree turns separated by a longer straight section, increasing connectivity. operator sightlines, especially of the crosswalks on Beresford. Helps create a “place” o It was suggested that there might be the need for a crosswalk on the west side of Telford crossing Beresford as well as the east. This is a negative aspect of this o Looks less like a bus exchange, option. With crosswalks on both sides of the cross streets extending from o Offers an opportunity for north and south neighbourhoods to relate to each other Beresford through the bus loop, there will be a loss of space for bus bays (due to visually, through visual corridors, and functionally, as the station area would be required setback from crosswalks to bus bays). narrower north-south and more permeable for pedestrians. Option B may be difficult for CMBC to sell to the Union o Desire lines will be complex. From a service delivery perspective, Option B will be more challenging to implement and o Plaza provides a lot of space for trees and landscaping involve additional safety issues, e.g. conflicts with bike
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc. | 22 Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc. | 23
32 METROtown exchange draft function plan Charrette Notes | October 2011 Charrette Notes | October 2011 TransLink TransLink
Option B is more permeable, and puts pedestrians first. On the other hand, with a few which doesn’t seem feasible. In 5-lane Central option, the transit lane is inset so buses tweaks, Option A could address a lot of the place-making concerns, with the advantage of could layover there without blocking a lane on Central. being able to meet the City’s objective of closing Beresford for festivals. Both Option A and B show options for Central and Beresford, which could be mixed and matched. There is also concern about the conflict between bus traffic and the BC Parkway in Option In many ways, they involve separate decisions, e.g. three- or five-lanes on Central and Beresford B. Option A separates pedestrians and cyclists from the busway and can utilize design shared with buses and automobiles. details such as a low wall to separate the BC Parkway from the busway. In large part, what happens on Central Blvd is a decision to be made by the City of Burnaby. BC Parkway Beresford can be redesigned independently of decisions for Central Blvd reconfiguration. It is more critical in the near term to solving Beresford traffic issues. Option B places the BC Parkway in the middle of the exchange. Action: The City and TransLink will verify minimum lane widths on Central, 4m wide bikeway with 2m wide landscaped zones on each side. Beresford, McKay and the new north-side link east of Telford. 8.5m for bus waiting space (circulation and passenger zones) south of the BC Parkway.
4.5 m between landscaping and station for circulation. Widened walkway on north side of exchange to 7.5m by considering narrower street 1.5.4 Layover Facility width on central. This 7.5m allows for circulation and trees Placement of trees on north edge (along Central Blvd), have to ensure they are set back Pick-up and drop-off at two proximate stops 3m from sidewalk, fit between load/unload zones. Species with a narrow crown. If each line only makes one stop at the Metrotown station and not two (one at the station Narrow the BC Parkway landscaped zones at the approach of intersection with vehicular and one at the mall), operations will be more efficient and less confusing to passengers. traffic to prevent bottlenecking. Information: With a single drop-off or pickup, passengers will only have one The 2m buffer on north of bikeway may not be needed? A narrower barrier could work location for catching their bus. By having two pickup locations (especially for and would gain 2m of space for passenger circulation. high ridership routes) in close proximity, it is likely passengers will cross the street to get on the bus at its first stop in order to get a seat on the bus. Having less permeability will encourage cyclists to use it (unimpeded flow). If pedestrians are walking all over the bike path, fast traveling bicyclists will avoid that path. But some Only one stop at the Metrotown station means mall patrons will have to make an permeability is necessary for pedestrians and transit riders to access the station and mall. additional trip across Central This potential inconvenience could be diluted if Central were a more pleasant place Central Blvd Most bus passengers would be dropped on the west end of the exchange Three lanes, parking bulges on north side of central, south side of central mostly continuous bus stops, drop-off and layover, may be some opportunities for bulges (which The Route 19 trolley will continue to serve the mall directly in the exchange (on the north would decrease the pedestrian crossing distance and increase visibility). side of Central) so lines wouldn’t need to be replaced. This is a variant to the established standard for Central Blvd. Three-lanes would entail The current exchange would be dedicated exclusively (with the exception of Route #19) to removing vehicular functionality, but the advantage is that it would be good for people layover activities. However, if recovery is less than 3-5 minutes, buses will recover in their first. drop-off position in the new exchange rather than going into the layover facility (current exchange). Decision: From a transit ops perspective, the south side of Central will not work as Kiss and Ride. Need to find an alternative location Goals for reconfiguring the layover facility Some thought it would be beneficial to take community shuttles out of the south side of Central and keep available for Kiss and Ride. Simplify ops for transit At the Holiday Inn vehicle access and gap in median on Central, people will want to cross Simplify passenger wayfinding the street. To accommodate the left turn pocket a median refuge may work, though it Maintain close connection between TransLink facility and mall would have limited sightlines for pedestrians as buses made their left turns. Buses all go in new exchange for p/u and d/o and recovery (if less than 3-5 minutes) Extra looping around for buses from east, laying over and pickup on north side of exchange. Information: It may be desirable to have buses stop and layover in No p/u or d/o in layover facility (except for Route 19) the same place to avoid looping. This option would require a layover on Central,
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc. | 24 Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc. | 25
METROtown exchange draft function plan 33 Charrette Notes | October 2011 Charrette Notes | October 2011 TransLink TransLink
Attributes of proposed layover facility 1.6 PIN-UP 10/14 Information: Can handle 10 sequential pull ins and with independent pull outs of articulated buses and 3 more first in first out basis 1.6.1 Option B: Shared Beresford Part 3 With the proposed layover facility redesign, 10m of potential retail space will be available Decision: Less desirable from an operational and place-based standpoint on the Central Blvd edge of the facility. The driver’s facility will be rebuilt in the middle of the layover island. That island cannot 1.6.2 Preferred Option A: Straight curb bus bays on be removed due to structural beams. Metrotown station site Part 3 Remove pedestrian access escalator Landscape: Full perimeter walkway around the layover facility As planned, large rain gardens on south side of Beresford, picking up rainwater from Will have walkways to Metropolis Mall parking Need for commercial loading for the new proposed retail on Central, through it could be On Thursday, bikeway was on south side and pedway on north, but was swapped, to give restricted to middle of the night only pedestrians better advantage of sunlight, and to be consistent with BC Parkway vis-a-vis positions Parkway to the east and west of Metrotown Station, where the bike path is on Information: The mall is a major destination, and this layover facility design the north edge. creates new retail opportunities on Central (in a sense, extending the mall onto the street). The pedestrian access walkway from Central to mall (east 1.8 m strip on the south edge of the BC Parkway could be landscaped with a swale side of layover facility) could be widened as well. 4m pedestrian way, with benches and furniture. Soft signal to move people into Changing bus operations in the layover facility to counter clockwise might not be feasible intersection easily, guide to openings. Also looking at bollard lighting, super visible and will have to be reviewed. The Trolley Overhead Group at CMBC will also need to be pedestrian crossing in busway. consulted regarding this change to operations. Rumblestrip between bike and pedway, 4m asphalt bikeway, 900mm planted strip, fence Except for Route 19, all buses would be empty, thus minimizing pedestrian conflicts in and wall and signage and lighting to avoid having a monotonous condition for the block this area length. Paired trees on either side of crosswalks, visual cue to reinforce where crosswalks are Information: Bus shelters near lay-bys will be the length of artics, not having trees the whole way along Will be able to figure this out in final design details, important to keep trees back to retain flexibility (2m back currently). 2m on north edge of exchange to avoid conflict with the mezzanine, perhaps buffering around columns. 3m is a good minimum, to edge of grate, for people with mobility devices Large, gracious trees with high canopies will improve sightlines from crosswalks and maximize visibility of pedestrians crossing busway Have a rain garden underneath the station mezzanine and pipe to the roadway to water those plantings, which would get southern exposure Question: Limitation of rain garden is that there are locations where the BC Hydro duct may be located underneath, which may interfere with rain garden depth (how much clearance is needed?) Is there an opportunity for public art to include Burnaby and the neighbourhood w/o stealing the thunder from the art walk, perhaps integrate art into furnishings, etc.?
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc. | 26 Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc. | 27
34 METROtown exchange draft function plan Charrette Notes | October 2011 Charrette Notes | October 2011 TransLink TransLink
Information: Already have 4 crosswalks in the current layout, and are all in Across Central—With crosswalks along Central located conveniently the midst of bus turning movements, in this one, the sightlines are better and in accordance with pedestrian desire lines, there should be minimal, random pedestrian crossings. Additionally, the passarelle Traffic: will remain, at least in the short term. The crosswalk at the Holiday Inn Intersection at mall driveway and Beresford could potentially be unsignalized, but might Driveway across Central would need to be signalized. NEED TO cause some delay for buses, not sure if it’s high volume. Three-way stop control would CHECK: Can buses still pull in and out with the proposed curb allow light traffic to get onto Beresford more quickly. bulges in place? At McKay and Central, the busway exit needs to be signalized, and is a little more Across loop—A variety of landscape treatments will funnel pedestrians challenging in the five-lane Central option. wishing to access the Metrotown station from Maywood into sanctioned pedestrian crosswalks. Potential treatments include a low, With a five-lane Central, there seems to be consensus to let drop-off buses aesthetically pleasing wall potentially with seating to prevent stop in the lane (Action: TransLink, please verify [done later]) pedestrians from crossing the busway at random. Bioswales or other Pickups on Central will change character of trees there and will need shelters. Might have landscape treatments could also effectively prevent pedestrians from to limit trees to where crosswalks bulb out. Need to sort out where these trees will fit. criss-crossing the station site. A rumblestrip or 50cm cobblestone edge between the bike and pedway would also help communicate the On McKay northbound approaching Central, there would be a right turn and a left/thru pedestrian zone and the bikeway. lane, but buses would use the whole northbound approach. McKay SB to Beresford would flare to include an extra lane at the Beresford approach, to keep moving thru traffic Transit Exchange behind a left turning vehicle. This signal would have 4 primary phases, with a pedestrian scramble when buses are moving out. Design will require significant additional effort and East stair surge area is very narrow and at grade, need to lengthen if possible modeling. If not doing drop-off/pick-up in existing facility, people coming from mall will use On westbound Beresford at McKay there would be room for a (signalized) right turn lane passarelle or cross Central to get to bus stops, creating flow conflicts. Need to be onto McKay if there’s no on-street parking provided in that spot on Beresford. conscious of that To avoid vehicle queuing on McKay spilling onto BC Parkway intersection, left turn 1.6.3 Layover Facility Part 3 movements of eastbound traffic on Beresford turning onto McKay should be banned. Decision: Prohibit left turns off Beresford onto McKay. Traffic on McKay today Information: Barry Hogue noted that CMBC Operations is pleased with the is virtually non-existent and is always going to be local. proposal of having only Route 19 perform drop-offs and pick-ups in the layover facility. Kiss and Ride: Barry Hogue also reported the following from an outside discussion with CMBC Kiss and Ride could be located along curbs on east side of Mall driveway on Beresford or Operations staff: on Central. Happy with the driver’s facility in the middle of the island In first few years, it may be practical to locate Kiss and Ride in lay-by on Central east of o the proposed bus stop drop-off locations, but over time that space might be needed for o CMBC Operations staff had concerns with the Stantec plan of passenger pick-up bus operations. at both the existing and new exchange, and are pleased that issue is resolved in this concept. Busway: There are always operator concerns about crosswalks, but it’s not an Information: Sight lines north-south across the station would be improved if o insurmountable issue. the westernmost station house was moved to clear the viewshed extending from Silver north towards the mall. o Bus operators liked the idea of pulling into a designated bus lane Drop-off on west side of station is great o One option is to move bike station against elevator stair entrance and fare gates, o clear the sightlines. Shift bike station over so Telford would have a clear view. In this proposed alternative, the narrow pedestrian way west of the layover facility has There are also advantages with bike storage under the stairs been expanded to 3 xs wider with a barrier similar to the barrier between the busway and BC Parkway in the new exchange. In this plan, there won’t be anything to attract people o Information: The minimum is 6m between crosswalk and waiting bus, but 12.5m provides optimal sight lines so that buses will not have into the layover facility and instead they will be funnelled behind the layover facility to to stop and look for pedestrians at each crosswalk. the mall entry and the bus stop for Route 19. 2.1.1 Jaywalking mitigation strategies
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc. | 28 Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc. | 29
METROtown exchange draft function plan 35 Charrette Notes | October 2011 Charrette Notes | October 2011 TransLink TransLink
Might consider a shared surface with the mall alley and this pedway using low bollards at some point 2 WORKING ASSUMPTIONS In this layout, there will be room for 10 articulated bus layover spaces, with sequential The following working assumptions inform the revised configuration of the transit exchange arrival independent pull out, and an additional 3 bays with first in first out ops 2.1 Proposed curb adjustments in preferred Option A (Please refer to PDF attached) Perceptions from the City’s representatives 2.1.1 New north-south street east of Telford Avenue connecting Beresford Street and Central Boulevard and facilitating transit access to the exchange Desire to see details, but prepared to recommend to the director that most of the City’s major concerns have been adequately addressed 2.1.2 7.5m-wide one-way SB busway Reconfiguration of Civic Square should be considered– perhaps its design treatment 2.1.3 One through lane SB and one through lane NB 3.5m-wide each could extend across the SkyTrain/BC Parkway area? 2.1.4 Straight curb 7.5m-wide WB busway immediately adjacent to the Metrotown Station For the scope of this project, N\N will resolve the connections between the Metrotown 2.1.5 At McKay, busway veers north (8m-wide shared through traffic lane) to Central station and Central and Beresford east and west of the station, and provide some Boulevard indication of design intent. 2.1.6 McKay extension north from Beresford Street to Central Boulevard Action: The City will provide specific guidance about lane widths, or 2.1.7 On McKay, one NB 3.5m-wide through lane plus a shared transit/auto lane from the articulate the process whereby lane widths are determined exchange approaching Central Blvd The wall between the bikeway and busway needs to be comfortable and not sever 2.1.8 Two SB lanes (one left-turn only lane) at Beresford. Maywood from the station. The City would like to see additional design details before signing off. 2.1.9 Inner travel lanes are 3.3m wide 2.1.10 Outer travel lanes are 3.5m wide 2.1.11 Straight curb on north side of Beresford with a right turn pocket at McKay Avenue 2.1.12 Parking lane with intersection bulb-outs on the south side of McKay 2.1.13 Straight curb along north side of Central Boulevard (with WB parking lane, WB through lane, shared left turn lane, EB travel lane, EB bus-only lane (with bulb-outs) (this may cause delays for the one WB through lane). 2.2 Layover facility 2.2.1 Curb adjustments In general, the curbs of the center island are shrunk to allow 1 meter clearance to the columns and the curbs become straight. The outer curb line is expanded inward toward the center 3 to 10 m depending on location. Most of the expansion is for wide walkways around the perimeter of the center. The front of the exchange, along Central Boulevard is moved inward 4.2 meters to provide depth for potential retail space. The drawings depict this better than words. (Note: geometry will need to be checked - can buses manoeuvre into position independently?) 2.2.2 L/O positions, Route 19 and HandyDART Layover positions vary based on the phase of the project
2.2.2.1 Phase 1 Route 19 using 12.3 meter trolleys Layover thirteen (13) articulated bus spaces, of which 10 are sequential arrival with independent departure and three are first in/first out spaces. See description by bay in 2.2.4
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc. | 30 Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc. | 31
36 METROtown exchange draft function plan Charrette Notes | October 2011 Charrette Notes | October 2011 TransLink TransLink
Route 19 – Two trolleys share bay 3 that will fit two 12.3 meter trolleys, exactly as 2.2.4.5 Bay 5 – Sequential arrival, unless bay 6 is vacant, then independent arrival, always today’s operation, just in a different location and orientation. Location is immediately independent departure. outside the lower mall entry. 2.2.4.6 Bay 6—Independent arrival and independent departure HandyDART – Uses bay 2 just ahead of Route 19. There may be a more optimal 2.2.4.7 Bays 7 , 8 and 9 -- If Bays 4,5, and 6 are not being utilized, these bays share the same location, but this was an unknown when we first laid out the facility. operating characteristics as the bays immediately north, Bays 4, 5, and 6. If Bays 4, 5, 2.2.2.2 Phase 2 Route 19 using 18.3meter Articulated Trolleys and 6 are being utilized these bays become First in—First out, If Bay 7 is the only bay used, it is independent pull in and out. Layover thirteen (13) articulated bus spaces of which 10 are sequential arrival with independent departure and 3 are first in/first out spaces. See description by bay in 2.2.4. 2.2.4.8 Bay 10 – Independent arrival and independent departure Route 19 – Utilizes bays 2 and 3 (to fit the 18.3 meter trolleys) bays, immediately adjacent 2.2.4.9 Bay 11 -- Sequential arrival, unless bay 10 is vacant, then independent arrival, always to each other and with full independent arrival and departure. The main operation bay, independent departure. bay 2 is to the west of the mall entrance, with the second bay, bay 3, directly in front of 2.2.4.10Bay 12 -- Sequential arrival, unless Bay 11 is vacant, then independent arrival, always the entrance. From a customer perspective this is exactly backwards. From an operations independent departure. perspective it makes some sense, fortunately this decision is neither final, nor fatal and can be revisited without modifying the facility physically. 2.2.4.11 Bay –13 Independent arrival and independent departure HandyDART – would utilize the back part of the very long eastern Route 19 bay, bay 3, 2.2.4.12Bay 14 -- Sequential arrival, unless bay 13 is vacant, then independent arrival, always which places it adjacent to the mall entry. This requirement was unknown when the independent departure. facility was first laid out. 2.2.4.13Bay 15 -- Sequential arrival, unless Bay 14 is vacant, then independent arrival, always 2.2.3 Assumed Dimensions independent departure. 2.2.3.1 Buses – Articulated Bus is allowed a space 3 meters x 19 meters, or somewhat larger than the physical envelope of the bus. 2.3 Proposed Retail Space 2.2.3.2 Spacing between Rows of Bus – Rows of layover buses were assumed to be one 2.3.1 The re-purposing of the exchange provide an opportunity to re-purpose a space that is meter apart. approximately 10 meters deep and 70 meters long for retail use, except for footprint space dedicated to a ventilation structure and a mechanical room structure. 2.2.3.3 Clearance to curb – In most cases bus layover spaces were assumed to be 0.3 meter from the curb line, except at the north face proximate to the back wall of what, we hope, 2.4 Pedestrian Pathways, Central Blvd to Mall/Route 19 will become street front retail. There the buses are assumed to be 1 meter away from the 2.4.1 West Entry -- The exchange re-design significantly widens the pathways into the Mall. curb to facilitate driver access. On the west side of the exchange the new pathway expands from its scant 1 meter to an 2.2.4 Operational Assumptions approximately 5 meters and is buffered by a 1 meter wide landscape strip which also functions as a pedestrian barrier to discourage entry into the bus loop. For further study, See drawings for bay numbers, the discussion below assumes that all buses in the layover area are this pedestrian access could be elevated a meter, +/-, or left at street level to blend into a articulated buses, thus presenting the most conservative set of operating assumptions. Today, sort of Woonerf with the Mall loading bay egress that is immediately adjacent to the west. only one route, one bus, is an articulated coach, the balance are 12.3 meter coaches. So the described operating assumptions only apply if all buses are artics. If standard length coaches are 2.4.2 East Entry -- The east access would provide a wider opening for this pathway to the mixed in the operating assumptions become less conservative. Mall with a nearly 7 meter wide path, 4.2 meters of which is uninterrupted by columns. The path would retain the vertical profile of the current path, and present a greater 2.2.4.1 Bay 1 – Under most operating conditions will be independent arrival and departure, opening at street/sidewalk face onto Central Boulevard. The vertical drop into the depending on the operating choices for Route 19 in phase 2; it could become sequential exchange with whatever method is used to protect people from stepping off the edge, arrival/independent departure as it competes for pull in space with Route 19 buses in guard railing, etc. will prohibit pedestrian access into the exchange from this walkway. A Bay 2. design detail that has not been completed is accommodation of pedestrians from the 2.2.4.2 Bay 2 – Phase 1 is HandyDART, Phase 2 is Route 19 elevation of this walkway down to the elevation of the exchange, to access Route 19. The walkway is at the same elevation as the Mall entrance but approximately 1 meter 2.2.4.3 Bay 3 – Phase 1 is Route 19, Phase 2 is Route 19 and HandyDART above the surface of the exchange. 2.2.4.4 Bay -4 – Sequential arrival, unless Bay 5 is vacant, then independent arrival, always 2.5 Jaywalking Strategies – Current Exchange independent departure.
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc. | 32 Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc. | 33
METROtown exchange draft function plan 37 Charrette Notes | October 2011 Charrette Notes | October 2011 TransLink TransLink
2.5.1 Perhaps the biggest challenge is to discourage pedestrians from using the bus driveway as an entry into the loop or a short-cut to route 19 or the mall entry if arriving from the west. 3. OUTSTANDING ISSUES FOR This can best be facilitated by changing the pavement surface and posting the driveway, which has been narrowed from its nearly 16 meters to 11 meters. The pavement surfaces VERIFICATION could be further enhanced by use of pedestrian crossing paint markings. As a last resort 3.1. The proposed options operate under the following lane width assumptions, signing will also be required. Finally, some level of enforcement may be necessary to all of which will be validated or refined in the design phase of the project, ensure people do not form bad habits while there are fewer buses actually using the loop before the final report: for layover. While not recommended at the outset, if continued pedestrian incursion into the bus loop becomes a significant safety issue due to the attractiveness of the Route 19 3.1.1. Inside travel lanes – 3.3m (3.1m is not sufficient) (bays 2 and 3) next to the Mall entrance, access to the bus bays could be controlled 3.1.2. Outside travel lanes —3.5m through use of glass panels and doors that only open at the bus doors and only when buses are loading. This type of design has been used in some exchanges as a method to 3.1.3. Shared bus/auto travel lanes –4.5m deter pedestrian incursion into an operating area. The design of Bays 1, 2 and 3, should 3.1.4. One-way busway allowing one bus to pass another bus –7.5m allow for this possibility should it become necessary. Another preventive measure is to require operators not post a route head sign while in layover. This is to prevent 3.1.5. Parking lane -2.5m (2m parking lane is not acceptable) customers from entering the layover facility to seek out their bus, rather than walking 3.2. The proposed options assume the following lane configurations: above or across Central Boulevard to reach the exchange. 3.2.1. Two-lane Beresford Street with parking on the south side of the street. In Option A, 2.6 Jaywalking Strategies – Central Boulevard the eastbound lane is 3.3m wide; the eastbound parking lane is 2.5m wide; and the 2.6.1 Central Boulevard will have all the attendant issues of any urban arterial in an area with westbound lane is 3.5m wide. In Option B, dimensions would vary. highly varied pedestrian desire lines and limited crossings. Well marked and placed 3.2.2. Central Boulevard either remains five lanes or has one westbound parking lane pedestrian crosswalks will aid substantially in guiding pedestrians to cross in the (2.5m), one westbound through lane (3.3m), a shared left turn lane/median (3.3m), intended locations as will signal operations that have short cycle times to minimize one eastbound travel lane (3.3m), and one eastbound bus-only lane (4.5m). pedestrian wait times, thus discouraging the alternative of jaywalking. Even so, jaywalking in urban environments is a given, the degree of jaywalking will depend on the 3.2.3. New connections between Beresford Street and Central Boulevard degree of enforcement applied to Central Boulevard. 3.2.3.1. North-south street east of Telford Avenue connecting Beresford Street and Central Boulevard and facilitating transit access to the exchange 7.5m-wide one-way SB busway One through lane SB and one through lane NB 3.5m-wide each 3.2.3.2. McKay extension north from Beresford Street to Central Boulevard One NB 3.5m-wide through lane funnelling into a shared transit/auto lane approaching Central Blvd Two SB lanes (one left-turn only lane 3.3m-wide and one through lane 3.5m-wide) at Beresford. 3.2.4. Busway is 7.5m wide
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc. | 34 Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc. | 35
38 METROtown exchange draft function plan APPENDIX b • Spacing between Buses – Articulated buses are arrayed 5m 1.1.3. proposed Retail Space pedestrian wait times, thus discouraging the alternative of jaywalking. apart, i.e. the distance between the nose of one bus and the tail The re-purposing of the exchange provide an opportunity to re-purpose Even so, jaywalking in urban environments is a given, the degree of WORKING ASSUMPTIONS of the proceeding bus is 5m. While this distance is less than the a space that is approximately nine meters deep and 70 meters long, except jaywalking will depend on the degree of enforcement applied to Central TransLink facility design standard, it is still operable at the desired for footprint space dedicated to a ventilation structure and a mechanical Boulevard. 1.1.1. proposed curb adjustments in preferred Option 1 lowe r speeds of the layover facility (3 km/hour or less, at the room structure. • All street and lane dimensions are at the discretion of City of pull-out from the curb). Burnaby. 1.1.4. pedestrian Pathways, Central Blvd to Mall/Route 19 • Clearance to curb – In most cases bus layover spaces were • New north-south street east of Telford Avenue connecting assumed to be 0.3 meter from the curb line, except at the north 1.1.4.1. West Entry Beresford Street and Central Boulevard and facilitating transit face proximate to the back wall of what, we hope, will become The exchange re-design significantly widens the pathways into the access to the exchange street front retail. There the buses are assumed to be 1 meter away Mall. On the west side of the exchange the new pathway expands from its scant 1 meter to an approximately 3-4 meters and is buffered by a .7 • 7.5m-wide one-way SB busway from the curb to facilitate driver access. meter wide landscape strip which also functions as a pedestrian barrier • One through lane SB and one through lane NB 3.5m-wide each 1.1.2.4. Operational Assumptions to discourage entry into the bus loop. For further study, this pedestrian See drawings for bay numbers, the discussion below assumes that all access could be elevated a meter, +/-, or left at street level to blend • Straight curb 7.5m-wide WB busway immediately adjacent to and buses in the layover area are articulated buses, thus presenting the most into a sort of Woonerf with the auto/truck access that is immediately south of the Metrotown Station conservative set of operating assumptions. Today, only one route, one adjacent to the west. • At McKay, busway veers north (7.5m-wide shared through traffic bus, is an articulated coach, the balance are 12.3 meter coaches. So lane) to Central Boulevard the described operating assumptions only apply if all buses are artics. 1.1.4.2. East Entry If standard length coaches are mixed in the operating assumptions The east access would provide a wider opening for this pathway to • McKay extension north from Beresford Street to Central become less conservative. the Mall with a nearly 6 meter wide path, 3.1 meters of which is Boulevard uninterrupted by columns. The path would retain the vertical profile Bay 1 – will be independent arrival and departure, even if Bay 2/3 • One NB 3.5m-wide through lane funnelling into a 7.5m-wide of the current path, and present a greater opening at street/sidewalk is occupied by Route 19 trolleys shared transit/auto lane approaching Central Blvd face onto Central Boulevard. The vertical drop into the exchange with whatever method is used to protect people from stepping off the edge, Bay 2/3 – Two Route 19 trolleys located 3m apart for first in / first • Two SB lanes (one left-turn only lane) at Beresford. guard railing, etc. will prohibit pedestrian access into the exchange out operation. o Inner travel lanes are 3.3m wide from this walkway. A design detail that has not been completed is Bay 4 – Sequential arrival, unless Bay 5 is vacant, then independent accommodation of pedestrians from the elevation of this walkway down o Outer travel lanes are 3.5m wide arrival, always independent departure. to the elevation of the exchange, to access Route 19. The walkway is at the same elevation as the Mall entrance but approximately 1 meter • Straight curb on north side of Beresford with a right turn pocket above the surface of the exchange. at McKay Avenue Bay 5 – Independent arrival / independent departure • Straight curb along north side of Central Boulevard (with two Bays 6 , 7 and 8 – If Bays 4 and 5 are not being utilized, these bays 1.1.5. Jaywalking Strategies WB through lanes, shared left turn lane, EB travel lane, EB become capable of facilitating independent departures. Buses in 1.1.5.1. Current Exchange bus-only lane (with pull-ins) Bays 6 and 7 arrive sequentially, while buses in Bay 8 would arrive Perhaps the biggest challenge is to discourage pedestrians from using independently of other operations. If Bays 4 and 5 are being 1.1.2. Layover (L/O) facility the bus driveway as an entry into the loop or a short-cut to route 19 utilized these bays become First in—First out, If only Bays 6 and or the mall entry if arriving from the west. This can best be facilitated 1.1.2.1. Curb adjustments 8 are in use, Bay 6 becomes independent pull in and out. by changing the pavement surface and posting the driveway, which has In general, the curbs of the center island are shrunk to allow 0.5-1 been narrowed from its nearly 16 meters to 11 meters. The pavement Bay 9 – Independent arrival and independent departure meter clearance to the columns and the curbs become straight. The surfaces could be further enhanced by use of pedestrian crossing paint outer curb line is expanded inward toward the center 0.5 to 8 m markings. As a last resort signing will also be required. Finally, some depending on location. Most of the expansion is for wide walkways Bay 10 – Sequential arrival, unless Bay 9 is vacant, then independent arrival, always independent departure. level of enforcement may be necessary to ensure people do not form around the perimeter of the center. The front of the exchange, along bad habits while there are fewer buses actually using the loop for Central Boulevard is moved inward 3 m to provide depth for potential Bay 11 – Sequential arrival, unless Bay 10 is vacant, then layover. While not recommended at the outset, if continued pedestrian retail space. The drawings depict this better than words. independent arrival, always independent departure. incursion into the bus loop becomes a significant safety issue due to the attractiveness of the Route 19 (Bays 2 and 3) next to the Mall entrance, 1.1.2.2. L/O positions and Route 19 Bay 12 – Independent arrival and independent departure access to the bus bays could be controlled through use of glass panels • Layover 12 articulated bus spaces, of which five are sequential and doors that only open at the bus doors and only when buses are arrival with independent departure, four are independent arrival Bay 13 – Sequential arrival, unless Bay 12 is vacant, then loading. This type of design has been used in some exchanges as a with independent departure, and three are first in/first out spaces. independent arrival, always independent departure. method to deter pedestrian incursion into an operating area. The design See description by bay in 2.2.4 of Bays 1, 2 and 3, should allow for this possibility should it become Bay 14 – Sequential arrival, unless Bay 13 is vacant, then necessary. Another preventive measure is to require operators not post • Route 19 – Two trolleys share Bay 2/3 that will fit two 12.3 meter independent arrival, always independent departure. trolleys, exactly as the operation in the current exchange, just in a route head sign while in layover. This is to prevent customers from entering the layover facility to seek out their bus, rather than walking a different location and orientation. Location is immediately All turning movements for buses entering and exiting the layover above or across Central Boulevard to reach the exchange. outside the lower mall entry. facility are graphically shown in Appendix C. Between the vehicle 1.1.2.3. Assumed Dimensions sweeps and the west wall of the layover facility, there is a 1m buffer. 1.1.5.2. Central Boulevard On the west end of the exchange, a buffer of at least .6m has been • Buses – Articulated Bus is allowed a space 3 meters x 19 meters, Central Boulevard will have all the attendant issues of any urban maintained between the wall and vehicle sweeps. Articulated buses or somewhat larger than the physical envelope of the bus. arterial in an area with highly varied pedestrian desire lines and limited in Bays 1 and 4-12 are placed 5m apart, while the two trolleys in Bay crossings. Well marked and placed pedestrian crosswalks will aid • Spacing between Rows of Bus – Rows of layover buses were 2/3 are placed 3m apart. Vehicles park parallel to the curb without substantially in guiding pedestrians to cross in the intended locations assumed to be one meter apart. infringing on the plane of the curb. as will signal operations that have short cycle times to minimize
METROtown exchange draft function plan 39 APPENDIX C bUS SWEEPS
40 METROtown exchange draft function plan METROtown exchange draft function plan 41 42 METROtown exchange draft function plan METROtown exchange draft function plan 43 44 METROtown exchange draft function plan METROtown exchange draft function plan 45 46 METROtown exchange draft function plan METROtown exchange draft function plan 47 48 METROtown exchange draft function plan