DOCSLIB.ORG

Feeling Congested?" – Update on Progress to Date

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Feeling Congested? STAFF REPORT ACTION REQUIRED "Feeling Congested?" – Update on Progress to Date Date: May 26, 2014 To: Planning and Growth Management Committee From: Chief Planner and Executive Director, City Planning Division Wards: All Reference P:\2014\ClusterB\PLN\PGMC\PG14076 Number: SUMMARY The current review of the Official Plan's transportation policies has been divided into two approval streams. One set of policy amendments is proceeding towards final approval within this term of Council, while the remainder continue under review with a target approval date of early 2015. This latter set of policies comprises four important transportation planning areas, namely: Rapid Transit Evaluation Framework (RTEF); Surface Transit Network; Cycling Policy Framework; and Street Related Maps and Schedules. This report provides an update on the progress being made on the ongoing review of these four transportation policy areas. RECOMMENDATIONS The Chief Planner and Executive Director, City Planning Division recommends that: 1. The Planning and Growth Management Committee receive this report for information Financial Impact There are no financial impacts resulting from the adoption of this report. Staff report for action on "Feeling Congested?" Update Report 1 DECISION HISTORY Section 26 of the Planning Act requires each municipality to conduct a review of its Official Plan within five years of it coming into force. At its meeting in May, 2011, the Planning and Growth Management Committee adopted, with amendment, the Chief Planner’s recommendations regarding the general work programme and public consultation strategy for the City’s Five Year Official Plan Review and Municipal Comprehensive Review contained in PG5.2 Five Year Review of the Official Plan and Municipal Comprehensive Review. The public consultation strategy for the Official Plan Review was launched in September, 2011. The review of the Official Plan's transportation policies is being undertaken under the banner of the "Feeling Congested?" initiative which was launched in February, 2013. An earlier status report on the "Feeling Congested?" initiative (see PG29.6 Update on the "Feeling Congested?" Initiative - A Consultative Approach to Transportation Planning) was considered by the Planning and Growth Management Committee at its meeting of December 4, 2013. Subsequent to the Committee's adoption of item PG29.6, the "Feeling Congested?" work program has advanced along two broad fronts. The first is the major ongoing policy review related to the four areas of: Rapid Transit Evaluation Framework (RTEF); Surface Transit Network; Cycling Policy Framework; and Rights-of-Way Map and Schedules. The second work stream comprises a number of "Other" transportation policy areas where it is proposed that amendments be brought forward and adopted within the current term of Council. These "Other" proposed transportation policies were presented to the Planning and Growth Management Committee at its meeting on April 10, 2014 (see PG32.3 "Feeling Congested?" Draft Transportation Policies: Official Plan / Municipal Comprehensive Reviews) and the Committee authorized their release for public consultation. This report provides an update on the progress of the ongoing Official Plan policy review related to the four transportation areas mentioned above. ISSUE BACKGROUND Much of the early emphasis of the "Feeling Congested?" initiative has been on two principal tasks of developing a comprehensive rapid transit network plan and an accompanying strategy for enhancing surface transit (bus and streetcar) services. These major tasks remain on-going and, as reported previously, are scheduled for completion in early 2015. The "Feeling Congested?" initiative is also in the process of addressing the following two important transportation policy areas of the Official Plan: • Developing a Cycling Policy Framework; and • Updating street related maps and schedules, namely: Staff report for action on "Feeling Congested?" Update Report 2 o Map 3: Right-of-Way Widths Associated with Existing Major Streets; o Schedule 1: Existing Minor Streets with Right-of-Way Widths Greater than 20 Metres; and o Schedule 2: The Designation of Planned but Unbuilt Roads. COMMENTS The following sections of this report describe the progress of the "Feeling Congested?" initiative’s ongoing review of the four transportation policy areas related to: Rapid Transit Evaluation Framework (RTEF); Surface Transit Network; Cycling Policy Framework; and Rights-of-Way Map and Schedules. The target completion date for these tasks is the first half of 2015, at which time, final Official Plan amendments will be brought forward for the Committee's consideration. Concluding in the Fall of 2013, a series of eighteen Focus Group meetings were organized for nineteen Councillors and were attended by a total of approximately 200 people. At each meeting, City staff gave a presentation on the progress of the "Feeling Congested?" initiative as described in the Phase 2 Toolkit. Topics included the Cycling Policy Framework and the Rapid Transit Evaluation Framework (RTEF). The main item of the presentation was the RTEF, its structure and results. The Focus Group discussions are reflected in the update of the RTEF presented below. 1. Rapid Transit Evaluation Framework (RTEF) The RTEF is being developed to provide a consistent and transparent approach to the task of identifying a recommended long-term comprehensive rapid transit network plan for inclusion in the Official Plan. As described in the November 28, 2013 report entitled Update on the "Feeling Congested?" Initiative, the RTEF comprises eight criteria and over 20 associated measures. A number of these measures are generated as output from the City's Regional Travel Demand Model (GTAModel V2). Refinements are continuing to be made to the RTEF, including the transportation modelling component. Refinements to the RTEF: As a result of the Focus Group meetings, a number of changes to the RTEF have been proposed, both to the project list of alternative rapid transit proposals and the measures used to evaluate the criteria as set out below: a) The west extension of the proposed Relief Line had originally been excluded from the project list because the Downtown Rapid Transit Expansion Study (2012) had found that it was not as high a priority as the core section and east extensions of the line. However, the 2012 study centered on the Relief Line issue only and did not include consideration of any of the other 22 local rapid transit or 11 GO Rail proposals. For the purposes of evaluating a comprehensive set of network elements, the Relief Line West has been added back to the project list. The revised and complete project list, including the current Relief Line proposals, can be found in Attachment 1. Staff report for action on "Feeling Congested?" Update Report 3 b) A new measure for auto accessibility is being considered. The measure responds to comments from the public that the evaluation process needs to explicitly consider transit's effect on other modes, particularly the car. The measure would be calculated in a similar way to the Toronto Transit Jobs Accessibility Index as described in Attachment 4 to the November 28, 2013 report entitled “Update on the “Feeling Congested? Initiative” (see item PG29.6 Update on the "Feeling Congested?" Initiative - A Consultative Approach to Transportation Planning) using auto travel times instead of transit travel times. c) After thorough consideration of the evaluation process, a number of measures were refined to eliminate duplication and reduce overlap. Initially, many of the measures were calculated on both a City-wide basis and a GTHA-wide basis. In most cases, the GTHA-wide measure is retained as this provides the fairest basis of comparison between the proposed rapid transit lines and better takes account of the nature of potential travel in the region. In the case of the customer-focused accessibility measures, those related to the Toronto population are retained. Measures which duplicated output related to ridership and connections have also been eliminated. d) Council has recently adopted new Neighbourhood Improvement Areas (NIAs) to replace Priority Neighbourhoods (see item CD27.5 Toronto Strong Neighbourhoods Strategy 2020 - Recommended Neighbourhood Improvement Areas). In adopting these NIAs, Council also endorsed a method for calculating Neighbourhood Equity Scores (NES). These scores have been adapted in the RTEF to weight, on a zero to one scale, the social significance of NIA’s impacted by the proposed transit lines. Previously, the RTEF simply took the number of residents in a Priority Neighbourhood that are within 500 metres of a proposed transit line as one of the measures of the Social Equity evaluation criterion. Now, the number of impacted residents in an NIA can be weighted by applying the zero to one factor derived from the NES to yield a more refined measure of the social variations between the NIA’s. The revised list of measures can be found in Attachment 2. Integrating GO Rail: To date, the RTEF has been applied to the comparative assessment of future subway, LRT and BRT proposals. These proposed rapid transit lines feature relatively close station stops and are primarily designed to serve trips within the City throughout the day. By contrast, GO rail services, with faster travel speeds and wider station spacings, primarily serve longer distance, inter-regional, peak-period, commuter trips, mainly into and out of Union Station. Integrating the 11 Metrolinx
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Routing Changes - Junction Area Study Update
    For Action Routing Changes - Junction Area Study Update Date: July 10, 2018 To: TTC Board From: Chief Customer Officer Summary The TTC bus network is very mature. In order to ensure that the network continues to reflect the way our customers travel across the city, staff has developed a program to review different segments of the city over time. This report provides an update on the status of the Junction Area Study. The objective of the study is to improve transit travel for customers by restructuring the bus route network in the Junction Area. In spring 2017, the TTC began the study with a customer survey to better understand customer travel patterns in the Junction Area. Feedback was also collected on existing services to identify key concerns for customers. Three key issues were identified: • No continuous transit service along Dundas Street West between Dundas West Station and Kipling Station; • No continuous transit service along St Clair Avenue West between Gunn's Loop (Weston Road) and Scarlett Road; and, • Need to extend the 80 Queensway from its current eastern terminus at Humber Loop to Keele Station via Parkside Drive in the late evening and on Sundays and holidays. Based on this feedback, staff prepared and proposed a preliminary transit network to reflect the data collected and address concerns raised by customers. The new transit network includes a number of service proposals that include restructuring and rationalizing existing services and improving periods of service on routes. In May 2018, the TTC held public information sessions at Runnymede, High Park, and Dundas West stations, and Gunn’s Loop to share the proposed transit network with customers and to collect feedback on the proposals.
    [Show full text]
  • Transit Planning in Toronto: Roles, Priorities and Our Decision Making Framework
    INFORMATION ONLY ____________________________________________________________________________ Subject: Transit Planning in Toronto: roles, priorities and our decision making framework Date: July 29, 2015 At the TTC Board meeting on July 29, 2015, Jennifer Keesmaat, Chief Planner, City of Toronto will deliver a presentation titled “Transit Planning in Toronto: roles, priorities and our decision making framework.” Original signed by Vincent Rodo Chief Financial & Administration Officer 1-17 Transit Planning in Toronto: Roles, Priorities and our decision making framework TTC Board Meeting July 29, 2015 Jennifer Keesmaat, Chief Planner and Executive Director City Planning Division PLANNING A GREAT CITY, TOGETHER Overview of Presentation 1. Role of the City Planning Division in Transit Planning 2. Key Transit Planning Projects • SmartTrack/RER • Relief Line Project Assessment • Scarborough Subway Extension Project Assessment • Metrolinx LRT Program • King Streetcar Enhancements • “Feeling Congested?” Transportation Official Plan Review ruill_TORDNIO 2 City Planning Division PROGRAMS • Application Review • Business Performance & Standards • Civic Design • Committee of Adjustment • Design Review • Community Policy • Environmental Planning • Graphics & Visualization • Heritage Preservation • Official Plan & Zoning By-law • Outreach and Engagement • Public Art • Research & Information • Strategic Initiatives • Transit Planning • Waterfront Renewal 3 Transit Implementation Unit Objective Transit planning in the City of Toronto requires a transparent,
    [Show full text]
  • Rapid Transit in Toronto Levyrapidtransit.Ca TABLE of CONTENTS
    The Neptis Foundation has collaborated with Edward J. Levy to publish this history of rapid transit proposals for the City of Toronto. Given Neptis’s focus on regional issues, we have supported Levy’s work because it demon- strates clearly that regional rapid transit cannot function eff ectively without a well-designed network at the core of the region. Toronto does not yet have such a network, as you will discover through the maps and historical photographs in this interactive web-book. We hope the material will contribute to ongoing debates on the need to create such a network. This web-book would not been produced without the vital eff orts of Philippa Campsie and Brent Gilliard, who have worked with Mr. Levy over two years to organize, edit, and present the volumes of text and illustrations. 1 Rapid Transit in Toronto levyrapidtransit.ca TABLE OF CONTENTS 6 INTRODUCTION 7 About this Book 9 Edward J. Levy 11 A Note from the Neptis Foundation 13 Author’s Note 16 Author’s Guiding Principle: The Need for a Network 18 Executive Summary 24 PART ONE: EARLY PLANNING FOR RAPID TRANSIT 1909 – 1945 CHAPTER 1: THE BEGINNING OF RAPID TRANSIT PLANNING IN TORONTO 25 1.0 Summary 26 1.1 The Story Begins 29 1.2 The First Subway Proposal 32 1.3 The Jacobs & Davies Report: Prescient but Premature 34 1.4 Putting the Proposal in Context CHAPTER 2: “The Rapid Transit System of the Future” and a Look Ahead, 1911 – 1913 36 2.0 Summary 37 2.1 The Evolving Vision, 1911 40 2.2 The Arnold Report: The Subway Alternative, 1912 44 2.3 Crossing the Valley CHAPTER 3: R.C.
    [Show full text]
  • Bus Bridging Decision-Support Toolkit: Optimization Framework and Policy Analysis
    Bus Bridging Decision-Support Toolkit: Optimization Framework and Policy Analysis by Alaa Itani A thesis submitted in conformity with the requirements for the degree of Master of Applied Science Department of Civil and Mineral Engineering University of Toronto © Copyright by Alaa Itani 2019 Bus Bridging Decision-Support Toolkit: Optimization Framework and Policy Analysis Alaa Itani Master of Applied Science Department of Civil and Mineral Engineering University of Toronto 2019 Abstract Bus Bridging is the strategy most commonly applied in responding to rail service interruptions in North America and Europe. In determining the required number of buses and source routes, most transit agencies rely on ad-hoc approaches based on operational experience and constraints, which can lead to extensive delays and queue build-ups at affected stations. This thesis developed an optimization model, to determine the optimal number of shuttle buses and route allocation which minimize the overall subway and bus riders delay. The generated optimal solutions are sensitive to bus bay capacity constraints along the shuttle service corridor. The optimization model is integrated with a previously developed simulation tool that tracks the evolution of system queues and delays throughout the bus bridging process. A set of bus bridging policy guidelines were developed based on further analysis of the optimization model outputs using a Classification and Regression Tree (CART) model. ii Acknowledgments First, I would like to thank my parents and for their continuous support and trust in my abilities. Although they were thousands of miles away, they were always supportive, I couldn’t have made it here without their presence.
    [Show full text]
  • Mobility Hubs December 2008
    Mobility Hubs December 2008 1. Introduction This is one in a series of backgrounders that have been produced by Metrolinx to provide further explanation and clarification on the policies and directions of the Regional Transportation Plan (RTP). The RTP is available for downloading at www.metrolinx.com. This backgrounder should be read as an accompaniment to Strategy 7 of the RTP. It is intended to provide additional detail on the mobility hub policies of the RTP and clarification of the terms and definitions used in the RTP with respect to mobility hubs. Metrolinx wishes to acknowledge the invaluable contribution of Urban Strategies Inc. and IBI Group to the preparation of this backgrounder. 2. What is a Mobility Hub? The mobility hub policies of the RTP build on the overall policy framework established in the Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe, particularly those related to major transit station areas. The Growth Plan defines major transit station areas as the area within a 500m radius (10 minute walk) of any existing or planned higher order transit station within a settlement area or around a major bus depot in an urban core. Major transit station areas that are particularly significant for the regional rapid transit system are recognized as mobility hubs in the RTP. Mobility hubs are major transit station areas with significant levels of transit service planned for them in the RTP, high development potential, and a critical function in the regional transportation system as major trip generators. They are places of connectivity where different modes of transportation — from walking to high- speed rail — come together seamlessly and where there is an intensive concentration of employment, living, shopping and/or recreation.
    [Show full text]
  • Transportation Needs
    Chapter 2 – Transportation Needs 407 TRANSITWAY – WEST OF BRANT STREET TO WEST OF HURONTARIO STREET MINISTRY OF TRANSPORTATION - CENTRAL REGION 2.6.4. Sensitivity Analysis 2-20 TABLE OF CONTENTS 2.7. Systems Planning – Summary of Findings 2-21 2. TRANSPORTATION NEEDS 2-1 2.1. Introduction 2-1 2.1.1. Background 2-1 2.1.2. Scope of Systems Planning 2-1 2.1.3. Study Corridor 2-1 2.1.4. Approach 2-2 2.1.5. Overview of the Chapter 2-2 2.2. Existing Conditions and Past Trends 2-2 2.2.1. Current Land Use 2-2 2.2.2. Transportation System 2-3 2.2.3. Historic Travel Trends 2-4 2.2.4. Current Demands and System Performance 2-5 2.3. Future Conditions 2-7 2.3.1. Land Use Changes 2-7 2.3.2. Transportation Network Changes 2-8 2.3.3. Changes in Travel Patterns 2-9 2.3.4. Future Demand and System Performance 2-10 2.4. Service Concept 2-13 2.4.1. Operating Characteristics 2-13 2.4.2. Conceptual Operating and Service Strategy 2-13 2.5. Vehicle Maintenance and Storage support 2-14 2.5.1. Facility Need 2-14 2.5.2. West Yard – Capacity Assessment 2-15 2.5.3. West Yard – Location 2-15 2.6. Transitway Ridership Forecasts 2-15 2.6.1. Strategic Forecasts 2-15 2.6.2. Station Evaluation 2-17 2.6.3. Revised Forecasts 2-18 DRAFT 2-0 . Update ridership forecasts to the 2041 horizon; 2.
    [Show full text]
  • Eglinton Crosstown West Extension Initial Business Case February 2020
    Eglinton Crosstown West Extension Initial Business Case February 2020 Eglinton Crosstown West Extension Initial Business Case February 2020 Contents Executive Summary 1 Scope 1 Method of Analysis 1 Findings 3 Strategic Case 3 Economic Case 3 Financial Case 4 Deliverability and Operations Case 4 Summary 4 Introduction 7 Background 8 Business Case Overview 10 Problem Statement 13 Case for Change 14 Problem Statement 14 Opportunity for Change 15 Key Drivers 16 Strategic Value 18 iv Investment Options 24 Introduction 25 Study Area 25 Options Development 25 Options for Analysis 27 Assumptions for Analysis and Travel Demand Modelling 33 Strategic Case 34 Introduction 35 Strategic Objective 1 – Connect More Places with Better Frequent Rapid Transit 38 Criterion 1: To provide high quality transit to more people in more places 38 Criterion 2: To address the connectivity gap between Eglinton Crosstown LRT and Transitway BRT 40 Strategic Objective 2 – Improve Transit’s Convenience and Attractiveness 42 Criterion 2: To provide more reliable, safe and enjoyable travel experience 42 Criterion 2: To boost transit use and attractiveness among local residents and workers 45 Strategic Objective 3 – Promote Healthier and More Sustainable Travel Behaviours 52 Criterion 1: To improve liveability through reduction in traffic delays, auto dependency and air pollution 52 Criterion 2: To encourage use of active modes to access stations 53 v Strategic Objective 4 – Encourage Transit-Supportive Development 57 Criterion 1: Compatibility with Existing Neighbourhood
    [Show full text]
  • Enhanced Eglinton West Rapid Transit Initial Business Case Analysis
    APPENDIX 4 ENHANCED EGLINTON WEST RAPID TRANSIT INITIAL BUSINESS CASE ANALYSIS JUNE 2016 Cover Image: Marcus Bowman TABLE OF CONTENTS Problem Statement II 1.0 Introduction 1 2.0 Context 2 3.0 Study Overview 4 4.0 Strategic Case 9 5.0 Financial Case 18 6.0 Economic Case 20 7.0 Deliverability and Operations Case 23 8.0 Next Steps 25 Appendix 26 I PROBLEM STATEMENT The implementation of the Mississauga BRT, Eglinton Crosstown Phase 1, as well as Union Pearson Express and RER connections at Mt. Dennis will bring vital rapid transit improvements to the Eglinton corridor and the region, but will also leave a key gap in the rapid transit network along Eglinton West between Mt. Dennis and Renforth Gateway. The corridor provides an opportunity for a connection to Pearson Airport and surrounding employment by linking communities, people, and jobs to and along the Mississauga BRT and Eglinton LRT. An Environmental Assessment was completed in 2010 for an at- grade LRT through the corridor with 14 stops along Eglinton Ave at all cross roads. In the context of current planning work being coordinated between Metrolinx and the City of Toronto there is a need to develop feasible options to optimize the 2010 EA design and understand their various benefits to different users and travel patterns. II INITIAL BUSINESS CASE 1.0 INTRODUCTION Eglinton West: A Gap in the Regional Rapid Transit Network The Greater Toronto and Hamilton Area’s Regional Transportation Plan, The Big Move, was adopted in 2008 and set out a 25-year vision for supporting growth in the region.
    [Show full text]
  • Staff-Report-PD-2016-14-RE-OPR-Consultant-Selection-With-Attachment.Pdf
    The Corporation of The Town of Penetanguishene Committee of the Whole COMMITTEE: Planning and Community Development COMMITTEE CHAIR: Councillor Debbie Levy SUBJECT: Official Plan Review - Consultant Selection RECOMMENDATION THAT the Committee of the Whole recommends to Council acceptance of the proposal dated February 8, 2016, to retain the services of MMM Group Limited, for a maximum upset limit of $99,389.15 (includes HST) to prepare the Town’s Official Plan. INTRODUCTION A Request for Proposals (RFP) to prepare a new Official Plan was issued on January 19, 2016. The Terms of Reference and Request for proposals was circulated to ten planning consultants, posted on the Town’s website and notice was given in the Midland Mirror. On or before the deadline the following nine (9) submissions were received: Consultant Cost (including HST) MMM Group $99,389.15 Meridian Planning Consultants $76,791.96 MHBC Planning $93,251.13 Innovative Planning Solutions $99,507.80 GSP Group $98,852.40 The Jones Consulting Group $94,349.35 Skelton Brumwell $99,101.00 The Planning Partnership $99,878.00 Cambium $100,000.000 The Steering Committee met on February 23, 2016 to evaluate and review the proposals and subsequently determined that MMM Group Limited be recommended to Council to prepare the new Official Plan. ANALYSIS The Steering committee conducted a detailed review of each of the proposals and held significant discussion on them. After much discussion, with advice and input from staff, selected the proposal from MMM Group Limited (Attachment #1) as best meeting the terms and conditions of the RFP and the needs and expectations from the Steering Committee.
    [Show full text]
  • 1600 Bloor Street West for Sale & for Lease
    1600 BLOOR STREET WEST FOR SALE & FOR LEASE ALEX PROTOMANNI* FRANK PROTOMANNI** BROCK MEDDICK RYAN BOBYK* Sales Associate Senior Vice President Sales Representative Sales Associate T +1 416 495 6284 T +1 416 495 6299 T +1 416 815 2305 T +1 416 495 6200 [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] *Sales Representative **Broker N 1600 BLOOR STREET WEST 29 STOREY MIXED AUTO BLDG USE CONDO AND MOCA AT THE OFFERING BY TRINITY LOWER JCT BY CASTLEPOINT DUFFERIN STATION DEVELOPMENT CBRE Limited is pleased to offer for sale 1600 Bloor Street West, GROUP INC. AND HOWARD PARK GREYBROOK Toronto. This two-storey building has a mix of retail and two RESIDENCES BY renovated apartment units. The property is located in the City’s LANSDOWNE STATION TRIUMPH WEST TWNS AT CHOICE DEVELOPMENTS well-known High Park North neighbourhood, just west of the LOWER JARVIS PROPERTIES intersection of Bloor Street West and Dundas Street West. BLOOR BY CASTLEPOINT STATION DEVELOPMENT FOR AND A MAJOR MIXED USE RONCESVALLES The Site is currently improved with 4,006 sq. ft. of building including GREYBROOK CENTRE INCLUDING LOFTS BY THE RONCY BY 24 STOREY 2,600 RESIDENTIAL the basement, and 17.08 ft. of frontage along Bloor Street West. TRIUMPH WORSLEY URBAN RENTAL UNITS The two-storey property is currently vacant, giving purchasers DEVELOPMENTS DEVELOPMENT BY unparalleled flexibility and an opportunity to achieve above market LORMEL HOMES DUNDAS WEST STATION rents. The property has a renovated 2-bedroom apartment on the second floor with a rooftop patio and a renovated 1-bedroom V6 BY OLD STONEHENGE apartment below grade.
    [Show full text]
  • Applying Life Cycle Assessment to Analyze the Environmental Sustainability of Public Transit Modes for the City of Toronto
    Applying life cycle assessment to analyze the environmental sustainability of public transit modes for the City of Toronto by Ashton Ruby Taylor A thesis submitted to the Department of Geography & Planning in conformity with the requirements for the Degree of Master of Science Queen’s University Kingston, Ontario, Canada September, 2016 Copyright © Ashton Ruby Taylor, 2016 Abstract One challenge related to transit planning is selecting the appropriate mode: bus, light rail transit (LRT), regional express rail (RER), or subway. This project uses data from life cycle assessment to develop a tool to measure energy requirements for different modes of transit, on a per passenger-kilometer basis. For each of the four transit modes listed, a range of energy requirements associated with different vehicle models and manufacturers was developed. The tool demonstrated that there are distinct ranges where specific transit modes are the best choice. Diesel buses are the clear best choice from 7-51 passengers, LRTs make the most sense from 201-427 passengers, and subways are the best choice above 918 passengers. There are a number of other passenger loading ranges where more than one transit mode makes sense; in particular, LRT and RER represent very energy-efficient options for ridership ranging from 200 to 900 passengers. The tool developed in the thesis was used to analyze the Bloor-Danforth subway line in Toronto using estimated ridership for weekday morning peak hours. It was found that ridership across the line is for the most part actually insufficient to justify subways over LRTs or RER. This suggests that extensions to the existing Bloor-Danforth line should consider LRT options, which could service the passenger loads at the ends of the line with far greater energy efficiency.
    [Show full text]
  • Exchange Arrival Guide INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS Welcome to the Schulich Community!
    Exchange Arrival Guide INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS Welcome to the Schulich Community! Dear Exchange Student, International Relations Office Room: W262P, SSB; Tel: +1-416-736-5059 Email: [email protected] Congratulations on being accepted to the Schulich School of Business at York Website: exchange@schulich University in Toronto, Canada! Cheryl Stickley Our team in the International Relations Office looks forward to welcoming you to Graduate International Program Coordinator Schulich, Toronto, and Canada. We hope that your time here will be a successful one Email: [email protected] filled with exciting opportunities. Tina Fantin Undergraduate International Program Our office is dedicated to making your transition to Canada a smooth one. We have Coordinator compiled this arrival guidebook for exchange students to address some of the most Email: [email protected] frequently asked questions regarding the arrival on campus and getting settled in the community. We hope that you will find this guide helpful. Lan Yu International Information Assistant Please contact us if you have any questions. Email: [email protected] Ann Welsh We look forward to meeting you at the Exchange Orientation. International Student Support Specialist Email: [email protected] Sincerely, Tim Tang Cheryl, Tina, Ann, Lan and Tim Director, International Relations Email: [email protected] Office Hours Monday through Friday 9:00 AM EST – 4:30 PM EST PREPARING TO ARRIVE IN CANADA Engage in Student Life The Open Arms Committee The Open Arms Committee (OAC) is a student-run organization at Schulich with the purpose of facilitating the transition of exchange students by trying to help them adjust to their new environment and settle into Schulich.
    [Show full text]