Intermodal Connectivity at Gateway Hubs

Rebecca Nelson

Final Report Prepared for the Metrolinx Rob MacIsaac Fellowship Program Academic Supervisor: Paul Hess, University of Toronto Metrolinx Advisor: Jana Neumann, Planning and Development

August 2018 Acknowledgements

Chair of Metrolinx, Mr. Rob MacIsaac. Since its creation, the program has given universityThe Rob MacIsaac students Fellowship studying in Program the Greater was Torontocreated inand 2011 Hamilton to honour Area the (GTHA) first work experience. The Fellowship Program consists of two parts: a research termthe opportunity occurring in to the expand winter upon semester, their studies and an and internship to benefit during from the practical summer months. This report presents research completed for the research term of the by Metrolinx as major transit stations with two or more converging (existing or planned)2018 Fellowship rapid transit Program lines on (2015a; intermodal 2015b). connectivity at Gateway Hubs, defined

I would like to thank my academic supervisor, Professor Paul Hess at the University of Toronto, and my Metrolinx Advisor, Jana Neumann, Senior Advisor, in Planning and Development. Professor Hess and Ms. Neumann provided support throughout this report. my research term and valuable feedback in crafting my methodology and finalizing I also wish to acknowledge the support provided by Professor Lindsay Stephens at the University of Toronto in obtaining ethics for this research project, as well as Jessica Stronghill and Nour El-Saheb for coordinating the 2018 Rob MacIsaac Fellowship program. I would like to offer special thanks to those who helped me in the recruitment process, as well as to those who participated in my study, for this research would be impossible without them. Finally, I am grateful for the opportunity Metrolinx has given me to explore my research interests in a the participants of this study. professional setting, and for their financial support in providing compensation to Rebecca Nelson

*When printing this document as a PDF, please choose “choose paper source by PDF page size” to ensure the intended layout is maintained. Final Report: Intermodal Connectivity at Gateway Hubs

Rebecca Nelson

Masters of Planning, University of Toronto [email protected]

Prepared for the Metrolinx Rob MacIsaac Fellowship Program Academic Advisor: Professor Paul Hess, University of Toronto Metrolinx Advisor: Jana Neumann, Planning and Development

August 2018 Contents 1.0 Introduction 1 1.1 Context �� 1 1.2 Study Overview �� 1 1.3 Report Outline �� 2 2.0 Methodology 2 2.1 Site Selection �� 2 2.2 Research Methods �� 3 2.2.1 Site Visit Audit �� 3 2.2.2 Intermodal Connectivity Audit �� 4 2.2.3 Sharing Circles �� 4 2.2.4 Interviews �� 5 2.2.5 Participants �� 5

�� 3.0 Study3.1.1 Areas: Transit Gateway�� Hub Profiles 6 3.1 3.1.2Dundas Population West-Bloor and Gateway Travel Characteristics Hub Profile . �� 76 3.1.3 Previous Studies �� 76 �� 8 3.2.1 Transit �� 8 3.2 3.2.2Kennedy Population Gateway and Hub Travel Profile Characteristics �� 8 3.2.3 Previous Studies �� 9 4.0 Findings 9 4.1 Dundas West-Bloor Gateway Hub ��10 4.1.1 Transfer Routes ��10 4.1.2 Site Visit Audit ��11 4.1.3 Intermodal Connectivity Audit and Sharing Circle Key Themes ��14 4.2 Kennedy Gateway Hub Transfer Routes ��19 4.2.1 Transfer Routes ��19 4.2.2 Site Visit Audit ��20 4.2.3 Intermodal Connectivity Audit and Sharing Circle Key Themes ��22 4.3 Evaluating the Intermodal Connectivity Audit and Sharing Circles ��24 5.0 Discussion 27 5.1 Existing and Emerging Policy Framework ��27 ��27 5.1.2 Station Design ��28 5.1.35.1.1 AccessibilityWayfinding ��28 5.1.4 Winter Conditions ��30 5.2 Opportunities to Improve Intermodal Connectivity ��30 ��30 5.2.2 Pedestrian Route ��31 5.2.35.2.1 PublicWayfinding Realm and Amenities ��33 5.2.4 Winter Conditions ��34 5.2.5 Summary ��35

��35 6.0 PhaseRecommendations 2: Conduct intermodal connectivity studies at all intermodal stations within mobility 35 hubsPhase �� 1: Implement improvements identified in the study areas 37 ��37 Phase 4: Continue monitoring and evaluation ��38 7.0 PhaseConclusion 3: Implement best practices in retrofits and future station design 38 Appendicies Appendix A: Site Visit Audit Appendix B1: Dundas West-Bloor Gateway Hub Intermodal Connectivity Audit Appendix B2: Kennedy Gateway Hub Intermodal Connectivity Audit Appendix C: Sharing Circle Questions Appendix D1: Dundas West-Bloor Gateway Hub Intermodal Connectivity Audit Responses Appendix D2: Kennedy Gateway Hub Intermodal Connectivity Audit Responses Appendix E1: Dundas West-Bloor Gateway Hub Sharing Circle Summary Appendix E2: Kennedy Gateway Hub Sharing Circle Summary Appendix F: Assigning Priority Levels for Intermodal Mobility Hub Studies 1.0 INTRODUCTION Newman & Kenworthy, 2015; Gurin, 2003; Wegener & Greene, 2002; IBI Group, 2002). 1.1 Context 1.2 Study Overview Intermodal transit stations are important locations in the regional transit network where The study had four main objectives: two or more transit lines connect, and where (i) To identify barriers to equitable pedestrian high volumes of passenger transfers take place. accessibility between transportation Metrolinx’s Mobility Hub Guidelines (2011) modes at two Gateway Hubs (Dundas West-Bloor and Kennedy) with a focus on winter conditions; Thisdefine studythese placeswas asundertaken Gateway Hubs. to evaluate (ii) To position these barriers within the intermodal connectivity for pedestrians in existing and emerging policy framework; the winter at two Gateway Hubs in the City of (iii) To determine opportunities to reduce Toronto: Dundas West-Bloor and Kennedy. these barriers and improve intermodal connectivity at the two Gateway Hubs; and, Improving intermodal connectivity at Gateway (iv) Hubs supports Metrolinx’s mission to deliver recommendations for intermodal mobility To relate these findings to broader and build mobility solutions for the region. hubs across the Greater Toronto and Hamilton Area (GTHA). 3 in Metrolinx’s 2041 Regional Transportation More specifically, this study relates to Strategy The study included four methods: System. A priority action of Strategy 3 is to (i) A site visit audit (to evaluate quantitative “setPlan consistent (RTP): Optimizehigh-quality the standards Transportation for the Gateway Hub and transfer route traveler experience”, which includes transit user characteristics); safety, convenience of using the transit system, (ii) An intermodal connectivity audit (with providing universal access to stations, and participants to evaluate qualitative embedding design excellence in transportation Gateway Hub and transfer route planning, such as accessible station access characteristics); 1. All of these factors affect the (iii) A sharing circle (with participants to provide more detail on the quality of the enjoyableand wayfinding transit transfers can be. Good station pedestrian environment between rapid designpedestrian will environment, become increasingly and how efficient important and transit modes); and, as ridership on the regional transit system (iv) Interviews with representatives from grows, particularly under the GO Expansion Metrolinx and the Toronto Transit program, which will provide frequent, all day, Commission (TTC). bidirectional transit on much of the GO rail network by 2025. This research is innovative because little information is available on intermodal More broadly, improving infrastructure for sustainable transportation modes, including 1 Wayfinding is defined in the 2041 RTP as “an orientation system […] that enables travellers to public transit, supports a better quality of life choose a preferred route, monitor their journey, and for its users, and helps mitigate the negative recognize when they have arrived” (Metrolinx, 2018c). environmental, health, safety, and economic A wayfinding system consists of mapping, graphics, schedules and timetables, directional signage, digital impacts associated with auto-dependent and real time information, network and line diagrams, and terminology and naming conventions (Metrolinx, 2018d). environments (Bertram & Rehdanz, 2015; 1 | Morar,Final Report Raoslav, Spiridon, & Păcurar, 2014; 2.0 METHODOLOGY on winter conditions and the equitable accessibilitypedestrian connectionsof different public specifically transportation focusing modes. Additionally, this research is at a 2.1 Site Selection smaller scale than previous studies at both While both of the Gateway Hubs included Gateway Hubs, as its focus is on the transfer in this study have been studied in the past, area between transit modes, and not the they have been examined at a larger scale, surrounding station area. and previous studies focused more on the surrounding environment of both stations. 1.3 Report Outline area between the three rapid transit modes The remainder of this report is structured as atThis each study Hub. specifically As a result, evaluates this study the is meant transfer to follows: 2.0 Methodology explains each method in for improvements of the features along the more detail, and describes the participant transferbe specific route in and terms within of its transit recommendations stations. recruitment process. 3.0 Study Area describes the criteria used in Dundas West-Bloor and Kennedy Gateway selecting the two Gateway Hubs for this study: Hubs were chosen for this study for the Dundas West-Bloor and Kennedy. Additionally, following reasons: 1. These two Gateway Hubs have at least two transit modes intersecting each Gateway Hub, intersecting existing (vs planned) rapid a profile of each Gateway Hub, including the the population and travel characteristics of the transit modes. surrounding area, and an overview of previous 2. This research focuses on Gateway Hubs studies of each Gateway Hub is provided. with at least two types of unique rapid 4.0 Findings transit modes, not only to evaluate the visit audits, intermodal connectivity audits, connectivity between different transit lines, presents findings from the site and sharing circles grouped in four themes: but between different types of transit, and different transit agencies. These factors public realm and amentities; and (iv) winter result in more choices for the transit user. (i) wayfinding; (ii) pedestrian route; (iii) conditions. While these modal and route choices are 5.0 Discussion provides a discussion of the important for a comprehensive transit network, the transfer between different policy context. modes and agencies may be confusing, findings within the existing and emerging 6.0 Recommendations focus on how to unsafe, and inaccessible for riders. improve the winter intermodal connectivity of 3. Neither of these stations currently has Gateway Hubs at a region-wide scale. construction occurring within the transfer area. While it is important to assess how the construction process affects transit riders, this is not the focus of the study. A few Gateway Hubs in the City of Toronto meet these criteria. Site visits at four stations (Kipling, Dundas West-Bloor, Main Street, and Kennedy) and consultation with Metrolinx informed the selection of Dundas West-Bloor and Kennedy, as Gateway Hubs that would Figure 1 shows

benefit fromIntermodal further Connectivity research. at Gateway Hubs | 2 Study Areas

Figure 1: Mobility Hubs in the Greater Toronto and Hamilton Area (GTHA): Toronto, York Region, and Peel Region (Metrolinx, 2011)

as well as certain amenities such as maps, the selected Gateway Hubs for this study with benches, and garbage bins. Site visit audits redall Gatewaycircles. Hubs in the GTHA, and identifies at Dundas West-Bloor and Kennedy Gateway Hubs were conducted on Tuesday March 20, 2.2 Research Methods 2018 for the duration of three hours and one hour, respectively. The following section describes the four methods used to evaluate the intermodal The audit tool records the quantitative connectivity at the Dundas West-Bloor and characteristics of each station including the Kennedy Gateway Hubs: following, among others: (i) A site visit audit; • Route distance; (ii) An intermodal connectivity audit; • Number of staircases or escalators needed (iii) A sharing circle; and, to complete the transfer; (iv) Interviews. • If a parking lot was crossed; • The number of transit shelters; 2.2.1 Site Visit Audit • The presence of maps and schedules; and, • The time allotted at crossings with a The site visit audit was completed during preliminary site visits of each station. This For the complete audit tool, please see Appendixsignalized A. intersection. rapid transit modes, and informed the creation audit identified the transfer routes between all staircases, escalators, and elevators are located, of maps and station floor plans to show where 3 | Final Report The audit has four main categories for evaluation: understandingVisualizing and digitizingof the pedestrian the built environment (i) Transit and area information; (Scholsherg,are significant & complementary Brown, 2004) toolsand tofor engage public (ii) Station amenities; stakeholders and decision makers to see where (iii) Pedestrian route; and, improvements to the environment should be (iv) Intersections along the transfer route. made (Moura, Cambra, & Conçalves, 2017). The The intermodal connectivity audit at Dundas audits were used in the intermodal connectivity West-Bloor station was conducted on auditmaps andwith floor participants, plans created to determinefrom the site where visit Thursday March 24, 2018 for the duration of improvements can be made along the transfer degrees Celsius, and at times with heavy rain. tools to translate qualitative values from both Twotwo hours.intermodal During theconnectivity audit, it wasaudits below were five typesroute. Theseof audits maps and and the floor sharing plans werecircles useful into conducted at Kennedy station on separate days, to accommodate participants’ schedules. Section 4. quantifiable and visual values, as found in 2.2.2 Intermodal Connectivity 27, 2018 and the second audit took place on Audit The first audit took place on Saturday March The two primary methods, intermodal Friday April 6, 2018 for one hour each. Both connectivity audits and sharing circles, were 2018.were chilly The complete days with audit temperatures tool can be below found five in completed in sequence with nine participants, Appendixdegrees Celsius, B. and some light rain on April 6, (n=4 for Dundas West-Bloor station, and n=5 for Kennedy station). The intermodal connectivity 2.2.3 Sharing Circles audit differs from the site visit audit in that it seeks more qualitative responses. The Sharing circles occurred following the intermodal connectivity audit2 created for intermodal connectivity audit, with the this study was adapted from the Pedestrian same participants. This method allowed the Environment Data Scan (PEDS) survey (Clifton participants to elaborate on their responses in the audit and build upon each other’s comments previously completed for an honours thesis to create a complete image of the transfer in& Rodríguez,two Ottawa 2004) neighbourhoods and a walkability (led by audit the experience. The sharing circle took a semi- Healthy Transportation Coalition) (Nelson, structured format, with prepared questions to previous studies to evaluate the pedestrian environment;2016). Several however, methods direct have observation been used (i.e. in 2 Intermodal connectivity refers to the connection in the form of an audit) is preferable since this between different transit modes. “Walkability audits” are commonly used to evaluate the pedestrian environment; method does not rely on user memory, which however, using the term walkability audit for this study is is prone to inaccuracy (Kim, 2015). Further, problematic for two reasons. First, the term “walkability” audits conducted in person are valuable to is exclusionary because it only includes pedestrians who walk. This study considers the experiences of all transit measure the pedestrian environment (Moudon riders, whether they are walking, or using a mobility and Lee, 2003) because transfers are affected device such as a wheelchair. Second, a walkability audit by factors at a micro-scale. does not specify the type of environment studied. This research specifically evaluates the transfer area between rapid transit modes. Therefore, for this study the term intermodal connectivity audit is used, which refers to the pedestrian environment of a transfer route between two or more rapid transit modes and unique transit agencies.

Intermodal Connectivity at Gateway Hubs | 4 guide the conversation. A list ofthese questions gender and physical ability contribute to can be found in Appendix C. one’s pedestrian experience (Moura, Cambra, & Conçalves, 2017). However, due to the The Sharing Circle for Dundas West-Bloor sensitivity of information, socio-demographic station took place over Google Hangout on data like income and occupation were not Thursday April 5, 2018 for one hour. As the collected from participants. While this smaller intermodal connectivity audit took longer to complete than expected, the sharing circle was pedestrian experiences completing transfers at scheduled for another day when all participants thesesample two size Gateway is not a completeHubs, this representation study evaluates of could partake in the conversation. The sharing the pedestrian environment in detail, which circles for Kennedy station took place directly can act as a guide to frame future studies. As following the intermodal connectivity audits, compensation for their time to complete the for one hour each at a nearby community centre. dollar PRESTO card, provided by Metrolinx in supportstudy, participants of this research. received a pre-loaded fifty- 2.2.4 Interviews Seven representatives from Metrolinx and Interviews were completed with a total of the TTC participated in interviews, and were seven participants from Metrolinx and the recruited through a purposive sampling TTC. The interviews were unstructured and completed during the month of May 2018 for interviewees are not listed to maintain their one hour each. The purpose of these interviews requestsapproach. for Theanonymity. specific departments of was to gain a better understanding of the policies, guidelines, standards, and initiatives that already exist, or are under development, to address aspects of intermodal connectivity at Gateway Hubs.

2.2.5 Participants Participants for the intermodal connectivity audit and sharing circles were recruited through committees under the TTC, and Metrolinx, as well the University of Toronto Transportation Research Institute (UTTRI). As mentioned, a total of nine people participated in the study, four evaluated the transfer at the Dundas West-Bloor Gateway Hub,

participated,and five evaluated ranging thefrom transfer 23 years at to Kennedy35 years ofstation. age, and Overall, from fivedifferent females ethnic and backgrounds four males including Caucasian, East Asian, South Asian, and North African. One person in a power- wheelchair participated in the study at each Gateway Hub, and all other participants were able-bodied. Including diverse participants is important to this study, as factors like

5 | Final Report N 3.0 STUDY AREAS: GATEWAY HUB PROFILES

D GO 3.1 Dundas West-Bloor undas S Shoppers t W Drug Mart Gateway Hub Profile est

FRESH Co. ve Chelsea A UP

KitchenerGO Transit: Line

UP Express ve Edna A TTC The Crossways

t West Bloor S

Dundas West TTC Station Route 1 (approx. 350m)

GO Transit: Line 2 Subway: Barrie Line Bloor GO/UP Station Route 2 (approx. 300m) Bloor-Danforth Proposed Tunnel Location Signalized Crossing

Figure 3: Transfer routes between Bloor GO Transit/UP Express and Dundas West TTC stations

Recently, Metrolinx announced plans to construct a tunnel between the TTC station and the GO Transit/UP Express station to provide a EXISTING FUTURE more connected and seamless transfer between TTC Subway GO Expansion Program GO Transit UP Express tunnel will provide a connection between the Transit Station existingthe three northern transit modesaccess (Benzie,tunnel from 2017). Bloor The Figure 2: Existing and Proposed Transit at Dundas West- GO/UP station directly to the Dundas West Bloor Gateway Hub (Adapted from Metrolinx, 2015a) TTC subway platform level. The tunnel will run 3.1.1 Transit underneath “The Crossways” building, a two- tower apartment complex at Dundas Street Dundas West-Bloor station serves three rapid West and Bloor Street (Figure 3). transit modes in addition to TTC buses and streetcars (Figure 2): As shown in Figure 4, the connection will be • The Line 2 Bloor-Danforth TTC subway; made from Bloor GO/UP station to Dundas • The Kitchener GO train; and, • The UP Express train. of stairs or two elevators from the Bloor GO/ UPWest tunnel TTC station to the by TTC taking subway two separate platform. flights In The Kitchener GO rail line is part of the GO between these levels will be the concourse with Expansion program, with increased service turnstiles for riders entering or exiting the paid planned by 2025. Currently, two transfer routes exist between the Dundas West TTC station GO Transit and UP Express have already been and the Bloor GO Transit/UP Express stations builtfare zone. over 25The years stairs earlier to connect in anticipation the subway ofthis to (Figure 3). project; however, the elevators are not yet built.

Intermodal Connectivity at Gateway Hubs | 6 CROSS SECTION - OPTION 2

Figure 4: Cross section of the planned tunnel between Bloor and Dundas West stations (Amec Foster Wheeler, 2016)

BLOOR GO STATION IMPROVEMENTS TP116012 Anticipating GO Expansion on the Kitchener PRELIMINARY DESIGN REPORT JUNE 2016 3.1.3 Previous Studies 1:250 P2 LEVEL CONCOURSE CONNECTION GO line, the existing northern Bloor GO In a 2011 mobilityOPTION 2 hub study, several strengths06 station tunnel will be extended to the east to encompass the new rail track. This tunnel will surrounding the Dundas West-Bloor Gateway provide an exceptional improvement to the Huband (see weaknesses Brook McIlroy were identifiedInc., 2011). at Some and existing transfer between Dundas West and strengths of the station include convenient Bloor stations, which is documented in this access to a variety of transit modes, a strong report. retail fabric, and a diverse community. The 3.1.2 Population and Travel Characteristics betweenstudy identified transit themodes, following poor weaknesses: pedestrian a 18,400 people live in the Dundas West-Bloor circulation,lack of efficient, an uninviting weather protected pedestrian connections realm with mobility hub with a population density of 92 a poor quality streetscape, and a lack of open people per hectare, compared to the average in space. Brook McIlroy Inc. (2011) made several the GTHA of 8 people per hectare (Metrolinx, recommendations to improve the quality of 2015b). Households in the mobility hub have the station and its pedestrian environment, an average of 1.2 residents and 0.9 cars, where including the following: • Widened sidewalks; • Improved crossings to enhance circulation; transitnearly 60%(Metrolinx, of residents 2015b). drive The to station work in area the • Better weather protection; morning peak period, and 24% use public • A stronger station presence at the street paradise” (Walkscore, 2018a). In terms of GO level; and, stationhas a Walkscore access: of 93, classified as “walker’s • A tunnel connection from Dundas West to • Bloor station entrance. in the morning; • 63% of GO station users walk to the station • 16% take public transit; and, off10% at arrivethe station) at the (Metrolinx, station by motor2015b). vehicle No information(5% drive themselves, is available and on 5%the areaccess dropped- mode shares for the TTC or UP Express.

7 | Final Report 3.2 Kennedy Gateway Hub Crosstown light rail transit (LRT), or ECLRT, which extends westwards to Mount Dennis. Profile The new ECLRT Kennedy station will be located south of Eglinton Avenue East (Figure

Line 3 - Scarborough RT Stouffville Line GO Transit: 6). The primary entrance and its associated

by LRT, subway, Scarborough RT and buses. Theurban entrance plaza will building serve thewill passengers include an arriving indoor bicycle parking facility. The secondary entrance, located east of the GO rail corridor will be combined with a new GO Transit Scarborough Subway station building. A GO Transit passenger pick- Eglinton Crosstown LRT up and drop-off will be located adjacent to the

Line 2 Subway: theentrance primary and and accessible secondary via theentrances. urban plaza.New Bloor-Danforth GOAn Transit underground platforms unpaid on both fare sides zone of will the linkrail corridor will extend an integrated passenger experience from the ECLRT to regional commuter rail. The existing south and east TTC EXISTING FUTURE entrances will be maintained as tertiary and TTC Subway Scarborough Subway quaternary entrances providing access and Scarborough RT Eglinton Crosstown LRT interconnectivity between ECLRT, TTC and GO (to be replaced by Scarborough Subway) GO Expansion Program GO Transit Transit facilities. Transit Station Figure 5: Existing and Proposed Transit Influencing 3.2.2 Population and Travel Kennedy Gateway Hub (Adapted from Metrolinx, 2015c) Characteristics 3.2.1 Transit 14,700 people live in the Kennedy mobility hub area, with a population density of 73 people Kennedy station serves three rapid transit per hectare (Metrolinx 2015b). Households modes, in addition to TTC buses (Figure 5): within the mobility hub have an average of 2.8 • The Line 2 Bloor-Danforth TTC subway; • The Stouffville GO train; and, drive during their morning commutes, while • The Scarborough Rapid Transit (SRT) train. residents and 1 car each, and 68% of residents area surrounding the station has a WalkScore The existing station facilities include public 22% take public transit (Metrolinx, 2015c). The washrooms (TTC Station), a passenger pick- 2018b). In terms of GO station access: up and drop-off area (TTC Station), several •of 48, classified as “car dependent” (WalkScore, commuter parking lots, and a bicycle rack (GO during morning peak hours; Station) (Metrolinx, 2015c). Current plans • 43% of GO station users walk to the station are to replace the Scarborough RT with a new • Scarborough subway, which will extend one 14% take public transit; and, stop from Kennedy Station to Scarborough carpool)43% use (Metrolinx, a car (18% 2015c). drive themselves to Town Centre. No informationthe station, is21% available are dropped on the accessoff, and mode 4% shares for the TTC. Additionally, Kennedy station will become the terminal stop at the eastern end of the Eglinton

Intermodal Connectivity at Gateway Hubs | 8 1 Main Entrance Avenue 2 Passenger Pick Up & Eglinton Drop Off

3 New East & West GO Platforms 4 New GO Transit T Passenger Pick Up & ransway Drop Off

Cr 5 Secondary Entrance esent (New GO Transit Ticketing Building)

Figure 6: Eglinton Crosstown LRT Kennedy Station Aerial view (Adapted from TTC, 2018a)

3.2.3 Previous Studies 4.0 FINDINGS A mobility hub study for Kennedy Station was conducted by Metrolinx in 2013. This study visit audits, intermodal connectivity audits, opportunities for Kennedy station within the andThis sharingsection presentscircles conducted the findings for from each the study site identified several areas for improvement and area. For each Gateway Hub, the site visit audit • Improving pedestrian and cyclist access; •primary zone (i.e. within 250m of the station): • Providing bicycle parking; connectivityis presented first,audit(s) followed and bysharing an overview circles, of • RetainingPedestrianizing non-fare existing paid connectionsparking areas; across includingfour key themesthe following: identified in the intermodal the GO corridor; • Allowing transit riders to retain on-fare- (ii) Pedestrian route; paid connections across the GO transit (iii)(i) PublicWayfinding; realm and amenities; and, corridor; (iv) Winter conditions • Adding features to announce the station to pedestrians passing by; and, • Enhancing the aesthetics of the environment D-E. surrounding the station (Metrolinx, 2013). For detailed findings, please see Appendices

9 | Final Report 4.1 Dundas West-Bloor These two routes and the broader transfer area were the focus for the site visit and intermodal Gateway Hub connectivity audits. 4.1.1 Transfer Routes The Dundas West-Bloor Gateway Hub includes two main transfer routes between the GO Train and UP Express station and the TTC subway station: • Route 1: Along Bloor Street West; and, • across Dundas Street West (Figure 7). Route 2: Through a commercial plaza and

D GO undas S

Shoppers t W Drug Mart

est

FRESH Co. ve Chelsea A UP

ve Edna A TTC The Crossways

t West Dundas West TTC Station Bloor S Bloor GO/UP Station Route 1 (approx. 350m) Route 2 (approx. 300m) Signalized Crossing

Figure 7: Transfer Routes Between the Dundas West TTC Station and the Bloor GO Transit and UP Express Station

Intermodal Connectivity at Gateway Hubs | 10 4.1.2 Site Visit Audit

Table 1: Dundas West-Bloor Gateway Hub Site Visit Audit Findings Route Characteristics Intersections Number of Staircases (or Escalators) to Route 1: 3 Number of Street Route 1: 1 (Dundas & Bloor) Complete the Transfer Route 2: 3 Crossings Route 2: 3 (Dundas; Chelsea; Edna) Elevators or Ramps Provided Where Stairs Always Required Curb Cuts at Street Always Route 1: 0 Number of Parking Lots Crossed P Route 2: 1 Crossings Route 1: N/A Pathways Provided Through Parking Lots Number of Route 2: 0 Route 1: Dundas & Bloor Signalized Street Route 2: Dundas Pick-up and Drop-off Zones Crossed No Crossings

Length of Driveways Used by Buses or Streetcars Route 1: 1 (Dundas Dundas & Bloor: 26 seconds St W) Pedestrian StationCrossed Characteristics Dundas: 19 seconds Route 2: 1 (Edna Ave) Crossing Lights

Station Characteristics

Dundas West TTC Station Bloor GO and UP Express Station

Number of Station Entrances 1 2

Number of Accessible Station Entrances 1 2

Number of Rapid Transit Modes 1 2

Number of Transit Shelters for Rapid Transit 1* 9

Canopy Cover Yes Yes

Heated Waiting Area Yes Yes

Public Toilets No 1

Accessible Toilets No 1

Garbage Bins 11 12 *this “transfer shelter” is the subway platform, within the station building Pedestrian Signage

Dundas West TTC Station Bloor GO and UP Express Station

Signs visible at station entrances indicating the TTC GO Yes Yes station name, agencies, and modes served UP

Static transit schedules posted at transit stops No No or in the station area

Maps of the station area and transit 2 4 connections posted within station areas

Real time information available stating the 4 3 arrival of the next rapid transit vehicle

11 | Final Report 193 40 168 Seasonal

Ground Floor 504 TTC Buses

Streetcars 505 EXIT

covered elevator canopy

shelter escalator

benches staircase

garbage/ recycling double staircase Concourse static maps bus stop

real time info streetcar stop enter/exit terminals ticket booth subway tracks pay phone

Westbound Platform

Underground Platform TTC Subway

Eastbound Platform

Figure 8: Dundas West TTC Station Floor Plan (Adapted from TTC (a))

Intermodal Connectivity at Gateway Hubs | 12 N benches WEST TORONTO RAILPATH WEST TORONTO RAILPATH garbage/ recycling GO UP enclosed shelter with benches

1 1 static maps

real time info 2 2 train tracks 3 3 BLOOR STREET WEST accessible platform

Ground Floor Ground track number

Platform Level Platform 1 Exit to Dundas Street West To Tracks Pick-Up & Drop O and Taxis 1 2 3 station entrance/exit To TTC Dundas West Station

To TTC Dundas West Station walkway

pick-up & drop off and taxis elevator

To Tracks To Tracks GO escalator 1 1 To Tracks staircase

To Tracks To Tracks train 2 3 2 3 To Tracks UP 2 3

BLOOR STREET WEST ticket booth UP GO i i To Dundas West Station GO UP ticket machines

Tunnel Level Tunnel Dundas Entrance Underground Underground Bloor Entrance i information

payphone

accessible washrooms

Figure 9: Bloor GO Train and UP Express Rail Station Floor Plan (Adapted from Union Pearson Express)

13 | Final Report 4.1.3 Intermodal Connectivity Audit with directions would improve the transfer and Sharing Circle Key Themes experience. This would be especially true for UP Express riders who are likely to be tourists.

(i) Wayfinding (ii) Pedestrian Route Both transfer routes between the Dundas West Neither transfer route was direct, well TTC station and the Bloor GO train and UP connected, safe, or convenient. Express station are confusing for transit riders: Transfer Routes: Route 1 is approximately 350 and too few. metres with one street crossing, and Route 2 wayfinding tools are inconsistent, too small, is approximately 300 metres with three street Signage: crossings. The transfer for both routes would be indicate the transfer route between the Bloor more direct if it was within an enclosed area so GO Transit/UPWayfinding Express signage and Dundasis not provided West TTC to transit users have a clear pathway between stations stations (Figure 10, number 4). For example, (i.e. the tunnel that is currently in development). when exiting the Dundas West TTC station on On Route 2, there is no pedestrian pathway to cross Route 1, signs for Bloor GO Transit/UP Express the parking lot; creating a separate pedestrian station do not always include both GO Transit pathway would provide better connectivity. and UP Express logos. Additionally, there is a lack of signs indicating where different transit Crossings & Intersections: Along both routes, modes can be found within the Dundas West TTC station (Figure 11, number 8). On Bloor lights or on-street markings such as different GO station platforms, the distinction between pavementstreetcar colours, tracks are painted crossed lines, without or bollards. traffic On waiting areas for the GO train and UP Express Street West and Bloor Street West needs a longerRoute 1,crossing the signalized time, intersectionto accommodate at Dundas high presentedis not clear. in OtherFigures examples 10-12. of specific areas lacking clear signage for wayfinding are for the transfer at Dundas West-Bloor Gateway Maps: Maps showing the area surrounding the pedestrian traffic. Suggested improvements station are available at both stations, they are at street crossings and implementing wider sidewalksHub include to increase prioritizing pedestrian pedestrian safety. needs TTC station. Participants suggested enlarging existingdifficult tomaps locate, and especially providing in themaps Dundas on rapidWest Elevators: Inside the stations, elevators are transit platforms (Figure 11, number 7 and conveniently located where there are stairs, Figure 12, number 7). but not enough information exists to indicate alternative routes if the elevator is out of order. Real time information: While both stations have real time information on the departure (iii) Public realm and amenities of the next rapid transit vehicle, real time Neither transfer route was enjoyable for information screens are not always easily participants. Suggestions for improving the located. Participants suggested locating real transit route included providing more benches time information on large screens at entrances and garbage bins at transit platforms, as well as along the transfer route. The transfer route the station (Figure 11, number 2 and 5; Figureso it is the12, firstnumber thing 11) riders. see when entering and more trees to provide shade and a pleasant environment.would also benefit Additionally, from smoother water sidewalksfountains Staff: Persons on staff to help transit riders and all-day access to public washrooms would

Intermodal Connectivity at Gateway Hubs | 14 result in a more enjoyable transfer. are user-controlled and not always responsive. A suggested improvement was to provide a (iv) Winter conditions signal (such as a green light) to indicate when Both the Dundas West and Bloor stations have the heat function is operating, since it is not transit shelters, with some heating. The Dundas immediately obvious.

enclosed shelters under the canopy on the Figures 10-12 in the following pages identify West TTC station would benefit from more buses and streetcars. The main entrance and from the intermodal connectivity audit and lowerground levels floor, of for Dundas transit West riders station waiting should for also the thespecific sharing improvement circle. These areas improvements derived directly are be heated during the winter. While the Bloor station has heated shelters on the GO train plan, and described the detail on the same or and UP Express platforms, heating functions adjacentdepicted page. with numbers on the map or floor

15 | Final Report N

No pedestrian pathway is present through the parking lot for transfer 1 Route 2.

D GO undas S Sidewalks are too narrow along Dundas Street West for transfer Shoppers 2 Route 2. t W Drug Mart

est 1 Streetcar crossing is not indicated with distinct pavement, painted lines, 3 or a signal. 4

FRESH Co. Lack of signage that is clear and ve UP visible. Chelsea A 2 4

Lack of trees along the transfer 3 5 routes. ve Edna A TTC The Crossways

3 5 t West Bloor S Dundas West TTC Station 4 Bloor GO/UP Station Route 1 (approx. 350m) Route 2 (approx. 300m)

Figure 10: Pedestrian Environment Improvement Areas Along the Transfer Route

1- no pedestrian pathway Intermodal Connectivity at Gateway Hubs | 16 2- widen sidewalk 3- improve current signage here 4- add trees Add wayfinding signs to locate bus 193 40 and streetcar stops, and the station 168 193Seasonal 40 1 exit. 168 Seasonal

504 4 covered Ground Floor Add a large screen with real time coveredcanopy 504 1 2 3 4 information, visible from the Ground Floor 5 canopy TTC Buses 1 2 3 2 entrance. shelter TTC Buses 5 2 Streetcars 505 EXIT shelter 2 Streetcars 505 EXIT benches benches Add benches under a transit shelter. garbage/ 3 garbage/recycling recycling static maps static maps Add a bench along the wall for real time info a waiting area inside the station real time info 4 entrance. enter/exit 6 enter/exitterminals 6 terminals subway tracks Add real time information for all transit modes (including the subway) subway tracks Concourse 7 5 over the doors leading to the bus elevator Concourse 7 and streetcar waiting area. elevator 6 escalator 6 escalator Add a large map of the surrounding staircase area. 6 staircase double doublestaircase

Westbound Platform staircase Inside navigation on the middle bus stop Westbound Platform floor/concourse is poor. Add signs 6 4 bus stop 7 and other wayfinding tools. 4 Underground 6 streetcar stop UndergroundPlatform streetcar stop Platform Enlarge text for the time of the next ticket booth TTC Subway subway train. The advertisements on ticket booth TTC Subway 8 these screens detour from the real 6 9 4 time information. pay phone 6 8 9 4 pay phone 6 Eastbound Platform 8 6 6 Eastbound Platform 6 9 Add garbage bins. Figure 11: Pedestrian Environment Improvement Areas in Dundas West TTC Station

17 | Final Report N

WEST TORONTO RAILPATH WEST TORONTO RAILPATH benches

GO UP garbage/ 3 recycling 5 6 1 4 1 8 enclosed shelter with 7 benches Ground Floor 2 2 static maps 7 Platform Level 3 2 3

BLOOR STREET WEST real time info

1 train tracks Exit to Dundas Street West To Tracks Pick-Up & Drop O and Taxis 1 2 3 To TTC Dundas West Station accessible platform To TTC Dundas West Station 1 track number

station entrance/exit

To Tracks To Tracks GO 1 1 walkway Underground To Tracks 9 pick-up & drop off Tunnel Level To Tracks To Tracks 10 2 3 2 3 To Tracks and taxis UP 2 3 11 UP GO i 12 BLOOR STREET WEST elevator i To Dundas West Station escalator Dundas Entrance Bloor Entrance staircase

Real time information screens Add a pedestrian pathway for transit Add a map of the surrounding should indicate when no trains are Add garbage bins. train users exiting the station on Route 2. environment. 1 4 scheduled. 7 10 ticket booth

Add benches inside the transit GO UP ticket machines Add another bench facing the rail Expand the enclosed stair building to Relocate real time information screen shelter, and a help button in case of path. add seating. so it is visible from the entrance. 2 emergency. 5 8 11 i information

payphone Emergency button should have clearer instructions for its use. Ensure the GO Train and UP Express Reposition and enlarge entrance sign Repair the gap in the cement floor. Emergency and elevator buttons sign is at eye-level. 12 so it is more visible from outside. accessible washrooms 3 should have braille. 6 9

Figure 12: Pedestrian Environment Improvement Areas in Bloor GO Train and UP Express Rail Station Floor Plan (Adapted from Union Pearson Express)

Intermodal Connectivity at Gateway Hubs | 18 4.2 Kennedy Gateway Hub Figure 13 below shows the area surrounding Kennedy Station and Figure 14 shows where Transfer Routes the transit modes listed above are located 4.2.1 Transfer Routes within the station. The transfer area within Kennedy station is the focus for the site visit The Kennedy Gateway Hub includes transfer and intermodal connectivity audits, which are routes within Kennedy station, between three documented on the subsequent pages. rapid transit modes: • Scarborough RT – Subway • Scarborough RT – GO Transit • GO Transit – Subway

Eglinton Ave Don Montgomery GO Community TTC Recreation Centre

YWCA Employment Centre Kennedy Ave

Transway Cres

Figure 13: Area Surrounding Kennedy Station

19 | Final Report 4.2.2 Site Visit Audit

Table 2: Kennedy Gateway Hub Site Visit Audit Findings Route Characteristics

Scarborough RT - Subway: 3 Number of Staircases (or Escalators) to Complete the Transfer Scarborough RT - GO Train: 3 GO Train - Subway: 2

Elevators or Ramps Provided Where Stairs Required Sometimes

Parking Lot Crossed P None

Pick-up and Drop-off Zones Crossed None

Driveways Used by Buses or Streetcars Crossed None

Station Characteristics

Number of Station Entrances 3

Number of Accessible Station Entrances 2

Number of Rapid Transit Modes 3

Scarborough RT: 1 (within station) Number of Transit Shelters GO Platform: 5 Subway: 1 (within station)

Canopy Cover All: Yes

Heated Waiting Area All: No

Public Toilets 1 (1 M, 1 W)

Accessible Toilets 1 (1 M, 1 W)

Scarborough RT: 5 Concourse: 1 Garbage Bins GO Platform: 4 Subway: 5

Pedestrian Signage

Signs visible at station entrances indicating TTC the station name, agencies, and modes GO Yes served UP

Static transit schedules posted at transit Yes stops or in the station area

Maps of the station area and transit 2 connections posted within station areas

Real time information available stating the Scarborough RT: 0 GO Platform: 0 arrival of the next rapid transit vehicle Subway: 2

Intermodal Connectivity at Gateway Hubs | 20 KENNEDY STATION FLOOR PLANS Platform TTC Platform Above Ground Ground Above Scarborough RTScarborough

34 12 West 43 21 334 57 West 343 131 TTC Buses

Ground Floor Ground 116 86E 86 20 198 113 334 300B West

under construction

benches

GO Transit garbage/recycling

enclosed shelter with benches Outdoor Platform Platform Outdoor static maps

real time info

train tracks

accessible platform

station enterance/exit GO P parking TTC GO to GO platform Concourse Concourse pick-up & drop-o P elevator

escalator

staircase

ramp

bus

train

ticket booth

ticket machines Platform GO P TTC Subway

Underground Underground payphone

accessible washrooms

Figure 14: Kennedy Station Floor Plan (Adapted from TTC (b))

21 | Final Report 4.2.3 Intermodal Connectivity Audit and interpret. and Sharing Circle Key Themes Staff: More staff to ask for directions and to identify accessible elevators would help transit (i) Wayfinding riders navigate Kennedy station. Participants found the transfer route between the Scarborough RT, the subway, and the GO train confusing overall, as the pedestrian route (ii) Pedestrian Route was poorly marked. The transfer route between rapid transit modes at Kennedy Gateway Hub is not direct, Signage: Participants recommended that signs well connected, or convenient. with arrows to indicate where transit riders Station design – stairs and escalators: Currently should be placed more frequently to decrease the transfer route is indirect and inconvenient confusion.can access More other signs floors should and also transit be placed modes to because of poor connectivity between each locate elevators, since existing elevator signs level within the station. For example, where are only visible when directly in front of the stairs lead to one platform, no staircases elevator itself. Coloured lines and arrows on leading to the next platform are nearby (Figure 15; Figure 16, number 14). In this instance, transit modes by leading transit users to stairs, the transfer could be improved if stairs led escalators,the floor would elevators, improve and hallways wayfinding necessary between to from the subway level up to the concourse and transfer between transit modes. In particular, bus level, and if the escalator path extended participants noted that the GO train was the from the concourse level to the bus level. These improvements would ensure those using an relying on the few signs visible to them. Also escalator (for example) during their transfer withinmost difficultthe station, transit signage mode to locate to locate bathrooms when can continue to use an escalator until they reach their destination.

Maps:should beMaps placed of atthe all floorsurrounding levels. area are Figure 15 illustrates this further: the blue available within Kennedy station, but not on rectangle outlines the area of focus where the rapid transit platforms. Participants would existing infrastructure leads to a confusing like maps on platforms so transit riders exiting transfer experience. Within this rectangle is to their destination. (TTC buses) to the concourse level. Someone their train can find their way out of the station descendinga red staircase this connectingstaircase would the ground face arrive floor Real time information: Real time information at the concourse facing in the direction of the is available on subway and GO train platforms, blue arrow on the left. Also within the blue but not on the Scarborough RT platform. On rectangle is a yellow escalator, which comes the subway platform, reducing the glare from up to the concourse from the underground the platform lighting and increasing the text subway platform. Someone using this escalator would face in the direction of the blue arrow on time information. On the GO train platform, the right, towards the red staircase. realsize wouldtime information improve the is communication provided at a ofkiosk, real Riders this escalator can continue ascend to since it did not explicitly state that service was the next level using the staircase; however, notbut running participants at that found time. it Overall, difficult participants to interpret those wanting to use an escalator for their would like to see real time information available whole transfer are unaware of the existing on all rapid transit platforms that is easy to see (red) escalator behind them. In the other

Intermodal Connectivity at Gateway Hubs | 22 benches

static maps Platform TTC Platform Above Ground Ground Above Scarborough RT

34 station enterance/exit 12 West 43 21 334 57 West 343 131 P parking

TTC Buses 116 86E 86 20 Ground Floor Ground 198 113 GO 334 300B to GO platform West

P under construction pick-up & drop-o GO

GO Transit elevator Outdoor Platform Platform Outdoor escalator TTC GO staircase Concourse Concourse

P ticket booth

payphone Platform TTC Subway Underground Underground accessible washrooms

Figure 15: Kennedy Station Floor Plan of the Concourse Level (Adapted from TTC (b)).

direction, if a rider was using the red staircase and the bus or Scarborough RT platforms. to descend to the concourse, they are met with The transfer would be improved if only one an escalator coming up to the concourse. This would cause the rider to wonder how they can and decrease confusion that occurs when reach the subway, as the yellow staircase to the transferringelevator was between needed, elevators. to increase Additionally, efficiency at right is not in their line of vision. The transfer least two elevators should be present to access can become more intuitive with the placement each platform for assured accessibility. For of the same type of infrastructure within the example, on the Scarborough RT platform, line of vision of the existing infrastructure. only one side of the platform has an elevator. If someone with a mobility device was to Station design – elevators: Similar to stairs unknowingly exit the train on the side where and escalators, participants recommended no elevator is available, they would need to connections should be improved between elevators. Currently, two elevators are needed wait for the next train to cross the platform to complete a transfer between the subway and exit the station (Figure 16, number

23 | Final Report 2). Further, if the single existing elevator is out of order, riders with mobility devices using wheelchairs are especially susceptible to would need to board the train again to reach winterfloor to temperatures the rest of thesince station they are floors. sitting Those and the next nearest accessible TTC station do not have the opportunity to walk around and then take a bus to Kennedy station, while waiting for transit. increasing their travel time. Additional Figure 16 elevators would also address capacity improvement within Kennedy station. These issues. For example, one of the participants suggestions on are the derived next page from identifies the intermodal areas of in a wheelchair was completing the transfer connectivity audit and sharing circles, as and they needed to wait for three elevators suggested by participants. to pass before boarding, since the previous elevators were at capacity. 4.3 Evaluating the Intermodal PRESTO: No PRESTO loading stations are Connectivity Audit and currently available within the Kennedy TTC Sharing Circles levels for riders to reload their PRESTO cards Participants found the intermodal connectivity atstation, their convenience.and would be useful on all station floor audit tool thorough. However, some suggestions include the following: adding a table of contents (iii) Public realm and amenities (i.e. pathway instead of sidewalk, walkway, and Along the transfer route, participants pathway),to the first page,and separating using more questions consistent by language transit recommended several built environment and mode. It was also suggested to have written pedestrian amenities that could be improved instructions for each survey section, so auditors to provide a better the pedestrian experience. know when to complete each section (e.g. “After On the GO platform, the ramp from the elevator completing section one and two on Transit and Area Information, and Amenities, wait to for wheelchair and other mobility device users complete section three on the Transfer Route tois toocomfortably narrow andaccess uneven, the GO making platform it (Figure difficult until the whole transfer has been completed”). 16, number 6). More seating and garbage bins should be provided the within Kennedy TTC plans useful and easy to read, and expressed station, for those waiting for company or for thatOverall, the participantsaudit was clear found and the consistent maps and in whatfloor the next train. it was asking. Participants did not believe the transfer The sharing circles were valuable to ensure between transit modes at Kennedy Gateway time for participants to ask questions about Hub was enjoyable as the station was poorly the intermodal connectivity audit, and to lit, and lacks vibrancy. Better internal lighting, elaborate on their experiences, especially more natural lighting, and artwork would transfer characteristics not addressed in the help transit riders view Kennedy station as an audit. Participants also enjoyed taking part attractive transit hub. in the sharing circles, as it allowed for a more

open conversation. In all, the sharing circles (iv) Winter Conditions were a great pairing with both the site visit Kennedy station is not heated, resulting in and the intermodal connectivity audits to a cold transfer experience for participants. gain an in depth understanding of the transfer Within the station, staircases act as wind experience. tunnels, circulating cold air from the ground

Intermodal Connectivity at Gateway Hubs | 24 KENNEDY STATION FLOOR PLANS

2 3 4 4 5 Platform TTC TTC Platform

Above Ground Above Ground 1 Scarborough RT Scarborough

34 12 West 43 21 334 57 West 343 131

TTC Buses TTC 116 86E 86 20 Ground Floor Ground 198 113 334 300B West

under construction 12 2 GO 6 7 8

benches

garbage/recycling GO Transit enclosed shelter with benches

Outdoor Platform Outdoor Platform static maps

real time info

train tracks 3 15 16 17 accessible platform 12 13 9 station enterance/exit GO P parking 10 14 TTC 20 GO 11 20 to GO platform

Concourse Concourse pick-up & drop-o P elevator

escalator

staircase

ramp

bus 18 19 2 21 19 18 22 train ticket booth 18 19 20 23 19 19 18 GO P ticket machines Platform

TTC Subway TTC payphone Underground Underground

accessible washrooms

Figure 16: Pedestrian Environment Improvement Areas in Kennedy Station

25 | Final Report Elevator buttons are not intiutive (e.g. what is the concourse?) Buttons should state the Elevator button hard to reach. 1 transit mode accessible by each floor. 13

Add an elevator so at least two elevators are Ensure infrastructure is aligned so that available per building level, and at least one transit riders can efficiently find the route to 2 elevator is present on each side of the rail the next transit mode. In this location, stairs tracks. 14 lead to an open concourse without sign of the saircase a few steps behind.

Add benches. 3 15 Improve lighting.

Add more wayfinging signs along the Add garbage bins. hallway for the GO train platform exit, 4 16 including signs for the elevator.

Relocate garbage bins so they are more Clean elevator. 5 accessible along the transfer route. 17

Add signs for stairs to direct transit riders to Ramp is bumpy and too narrow. 6 18 the nearest exit.

Add real time information screens closer Ticket machines do not show the ticket to the subway tracks, in visible range from price. 7 19 transit users waiting for the subway.

Loading ramp from GO train doors is not Add wayfinding signs, especially to locate attached to the boarding platform, and can the GO Transit platform. 8 easily fall into the tracks. 20

Add an elevator here, or add a sign to Use a different font for elevator signs instruct elevator users to the alternative (illegible from far away). 9 route at the pick-up and drop-off zone. 21

Ensure real time information signs show next train times in a larger font, visible from Add PRESTO reload machine. further down the platform. Reduce glare 10 22 from platform lighting.

Lower PRESTO tap on accessible station Decrease the ability for stairwells to act as a terminal so it is within comfortable reach for wind tunnel. 11 someone in a wheelchair. 23

Add PRESTO tap for wheelchair, or other mobilty device users to be able to enter the 12 station at this terminal.

Intermodal Connectivity at Gateway Hubs | 26 5.0 DISCUSSION guide (2018b), which applies principles of the

This section discusses the existing and guidelines on signage design and placement. Signage Manual and Standards with specific emerging policy context including initiatives One important aspect from this guide is from the City of Toronto, the TTC, and to ensure maps and station information Metrolinx, with objectives that can improve are available on both sides of the fare line. intermodal connectivity in relation to the key Metrolinx Wayfinding Harmonization—

tothemes identify from opportunities the findings section to implement of this report. their objectives,These policies and to and identify initiatives other wereways analyzedin which expandingMetrolinx has transit initiated network a wayfinding in the GTHA. transit transfers can be improved. Theharmonization initiative involves initiative all in GTHA response transit to the

inconsistencies between operators. 5.1 Existing and Emerging agencies, with the goal to resolve wayfinding Policy Framework Four main themes of policies and initiatives assumingA Wayfinding no previous Design Standard knowledge Manual of the (2018d) transit are explored in this section, relative to the systemwas developed and is withalso a “customercompliant first”with design,AODA aforementioned barriers listed in 4.0 Findings, guidelines. The manual details: which include: • • • Movement planning; • Station design (to address the pedestrian • SequenceA suggested planning; wayfinding planning process; route,Wayfinding; and the public realm and amenities); • Messaging and placement; • Accessibility (to address the pedestrian • Coordination with operators; and, route); and, • • Winter conditions. All policies and initiatives are explained under other specific standards. these four themes. progressiveSimilar to thedisclosure. TTC manual, For example, the Wayfinding maps of 5.1.1 Wayfinding surroundingDesign Standard areas recognizes are only provided the importance at station of Both the TTC and Metrolinx have developed entrances and exits; this is where transit users decide how to reach their destination. Maps are therefore not present at station platforms, TTCtheir Signageown wayfinding Manual standards. and Standards— The TTC’s Signage Manual and Standards the station exit is located. since transit users need to first identify where signage that anticipate multi-modal journeys, This manual is a guide for the current phase support(2014) provides connections basic with objectives other ofGTHA wayfinding transit agencies, progressively disclose information, which includes pilot projects at seven selected and incorporate accessibility in planning, of the wayfinding harmonization initiative, among others. This manual is updated being placed within the stations to help transit annually and while the most recent document usersstations navigate where additionalto their wayfindingdestination, tools or theare is not public, TTC has shared the manual with transit service they need. One of the seven pilot other transit agencies in the GTHA to inform projects is taking place at Bloor GO Transit/UP Express station, one of the study areas. Here,

thier wayfinding practices. The TTC also has 27 |an Final nintermodal-specific Report wayfinding system two wayfinding maps will be placed in the tunnel entrances, as shown in Figure 17. experience locality and heritage, and through the Both Metrolinx and the TTC evaluate their • Plan for weather protection that is engagement of community members and progress towards achieving AODA standards in 5.1.2 Station Design incorporated into street and station municipal stakeholders in station design. their Accessibility Plan Status Update reports design (Metrolinx, 2011) Metrolinx has several station design guidelines Other relevant design-related guidelines 2018c), as detailed below. including Mobility Hub Guidelines (2011), GO (Metrolinx, 2016a; Metrolinx, 2017a; TTC, Design Requirements Manual (DRM) (2017b), Metrolinx Design Requirements Manual and GO Design Excellence Guidelines (GODEG) (DRM)— The DRM is a technical document Metrolinx Accessibility Plan Status— Guidelinesinclude specifications (Metrolinx, for2015a). GO ShelterThe GO DesignsShelter (2018b). that outlines the infrastructural and design Select objectives from the Metrolinx requirements at GO stations, terminals, and (Metrolinx, 2016b) and the Accessible Design Accessibility Plan Status include the following: concerning heating within enclosed platform Implement accessibility enhancements at Metrolinx Mobility Hub Guidelines— facilities. The DRM applies to new construction, shelters,Designs in document addition to includes the materials specifications used and selected stations (including Bloor); The Mobility Hub Guidelines were developed Install lower PRESTO reader at accessible fare to inform the development and planning of guiding principles of the DRM include the retrofits, and state of good repair works. The The Accessible Design Guidelines build upon gates in TTC subway stations; mobility hubs in the GTHA. The Guidelines following: designmaintenance excellence of shelters principles (Metrolinx, with guidelines 2016b). Improve customer service with accessibility address factors that create successful mobility • Universal Access; • Customer Service; to ensure transit services are accessible for all enhancements for the GO website; its users (2015a). Other initiatives concerning Work with municipal partners across the GTHA and station circulation and access, as well • Sustainable Design; and, accessibility are described in the next section to help ensure seamless cross-boundary travel ashubs how such these as transit guidelines station can design, be fundedwayfinding, and • Integrated Design. (5.1.3). experience (i.e. intermodal connectivity); and, implemented. Three objectives of the Mobility Include the Accessibility Advisory Committee Hub Guidelines relate to the themes of this (AAC) members in Metrolinx’s Design Review report: 5.1.3 Accessibility One specific objective of the DRM is to The Accessibility for Ontarians with Panel to provide more detailed input on station implement wayfinding to ensure an easy and the DRM is to provide a continuous accessible Disabilities Act (AODA) came into effect in efficient transit journey. Another objective of route where there is opportunity for direct 2005. The AODA applies to public, private, people designs (Metrolinx, 2016a; Metrolinx 2017a). •Objective Conduct 2: Safewalkability and efficient studies movement along of access. Relatedly, under the DRM, redundant TTC Accessibility Plan Status— Select priority corridors to identify barriers access, such as a secondary elevator, should be the City of Toronto, Metrolinx, and the TTC. In objectives from the TTC Accessibility Plan to station access and adequacy of provided for an alternative accessible route to accordanceand non-profit with sectorsthe AODA in standards, Ontario, including all three Status include the following: pedestrian amenities reach all transit modes (Metrolinx, 2017b). • • people with disabilities and others to publish stations; Complete accessibility retrofits at selected Metrolinx GO Design Excellence anaforementioned annual accessibility organizations plan, accompanied consult with by • Create new accessible station entrances toMaximize meet safetyor exceed and securityaccessibility by Guidelines (GO DEG)— The GODEG is a multi-year accessibility plan (revisited every where opportunities arise; guidelinesretrofitting the pedestrian environment an internal document outlining the design • Collaborate with Metrolinx to ensure all principles for GO stations and sites. The core major transfer points between both agencies Objective 3: A well-designed transit station design principles in the GODEG include: withfive years).the legislated These AODA documents standards are meant to are accessible (including consultation • Create safe and convenient accessible • Responsive placemaking; demonstrate each organization’s compliance with the TTC’s Advisory Committee on pedestrian connections to regional and • Design for everyone; Some of the clauses relevant to intermodal Accessible Transit (ACAT) at Kennedy local transit services • Legible and consistent design identity; connectivity include accessibility training station, among others, to review its station • • Clean and simple design; design in anticipation of the ECLRT); navigation of the transit station and • Enduring and practical design; and, and general duties of municipalities (clause • Implement escalator and elevator real-time transitDevelop area wayfinding signage for efficient • Sustainable design and climate resiliency 78).(clause These 36), sections service require disruptions municipalities (clause 50), to monitoring system; (Metrolinx, 2018b). conduct employee accessibility training, make • Guarantee consistency in accessibility In particular, these guidelines require accessible accessible arrangements to transfer people signage at elevators; and, • Promote the use of transit by improving universal design with clear circulation paths, with disabilities when a route is changed, and • Ensure all PRESTO devices are accessible Objectivethe sense 6: An of attractive place and public walkable realm area and staff available to aid transit riders at the consult with the municipal advisory committee, (TTC, 2018c). around the station station. Additionally, these guidelines create the public, and other persons with disabilities • Implement trees, street furniture, and incentive for transit stations to be seen as when developing accessible design criteria public art to improve the pedestrian transit hubs, by integrating art, celebrating (City of Toronto, 2012).

Intermodal Connectivity at Gateway Hubs | 28 Bloor Station map Buses and streetcars Carte de la gare de Bloor Autobus et tramways

WEST TORONTO RAILPATH

Runnymede Avon Loop Loop

Keele St / Dufferin St / Bathurst St / Avenue St / St Clair Keele St / St Clair Av W St Clair Av W St Clair Av W St Clair Av W Dundas St W Keele St / Rogers Rd Pick up/drop off Zone de débarcadère Dupont St / Dundas St W RANDOLPH AV Old Weston Rd / Davenport Rd

Symington Av / Davenport Rd Only major stops indicated Seuls les principaux arrêts sont indiqués All stops within this map indicated ABBOTT AV Tous les arrêts sur la carte sont indiqués

WALLACE AV

PERTH AV PERTH GLENLAKE AV

SYMINGTONAV

CAMPBELL AV CAMPBELL

To Track ed pi Bloor à

Vers la voie WST DUNDAS WANDA RD DORVALRD s te u W TORONTO RAILPATH n To Tracks i ERNEST AV Vers la voies 2 3 m PATON RD lk JUNCTION a w DUNDAS ST W e TRIANGLE t CHELSEA AV u Chelsea Av n HAROLD AV i RANDOLPH AV

Playground AV PERTH m Kingdom Hall

A of Jehovah’s Lansdowne Witnesses

Pearson Airport Terminal and EDNA AV HAROLD AV RANKIN CR Dundas West Dundas The Crossways West B A B BLOOR ST W BLOOR ST W The West Mall / Etobicoke Kipling RUTTANST St George Danforth Rd / Brimley Rd / Kennedy Burnhamthorpe Rd Civic Centre Consulate of Bishop Marocco/ Warden Av Eglinton Av E Lithuania Thomas Merton Catholic Secondary School High Park INDIAN TR Church of the First Born Apostle

STERLING RD

PERTH AV

The Crossways DUNDAS ST W

ALHAMBRA AV

RADFORD AV

To Tracks Museum of Vers la voies 2 3 Contemporary Art To Track Vers la voie College St / Queen’s Park College Gerrard St E / River St / Gerrard St E / Woodbine Av / Main Street Lansdowne Av Parliament St Gerrard St E Coxwell Av Gerrard St E

min Broadview Toronto Western Spadina Av / Art Gallery St Patrick Dundas Parliament St / Hospital Dundas St W of Ontario Dundas St E

Dundas St E / BLOOR ST W Broadview Av

Queen St W / Dufferin St / Spadina Av / St Andrew King Parliament St / Broadview Av / Roncesvalles Av King St W King St W King St E Queen St E

Legend Légende Local bus services Local streetcar services Legend Légende Services d’autobus locaux Services de tramway locaux Trains Elevator ROUTE NAME DIRECTION STOP ROUTE NAME DIRECTION STOP Route number Bus/streetcar stop Ascenseur NOM DU TRAJET ARRÊT NOM DU TRAJET ARRÊT Numéro du trajet location Emplacement d’arrêt Airport Train Customer service 40 Junction Northbound Vers le nord 504 King Eastbound Vers l’est Interchange 1 1 d’autobus/de tramway Liaison air-rail Service à la clientèle Correspondance 168 Symington Northbound Vers le nord 1 3 304 King Eastbound Vers l’est 2 Connection to Trains Subway Ticket machine Night bus service Bus/streetcar stop Correspondance avec Métro Distributeur de billets 300A Bloor-Danforth Westbound Vers l’ouest 5 Service d’autobus de nuit Arrêt d’autobus/ Night bus service le service ferroviaire 300B de tramway Buses Washrooms Service d’autobus de nuit Eastbound Vers l’est 4 505 Dundas Eastbound Vers l’est 1 Connection to Subway Autobus Toilettes Terminus Correspondance avec 312 St Clair-Junction Northbound Vers le nord 2 Carlton Eastbound Vers l’est 306 2 le métro Streetcars Pick up/drop off Night bus service Night bus service Regular service Tramways Zone de débarcadère Service d’autobus de nuit Service d’autobus de nuit Service habituel Airport For GO Trains Parking Special service Aéroport Pour les trains de GO Stationnement See schedule for information Exit For UP Express Service spécial Sortie Voir l’horaire pour de plus Pour UP Express amples renseignements Exit Sortie All buses are step-free. Not all stations and stops are step-free. Stairs Check with operator or visit www.triplinx.ca before travelling. Escaliers Tous les autobus offrent l’accès facile. Certains arrêts et stations Diagram is not to scale. Information correct at time of going to print 2018-04-25. n’offrent pas l’accès facile. Veuillez vérifier auprès de l’exploitant ou visiter www.triplinx.ca avant de vous déplacer. Contains information licensed under the Open Government Licence – Toronto Contient de l’information visée par la Licence du gouvernement ouvert – Toronto Le diagramme n’est pas à l’échelle. Information correcte au moment de l’impression 2018-04-25.

www.triplinx.ca

Figure 17: Wayfinding maps for the Bloor station pilot project of Metrolinx’s Wayfinding Harmonization initiative. Left: Map of the transfer route from Bloor station to the Dundas West (TTC) station. Note that this map excludes Route 2, which leads transit users through a parking lot without a pedestrian pathway leading from the northern tunnel at Bloor station (see Figure 7 for details). Right: Map of the area surrounding Bloor station in a 5-minute walk radius, including Dundas West station, and the transit lines accessible from this area.

29 | Final Report Other documents address accessibility, such as climate will introduce new winter season Metrolinx’s DRM and Mobility Hub Guidelines conditions such as more extreme rainfall days, (Metrolinx, 2011; Metrolinx, 2017b), through To prepare for differing winter weather features, a barrier-free route, accessible events,which mayMetrolinx lead to has more conducted frequent flooding.several washrooms,objectives to andimplement to create accessible an accessible, wayfinding clear, initiatives including a vulnerability assessment and direct transfer between transit modes. pilot project, implementing resiliency and adaptation principles into its design guidelines, 5.1.4 Winter Conditions and establishing emergency response planning and preparedness principles. Metrolinx considers winter conditions in several of its guiding documents and policies. The GO Design Excellence Guidelines (GODEG) 5.2 Opportunities to Improve ensures building designs provide protection Intermodal Connectivity from winter winds and allow for maximum solar exposure to reduce energy consumption This section analyses how the existing and and operating costs associated with heating emerging policies and initiatives, as well stations (Metrolinx 2018b). The Design as planned station upgrades, will address Requirements Manual (DRM) considers the barriers to intermodal connectivity as shelter, heating, and snow melt at stations. described in the four key themes, and where Canopies and shelters are required on all opportunities for further improvement exist. heating should be used at stations (Metrolinx, 5.2.1 Wayfinding rail platforms and the most efficient source 2017b). Full snowmelt is required on all new Findings from the intermodal connectivity rail platforms and ramps, and snow storage is considered in station landscaping designs placement and frequency of signage, maps, (Metrolinx, 2017b). Finally, the Mobility Hub andaudits real andtime information, sharing circles in addition identified to a lack the Guidelines promote weather protection to be incorporated in the areas surrounding stations, barriers to intermodal connectivity. The in street and station designs (Metrolinx, 2011). of informational staff as the main wayfinding

While these three documents consider current anexisting excellent and emergingbasis to wayfindingovercome policiesbarriers and to operations during the winter season, one of initiatives identified in Section 5.1.1 provideTable Metrolinx’s goals is to improve climate resiliency 3. under Strategy 5 of the 2041 RTP: to prepare intermodal wayfinding, as presented in for an uncertain future (Metrolinx, 2018c). This includes the following initiatives to design new infrastructure, and strengthen existing In particular, the Wayfinding Design Standard infrastructure to resist extreme weather: (2018d) and Metrolinx’s Wayfinding • Vulnerability assessment pilot project; improvingHarmonization intermodal initiative createconnectivity an opportunity and • Asset management; to improve wayfinding regionally, thereby • Design practices; Although real time information is considered a • Emergency response planning and resolving many of the identified barriers. preparedness; and, Design Standards (2018d), the main gap in • Regional and strategic planning. part of wayfinding in the Metrolinx Wayfinding of real time information screens. Real time Relatedly, the Planning for Resiliency report informationpolicy for wayfindingshould either concerns be implemented the design (Metrolinx, 2017d) explores how a changing

Intermodal Connectivity at Gateway Hubs | 30 information standards should be developed to improveinto the existing its legible standards, and intuitive or specific design. real time guidesalong the for platform, the visually different impaired floor materials, (ADOA Alliance,and pillars 2018). or poles, This iscan one act example as wayfinding of how Planned upgrades at both Gateway Hub study areas will affect the transfer experience. The needs of transit users with varying abilities. tunnel at Dundas West-Bloor will resolve many wayfinding practices should consider the transfer at this Gateway Hub. The construction in consultation with Metrolinx’s AAC to ofwayfinding the ECLRT barriers at Kennedy by creating station a willmore expand direct ensureThe wayfinding their principles guides shouldaddress be the adapted needs the transfer area from one building to three. of all transit users. This creates a larger transfer area, but the implementation of tunnels will mitigate 5.2.2 Pedestrian Route Barriers to intermodal connectivity along the outdoors. While not necessarily included pedestrian route include a lack of designated inany the potential station wayfindingplans, changes barriers at both occurring study pedestrian pathways and safe street crossings areas provide an opportunity to implement for the outdoor transfer area, and poor connectivity due to the lack of intuitive the new transfer routes are intuitive and wayfinding harmonization principles, ensuring inside stations. Many of the design guidelines presentedplacement inof elevators,5.1.2 address escalators, these barriers,anzd stairs as result in an efficient transfer for transit users. Additional Considerations— Additional shown in Table 4.

The main policy gap is the alignment of wayfinding considerations include the similar infrastructure (e.g. escalators with inclusivity of wayfinding practices: a gap escalators) to create a more intuitive transfer experiencedin the wayfinding differently guidelines for people as who well are as experience. This gap should be addressed in this study’s scope is how wayfinding is both the DRM (Metrolinx, 2017b) and GODEG principles are visual, and do not consider (Metrolinx, 2018b), as well as the Accessible howblind stationor visually infrastructure impaired. Many such wayfinding as walls Design Guidelines (Metrolinx, 2015a).

Table 3: Wayfinding policy review and gaps

Main Improvement Areas Policies Addressing Improvement Areas Policy Gaps

Lack of maps showing transfer route MX Wayfinding Design Standards (9.3) n/a

TTC Signage Manual and Standards (3.1.1) TTC Intermodal Stations Wayfinding System Poor and too few wayfinding signage along MX Wayfinding Design Standards (7.2, 7.3, 8.1) n/a transfer route (inside station) MX Mobility Hub Guidelines (3.5.1) MX Design Requirements Manual (C.1, C.3)

Poor and too few wayfinding signage along Mobility Hub Guidelines (2.4.2, 2.4.3) n/a transfer route (outside station)

Real time information not directly visible or Mobility Hub Guidelines (1.1.5) n/a legible from station entrance

Policies cover the placement of Real time information not directly visible or MX Wayfinding Design Standards (8.1.5, 8.1.7) signage, but not the design of legible on transit platform real time information screens

Lack of staff to help riders with transfers MX GO Design Excellence Guidelines (2.5) n/a

31 | Final Report Table 4: Pedestrian route policy review and gaps

Main Improvement Areas Policies Addressing Improvement Areas Policy Gaps

Unmarked pedestrian pathway and unclear MX Mobility Hub Guidelines (2.4.3, 2.4.5) n/a streetcar track crossing

Intersection crossing times are under Too short intersection crossing municipal jurisdiction

Connectivity of vertical circulation is Poor connectivity between elevators, MX Mobility Hub Guidelines (1.1.4) addressed broadly, but the specific escalators, and stairs alignment of infrastructure is not detailed

MX Mobility Hub Guidelines (1.1.4) Lack of accessible redundancy MX Design Requirements Manual (D.1, D.2) n/a MX Accessible Design Guidelines (13)

The planned improvements at Dundas West- Planned improvements at both Gateway Hubs Bloor and Kennedy Gateway Hubs will address consider better connectivity for accessibility needs. The tunnel at the Dundas West-Bloor by intermodal connectivity audit and sharing Gateway Hub will be completely accessible circlethe key participants. intermodal transferAt the Dundas barriers West-Bloor identified and will provide a more direct transfer route Gateway Hub, the future tunnel connection between transit modes. The tunnel will also will completely bypass the outdoor transfer create complete redundancy for the rapid resulting in a more direct and intuitive transit transfers, as two elevators will connect route. The tunnel will also improve safety by to the subway platform from either end of the platform (one from the existing Dundas West such as crossing streetcar tracks, parking station, and another from the future tunnel lots,minimizing and andbusy avoiding car-centric street levelintersections, hazards, leading to the existing Bloor station). However, as the existing Dundas West TTC station will be safety concerns. At Kennedy station, the not be altered during tunnel construction, transferwhich werebetween identified modes by will participants also occur to redundancy to reach the concourse and the through a pedestrian tunnel, with the same advantages as Dundas West-Bloor (Figure 18). not be achieved. The future ECLRT building entrancesground floor at (theKennedy streetcar station and are bus accessible, bay) will

Figure 18: Eglinton Crosstown LRT and TTC Kennedy Transit Station Kennedy Cross-section looking east (TTC, 2018a)

Intermodal Connectivity at Gateway Hubs | 32 and will provide a few routes to access the LRT majority of these barriers are addressed in platform. Metrolinx’s policies, as presented in Table 5.

While both plans incorporate redundancy into their design features, complete redundancy the barriers presented in Table 5, design will not be achieved for the whole transfer guidelinesIn addition includeto the specificinitiatives policies to improve addressing the route. Therefore, if the one accessible route public realm and amenities at stations. Under provided is out of service (e.g. an elevator is the Mobility Hub Guidelines (Metrolinx, 2011), broken), people who require this route are walkability studies should be conducted to unable to access their desired transit mode. assess the adequacy of pedestrian amenities. Additional Considerations— Metrolinx and The GO DEG addresses other factors to improve other transit partners across the GTHA are the public realm as it seeks to create unique considering fare integration (see Steer Davies stations that attract transit users in designing Gleave, 2017) to make crossing municipal stations through community engagement boundaries simpler for transit riders. Depending and valuing the locality and history of the on the fare integration concept chosen, this surrounding station area. could have an impact on how stations need to be designed, and how transit users transfer between transit modes. For example, in the Bloor tunnel connection follows Metrolinx’s Dundas West-Bloor tunnel plans (Figure 4), the DesignSpecific toExcellence the study areas,requirements, the Dundas asWest- it incorporates natural lighting from the platform unnecessary with fare integration where riders level “lightboxes” on the Bloor platform. While dofare-free not need zone to oncross the fare concourse lines. Eliminating level would fare be the tunnel will not be completely lit by natural terminals at this level creates an opportunity lighting, this feature responds to some of for a more convenient and accessible transfer, participants’ desires in this study. by simplifying the transfer route. While fare integration is still in development, it should At Kennedy Station, ECLRT designs include be considered when discussing transfers and natural lighting, integrated artwork, and station plans. and bicycle parking (Figures 20 and 21). 5.2.3 Public Realm and Amenities Surroundingan outdoor urbanthe station plaza is a with multi-use seating pathway areas to connect pedestrians and cyclists in the Participants from the intermodal connectivity surrounding area to Kennedy Gateway Hub. These design features and future development to improve station aesthetics and amenities will lead to an impactful impression of Kennedy suchaudit andas benches, the sharing garbage circles bins,identified and thetrees need as station as a transit hub. areas to contribute to the public realm. The

Table 5: Public realm and amenities policy review and gaps

Main Improvement Areas Policies Addressing Improvement Areas Policy Gaps

Inadequate number of station amenities on Location of amenities are outlined, but not station platforms (benches, garbage bins, MX Design Requirements Manual (B.1, F.4) the required quantity per location washrooms) Inadequate number of station amenities along transfer routes (benches, garbage MX Mobility Hub Guidelines (2.4.3) n/a bins, trees)

MX Mobility Hub Guidelines (1.1.5, 3.1, 6.1) Poor public realm (lack of natural lighting, MX Design Requirements Manual (B.4) n/a trees and integrated art) MX GO Design Excellence Guidelines (2.4)

33 | Final Report Figure 19: Photo of the existing Bloor station Figure 20: Eglinton Crosstown LRT Kennedy Station Main Entrance “lightboxes” on the GO Transit and UP Express Plaza (Metrolinx, 2018a) platform, from street level (Amec Foster Wheeler, 2016)

Figure 21: Eglinton Crosstown LRT Kennedy Station Integrated Art Renderings. Left: “Reorganization of One Hedge” by Dagmara Genda. Right: “Locations of Meaning” by Joseph Kosuth (Metrolinx, 2018a).

5.2.4 Winter Conditions station heating barriers are not adequately addressed. Resolving these barriers should be incorporated into their respective policies. ofThe enclosed main winter shelters, condition heated barrierswaiting areas,identified and Additionally, mitigation of wind tunnels should thein the poor findings mitigation section of ofwind this tunnels. report are A couple a lack be included as a part of the DRM to reduce policies address these barriers broadly, as the circulation of cold air within stations (Metrolinx, 2017b). shown in Table 6.

There are several policy gaps concerning winter season barriers. While mentioned in policies, user controlled heating features and

Table 6: Winter conditions policy review and gaps

Main Improvement Areas Policies Addressing Improvement Areas Policy Gaps

Policies align with current user controlled Lack of intuitive user controlled heating MX GO Shelter Designs (2.2.3.5) heating features, but do not improve features for enclosed platform shelters intuitiveness

Poor mitigation of wind tunnels circulating Wind tunnel mitigation not addressed in cold winter temperatures within stations current standards or policies

Policies consider the protection of transit MX GO Design Excellence Guidelines (4.6.1, users from winter conditions, but heating Station buildings not sufficiently heated 5.3) will not be resolved aside from better station insulation

Intermodal Connectivity at Gateway Hubs | 34 Neither the Dundas West-Bloor tunnel, nor the 6.0 future ECLRT buildings will be heated as it is against station design policy to heat stations RECOMMENDATIONS (excluding enclosed platform transit shelters), to conserve energy. However, both structures will provide weather protection from winter and discussion sections, and outlines conditions and ventilation in accordance with recommendationsThis section buildsto reduce on thebarriers findings and the GODEG (Metrolinx, 2018b). Other station improve winter season intermodal connectivity improvements such as better insulation and air at all intermodal mobility hubs in the GTHA. A circulation should also be considered in station four-phase process is recommended to ensure intermodal transfers are direct, well connected, to protect transit users from cold winter safe, convenient, and enjoyable: temperatures.retrofits and the construction of new stations • Phase 1: Implement improvements

5.2.5 Summary Bloor and Kenndy); identifiedConduct in the study intermodal areas (Dundas connectivity West- The existing and emerging policies and • Phase 2: audits at all intermodal mobility hubs; initiatives discussed in this section satisfy many • Phase 3: Implement best practices in (Section 4). The main challenge in using these Continue periodic monitoring toolsaspects to improve of the four intermodal key themes connectivity from the findings is their • Phase 4: andretrofits evaluation and future of intermodal station design; stations and, and implementation: several of these policies and policies, standards, and initiatives. initiatives are still in development and cannot be implemented immediately, while others cannot be implemented at study areas without Phase 1: Implement major reconstruction. Some recommendations improvements identified in for how barriers to intermodal connectivity the study areas

can be resolved are provided in Section 6. KennedyThe first Gateway phase is Hubs to evaluate to identify the specificwhich improvementsfindings from can the be Dundas addressed West-Bloor in upcoming and station works, either as part of the GO Transit Expansion program or state of good repair.

Recommendations 1. a) Responsibility: Any required changes should be addressed either by the owner of the facility and/or building (i.e. TTC or Metrolinx), or the municipality for off-site improvements (i.e. City of Toronto).

1. b) Upcoming Station Works: Barriers

and Discussion) should be evaluated to determineidentified inif Sectionthey can 4 be and addressed 5 (Findings in upcoming station works through the GO

35 | Final Report Transit Expansion program, or through state of be addressed in upcoming station works or good repair. Some examples of these barriers state of good repair (SORG). are presented in Table 7 and 8, per key 1. d) Major Improvements: Major barriers refer to Section 4 and Figures 11, 12, and to intermodal connectivity that cannot be 16issue.. The For barriers more detailedthat can findings, be addressed please resolved through upcoming station works should be resolved in the next station improvement cycle. station building reconstruction, and should beshould considered be addressed in future in future transit retrofits station or in 1. c) Interim Solutions: Barriers that will be designs. resolved in station changes (i.e. the Dundas West-Bloor tunnel, and ECLRT) should still

Table 7: Select examples of intermodal connectivity Table 8: Select examples of intermodal connectivity barriers at Dundas West-Bloor Gateway Hub barriers at Kennedy Gateway Hub

Can be Can be Addressed Addressed Examples of Intermodal Connectivity Barriers in Upcoming Examples of Intermodal Connectivity Barriers in Upcoming at Dundas West-Bloor Gateway Hub Station Work at Kennedy Gateway Hub Station Work or SORG or SORG (Y/N) (Y/N)

Wayfinding Wayfinding • No maps in Dundas West TTC station showing the transfer route to Bloor GO Y • Too few wayfinding signage in the transfer Transit/UP Express station area (of the existing TTC Kennedy station), Y • Poor wayfinding signage along transfer especially towards the GO Transit platform route (small signs, only some transit Y modes indicated) • Small text and glare on real time • Real time information not directly visible information screens (in the existing TTC Y Y from station entrance Kennedy station)

• Lack of staff to help riders with transfers N • Lack of staff to help riders with transfers N

Pedestrian Route Pedestrian Route • Unmarked pedestrian pathway through a Y parking lot along Route 2 • Poor connectivity due to placement of elevators, escalators, and stairs inside the N station • Crossing time along Route 1 too fast N

Public Realm and Amenities • Unclear streetcar track crossings Y • Inadequate number of station amenities Public Realm and Amenities on platforms (e.g. benches, garbage bins Y • Inadequate number of station amenities in the existing TTC Kennedy station) on station platforms (benches, garbage Y bins, washrooms), and along transfer • Poor public realm (lack of natural lighting, routes (benches, garbage bins, trees) Y trees and integrated art) Winter Conditions

• Too few enclosed shelters under the Winter Conditions canopy on the ground floor of Dundas Y West TTC station • Poor mitigation of wind tunnels circulating • Lack of intuitive heating features for cold winter temperatures within Kennedy N enclosed shelters on the Bloor GO unknown station Transit/UP Express platform

Intermodal Connectivity at Gateway Hubs | 36 Phase 2: Conduct intermodal 9 studies at intermodal mobility hubs in the connectivity studies at all GTHA. identifies Intermodal the level stations of priority with for high completing priority intermodal stations within should be completed in the next three years; mobility hubs mobility hubs with low priority should be completed within 5 years. The considerations The second phase is to apply the same principles used to assign the level of priority for each hub of this study to all mobility hubs that classify is available in Appendix F. as intermodal stations in the GTHA to evaluate their intermodal connectivity, including site Table 9: Level of priority for intermodal connectivity audits visit audits, intermodal connectivity audits, High Priority (Unique Transit Low Priority (One Transit and sharing circles. Mobility hubs should be Agencies) Agency) studied if two or more existing rapid transit • Kipling • Eglinton-Mt.Dennis lines intersect and stop within the mobility • Main-Danforth • St.George • Newmarket GO • Yonge-Bloor hub. • Richmond Hill-Langstaff • Yonge-Sheppard Gateway • Union Recommendations 2. a) Responsibility: Metrolinx should lead Phase 3: Implement best and conduct intermodal connectivity studies in partnership with local transit agencies to ensure practices in retrofits and future consistency of the audits, in accordance with station design other transit agencies’ station requirements.

2. b) Audit Tool: Before conducting Phase 2 (conducting intermodal connectivity The third phase is to evaluate the findings from audits at all intermodal stations, the audit audits at all intermodal stations) to determine tool should be revised to consider other which changes can be addressed through state intermodal connectivity aspects, the potential of good repair or in major station upgrades of fare integration, and the tool’s usability. through the capital program. Additionally, the audit tool should be reviewed by the Metrolinx Accessibility Advisory Recommendations Committee (AAC) to ensure auditors are able 3. a) Responsibility: Any required changes to identify all accessibility barriers. The audit should be addressed either by the owner of the tool for this study was only completed with facility and/or building, or the municipality for off-site improvements. disability experiences were not captured. For example,motorized how wheelchair a person users;who is otherblind navigates types of 3. b) Upcoming Station Works: Barriers a transit system is much different than how a should be evaluated to determine if they can be sighted person in a wheelchair does. addressed in upcoming station works, such as 2. c) Priority: While all mobility hubs should be studied, priority should be given to or in station building reconstruction. stations with rapid transit transfers between through state of good repair, in future retrofits, different transit agencies, and stations that have upcoming station works. Studies of all intermodal stations should be completed as a part of the asset management program, under the Station Services division at Metrolinx. Table

37 | Final Report Phase 4: Continue monitoring 7.0 CONCLUSION and evaluation A well-connected transit system ensures people can reach their destination in a way that is direct, intermodal connectivity conditions at all accessible, safe, convenient, intuitive, and intermodalThe final phasestations, is toand continue to update monitoring relevant enjoyable. Successful intermodal connectivity policies and programs in accordance with can lead to higher system ridership, which

the GTHA’s transportation system and deliver Recommendationsintermodal connectivity study findings. optimalsupports mobility Metrolinx’s solutions objectives for the region. to optimize 4. a) Responsibility: Metrolinx should oversee the monitoring and evaluation process, This report provided an overview of the barriers as described in the following recommendations. to intermodal connectivity through a case study of two Gateway Hubs—Dundas West-Bloor 4. b) Ongoing Station Evaluation: the pedestrian route, (iii) the public realm and Intermodal stations that have implemented the amenities,and Kennedy—including and (iv) winter conditions. (i) wayfinding, Existing (ii) needed changes from phase 1 and 3 (station and emerging policies and initiatives were evaluated in relation to these barriers, and a part of station works or through major station used to inform recommendations to improve improvements,retrofits to improve should intermodal be evaluated connectivity) either as intermodal connectivity in the GTHA. The every 10 years, or before changes to a station recommendations from this report, focused on a four phased process, should be implemented occur (whichever occurs first). The purpose of to support a sustainable transportation system and to improve the quality of life of its users. barriersthis evaluation to intermodal is to determine connectivity which retrofitsand to identifywere successful where other in addressingimprovements the need identified to be made in future station works.

4. c) Policy and Initiative Upgrades: Intermodal connectivity studies should be used to determine where gaps in existing or emerging policies and initiatives to address intermodal connectivity barriers exist. These gaps should be considered in future versions of these policies and initiatives, or before and initiatives under Metrolinx’s jurisdiction describedthey are finalized. in Section An 5.1evaluation should ofbe all reviewed policies every 5-10 years to ensure they address barriers to intermodal connectivity.

Intermodal Connectivity at Gateway Hubs | 38 Bibliography

Accessibility for Ontarians with Disabilities Act (AODA) Alliance. (2018, May 15). Accessibility Problems at New Toronto Area Public Transit Stations (Short Version)

Bloor GO/UP Express Station [video and file]. TTC RetrievedConnection from Feasibility https://www.youtube.com/ Study. Internal Metrolinx document:watch?v=za1UptZq82o&feature=youtu.be unpublished. Amec Foster Wheeler. (2016). The Star. Retrieved from https://www.thestar.com/news/queenspark/2017/09/21/dundas-west-ttc-station-to- Benzie, R. (2017, September 21). Dundas West TTC station to finally be connected to Union Pearson Express station. Ecological Economics, 120,139- finally-be-connected-to-union-pearson-express-station.html BrookBertram, McIlroy C., & Rehdanz,Inc. (2011). K. (2015).Dundas The West-Bloor role of urban Mobility green Hub space Study. for Toronto: human well-being.Metrolinx. Retrieved from http://www. metrolinx.com/en/regionalplanning/mobilityhubs/mobility_hubs_studies.asp152. http://journals2.scholarsportal.info/pdf/09218009/v120icomplete/139_trougsfhw.xml City of Toronto. (2011). Meeting Accessibility Standards: AODA. Retrieved from https://www.toronto.ca/city- government/accessibility-human-rights/accessibility-at-the-city-of-toronto/meeting-accessibility-standards- aoda/ City of Toronto. (2012). 2012-2016 Multi-Year Accessibility Plan. Retrieved from https://www.toronto.ca/city- government/accessibility-human-rights/accessibility-at-the-city-of-toronto/multi-year-accessibility-plan/ Active Living Research. Retrieved from http://activelivingresearch.org/pedestrian-environment-data-scan-peds-tool Clifton, K., Livi, A., & Rodríguez, D.A. (2004). Pedestrian Environment Data Scan (PEDS) Tool. IBI Group. (2002). Toronto-Related Region Futures Study: Interim Report: Implication of Business-As-Usual Gurin,Development. D. (2003). Understanding Toronto, ON: IBI Sprawl: Group. A Citizen’s Guide. Vancouver, BC: The David Suzuki Foundation. Kim, H. (2015). Walking distance, route choice, and activities while walking: A record of following pedestrians from transit stations in the San Franciso Bay area. Urban Design International, 20 (2), 144-157. doi: http://dx.doi.org. myaccess.library.utoronto.ca/10.1057/udi.2015.2 Social Equity and Transit. Internal Metrolinx document: unpublished.

Kramer, A. (2016). Metrolinx. (2011).(n.d.). Wayfinding Mobility Hub Harmonization. Guidelines. Toronto: Retrieved Metrolinx. from http://www.metrolinx.com/en/regionalplanning/ Retrieved from http://www.metrolinx.com/en/ regionalplanning/mobilityhubs/mobility_hubs_guidelines.aspxwayfinding/default.aspx Metrolinx. (2012). Metrolinx Multi-Year Accessibility Plan. Retrieved from http://www.metrolinx.com/en/aboutus/ publications/Accessibility_Plan_Multi-Year_EN.pdf Metrolinx. (2013). Kennedy Station Mobility Hub Study. Toronto: Metrolinx. Retrieved from http://www.metrolinx. com/en/regionalplanning/mobilityhubs/mobility_hubs_studies.aspx Metrolinx. (2015a). Accessible Design Guidelines. Internal Metrolinx document: unpublished.

metrolinx.com/mobilityhubs/en/map/maps.aspx Metrolinx. (2015b). Dundas West-Bloor Mobility Hub Profile. Toronto: Metrolinx. Retrieved from http://www. mobilityhubs/en/map/maps.aspx Metrolinx. (2015d).(2015c). KennedyGO RER Initial Mobility Business Hub Profile. Case Summary. Toronto: Metrolinx.Toronto: Metrolinx. Retrieved Retrieved from http://www.metrolinx.com/ from http://www.metrolinx.

Metrolinx Accessibility Status Report: 2016. Retrieved from http://www.metrolinx.com/en/ aboutus/publications/accessibility_reports.aspxcom/en/regionalplanning/projectevaluation/benefitscases/benefits_case_analyses.aspx Metrolinx. (2016a). Specifications: GO Shelter Designs. Internal Metrolinx document: unpublished. Metrolinx. (2017a). Accessibility Public Meeting Teleconference. Metrolinx.unpublished. (2016b). Metrolinx. (2017b). Design Requirements Manual (DRM). Retrieved [PowerPoint from http://www.gosite.ca/engineering_public/ slides]. Internal Metrolinx document: DRM_Manual.pdf Metrolinx. (2017c). Draft 2041 Regional Transportation Plan for the Greater Toronto and Hamilton Area. Toronto: Metrolinx. Metrolinx. (2017d). Planning for Resiliency: Toward a Corporate Climate Adaptation Plan. Retrieved from http://www.

Metrolinx. (2018a). Crosstown LRT East Open House ca/news-media/whats-new/east-open-house-east-at-grade-pharmacy-ionview-stops-to-kennedy-station-0metrolinx.com/en/aboutus/sustainability/Planning_for_Resiliency_2017_EN_final.pdf . [PowerPoint slides]. Retrieved from http://www.thecrosstown. 39 | Final Report Metrolinx. (2018b). GO Transit Design Excellence Guidelines (GO DEG): Urban Architecture and Landscape Design. Internal Metrolinx report: unpublished. Metrolinx. (2018c). 2041 Regional Transportation Plan. Retrieved from http://www.metrolinx.com/en/

Metrolinx. (2018d). Wayfinding Design Standard (Version 2.0). Internal Metrolinx report: unpublished. regionalplanning/rtp/Metrolinx%202041%20Regional%20Transportation%20Plan.pdf GIS. Transylvanian Review of Administrative Sciences, 42 Morar,view/94/90 T., Radoslav, R., Spiridon, L. C., & Păcurar, L. (2014). Assessing pedestrian accessibility to green space using Moudon, A.V. & Lee, C. (2003). Walking and bicycling: an evaluation, 116-139. of http://rtsa.ro/tras/index.php/tras/article/environmental audit instruments. The Science of Health Promotion, 18, 21–37. Moura, F., Cambra, P., & Gonçalves, A.B. (2017). Measuring walkability for distinct pedestrian groups with a participatory assessment method: A case study in Lisbon. Landscape and Urban Planning, 157

, 282-296. http:// anddx.doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2016.07.002 Cummings Neighbourhoods. Unpublished manuscript, University of Ottawa. Newman,Nelson, R. P.,(2016). & Kenworthy, Accessibility J. (2015). to Sustainable The End of Transportation automobile dependence: and Green Spaces:How cities A Case are movingStudy in beyond Ottawa’s car-based Vanier North planning. Washington, DC: Island Press. Schlosberg, M., & Brown, N. (2004). Comparing Transit-Oriented Development Sites by Walkability Indicators. Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, 1887, 34-42. doi: 10.3141/1887-05 Steer Davies Gleave. (2017). GTHA Fare Integration: Draft Preliminary Business Case. Metrolinx. Retrieved from http://

Torontowww.metrolinx.com/en/regionalplanning/fareintegration/Draft%20Preliminary%20Business%20Case%20 Transit Commission (TTC). (a). Dundas West: Map of bus bay locations at this station. Retrieved from http:// www.ttc.ca/Subway/Stations/Dundas_West/station.jsp#StationDescription_for%20Fare%20Integration%20in%20the%20GTHA%20v4.0.pdf Toronto Transit Commission (TTC). (b). Kennedy: Map of bus bay locations at this station. Retrieved from http://www. ttc.ca/Subway/Stations/Kennedy/station.jsp#StationDescription_ Toronto Transit Commission (TTC). (2014). Signage Manual and Standards. Retrieved from https://joeclark.org/

Toronto Transit Commission (TTC). (2018a). Eglinton Crosstowm LRT Interchange Stations – Final Designs (For Action)design/signage/TTC/2015/TTCWayfindingStandardsManual_201409.pdf. Retrieved from https://www.ttc.ca/About_the_TTC/Commission_reports_and_information/Commission_ meetings/2018/March_20/Reports/11_Eglinton_Crosstown_LRT_Interchange_Stations_Final_Designs.pdf Toronto Transit Commission (TTC). (2018b). Intermodal stations: Wayfinding system. Internal TTC report: unpublished. Toronto Transit Commission (TTC). (2018c). Report for Action: 2018 Accessibility Plan Status Update. Retrieved from https://www.ttc.ca/About_the_TTC/Commission_reports_and_information/Commission_meetings/2018/ April_11/Reports/4_2018_Accessibility_Plan_Status_Update.pdf Union Pearson Express (UP). Bloor Station Floor Plan. Toronto: Metrolinx. Retrieved from https://www.upexpress. com/SchedulesStations/BloorStationDesktop

toronto-on-canada Walkscore. (2018a). 1456 Bloor Street West. Retrieved from https://www.walkscore.com/score/1456-bloor-st-w- ave-e-toronto-on-canada Wegener,Walkscore. M., (2018b). & Greene, 2467 D. L. Eglinton (2002). Avenue Sustainable East. Transport.Retrieved fromIn W. https://www.walkscore.com/score/2467-eglinton- R. Black & P. Nijkamp (Eds.), Social Change and Sustainable Transport (pp. 27-34). Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press.

Intermodal Connectivity at Gateway Hubs | 40