DOCSLIB.ORG

Area Transportation System Alternatives Report

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Area Transportation System Alternatives Report Revised Draft January 2011 December 2010 February 2010 DRAFT i GTA West Planning and Environmental Assessment Study Revised Draft Area Transportation System Alternatives Report PREFACE The Area Transportation System Alternatives Report – Revised Draft (2011) is one of several interim reports which depicts the study process culminating in the Transportation Development Strategy. The Area Transportation System Alternatives Report – Revised Draft (2011) was first issued in March 2009. The reports purpose was to summarize the process and methodology that was used to develop a broad range of the Area Transportation System Alternatives and to document the key findings of this work. In the consultation period following its release, the study team received comments relating to a range of issues. The purpose of this revised draft report (January 2011) is to ensure that all comments received have been adequately addressed; and where appropriate, the content of the report has been revised accordingly. Appendix A provides an overview of the individual Transportation Alternatives. Appendix B summarizes the factors and criteria for assessing the preliminary planning alternatives, a description and categorization of multi-modal alternatives and a high level assessment of Group alternatives. Appendix C provides a summary of the input received on the March 2009 draft report, and details each comment received, the study team’s response, and any changes incorporated into the revised draft report. January 2011 GTA West Planning and Environmental Assessment Study Revised Draft Area Transportation System Alternatives Report TABLE OF CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ............................................................................................................................... i 1. INTRODUCTION.................................................................................................................................. 1 1.1 STUDY BACKGROUND..............................................................................................................1 1.2 STUDY PURPOSE ......................................................................................................................2 1.3 PURPOSE, RELEVANCE AND POSITION OF REPORT WITHIN STUDY PROCESS..............3 1.4 STUDY AREA AND AREAS OF INFLUENCE .............................................................................3 1.5 OVERVIEW OF PROBLEMS & OPPORTUNITIES IN THE TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM.......4 1.6 PROCESS FOR GENERATING AND ASSESSING AREA TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM ALTERNATIVES..........................................................................................................................5 2. INDIVIDUAL TRANSPORTATION ALTERNATIVES ......................................................................... 8 2.1 OVERVIEW..................................................................................................................................8 2.2 TRANSPORTATION DEMAND MANAGEMENT (TDM) / TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS MANAGEMENT (TSM) ................................................................................................................8 2.2.1 Existing TDM / TSM Initiatives ................................................................................................8 2.2.2 Description of Alternatives Generated ..................................................................................12 2.3 TRANSIT....................................................................................................................................14 2.3.1 Existing Bus / Rail Passenger Transit System......................................................................14 2.3.2 Metrolinx Regional Transportation Plan (RTP) .....................................................................16 2.3.3 GO Transit 2020 Strategic Plan ............................................................................................20 2.3.4 Description of Alternatives Generated ..................................................................................23 2.4 FREIGHT RAIL ..........................................................................................................................26 2.4.1 Existing Freight Rail System .................................................................................................26 2.4.2 Description of Alternatives Generated ..................................................................................27 2.5 MARINE.....................................................................................................................................31 2.5.1 Existing Marine Transportation System ................................................................................31 2.5.2 Description of Alternatives Generated ..................................................................................33 2.6 AIR .............................................................................................................................................36 2.6.1 Existing Air Transportation System .......................................................................................36 2.6.2 Description of Alternatives Generated ..................................................................................37 2.7 FREIGHT INTER-MODAL .........................................................................................................39 2.7.1 Existing Freight Inter-modal Facilities ...................................................................................39 2.7.2 Description of Alternatives Generated ..................................................................................40 2.8 ROADS AND HIGHWAYS .........................................................................................................43 2.8.1 Existing Road and Highway System .....................................................................................43 2.8.2 Description of Ideas Generated.............................................................................................48 2.9 ASSESSMENT OF INDIVIDUAL TRANSPORTATION ALTERNATIVES .................................52 3. GROUP TRANSPORTATION ALTERNATIVES............................................................................... 54 3.1 OVERVIEW................................................................................................................................54 3.2 ASSESSMENT OF MULTI-MODAL ALTERNATIVES...............................................................55 3.3 ASSESSMENT OF GROUP ALTERNATIVES ..........................................................................55 3.4 GROUP #1 – OPTIMIZE EXISTING NETWORKS.....................................................................56 3.4.1 Overview of Group #1 ...........................................................................................................56 3.4.2 Assessment of Group #1.......................................................................................................57 3.5 GROUP #2 – NEW / EXPANDED NON-ROAD INFRASTRUCTURE ......................................58 3.5.1 Overview of Group #2 ...........................................................................................................58 3.5.2 Assessment of Group #2.......................................................................................................60 3.6 THE NEED FOR ROADWAY BASED SOLUTIONS ..................................................................61 3.7 GROUP #3 – WIDEN / IMPROVE ROADS ................................................................................62 3.7.1 Overview of Group #3 ...........................................................................................................62 3.8 GROUP #4 – NEW TRANSPORTATION CORRIDORS............................................................63 January 2011 GTA West Planning and Environmental Assessment Study Revised Draft Area Transportation System Alternatives Report 3.8.1 Overview of Group #4 ...........................................................................................................63 3.9 ASSESSMENT OF GROUP #3 AND GROUP #4 ......................................................................64 3.10 NEXT STEPS.............................................................................................................................64 4. SUMMARY OF CONSULTATION ..................................................................................................... 66 4.1 MEETINGS HELD DURING GENERATION OF ALTERNATIVES............................................67 4.2 MEETINGS HELD DURING ASSESSMENT OF ALTERNATIVES ...........................................68 4.3 PUBLIC INFORMATION CENTRE (PIC) #3..............................................................................68 DEFINITIONS ............................................................................................................................................. 75 APPENDIX A: INDIVIDUAL TRANSPORTATION ALTERNATIVES...................................................... A-1 APPENDIX B: ASSESSMENT OF MULTI-MODAL ALTERNATIVES.................................................... B-1 APPENDIX C: SUMMARY OF COMMENTS AND RESPONSES........................................................... C-1 LIST OF EXHIBITS Exhibit E-1 Two-Stage Process for Developing and Assessing Area Transportation System Alternatives Exhibit E-2 Group 2 – New/Improved Non-Roadway Infrastructure Exhibit E-3 Group 3-1 – Freeway Widening Exhibit E-4 Group 3-2 – Freeway and Arterial Road Widening
Load more

Recommended publications
  • APPENDIX 5 February 2013
    APPENDIX 5 February 2013 APPENDIX 5 APPENDIX 5-A Paper #5a Transit Service and Infrastructure Paper #5a TRANSIT SERVICE AND INFRASTRUCTURE This paper outlines public transit service within the Town of Oakville, identifies the role of public transit within the objectives of the Livable Oakville Plan and the North Oakville Secondary Plans, outlines the current transit initiatives and identifies future transit strategies and alternatives. This report provides an assessment of target transit modal share, the level of investment required to achieve these targets and the anticipated effectiveness of alternative transit investment strategies. This paper will provide strategic direction and recommendations for Oakville Transit, GO Transit and VIA Rail service, and identify opportunities to better integrate transit with other modes of transportation, such as walking and cycling, as well as providing for accessible services. 1.0 The Role of Transit in Oakville 1.1. Provincial Policy The Province of Ontario has provided direction to municipalities regarding growth and the relationship between growth and sustainable forms of travel including public transit. Transit is seen to play a key role in addressing the growth pressures faced by municipalities in the Greater Golden Horseshoe, including the Town of Oakville. In June 2006, the Province of Ontario released a Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe. The plan is a framework for implementing the Province’s vision for building stronger, prosperous communities by better managing growth in the region to 2031. The plan outlines strategies for managing growth with emphasis on reducing dependence on the automobile and “promotes transit, cycling and walking”. In addition, the plan establishes “urban growth centres” as locations for accommodating a significant share of population and employment growth.
    [Show full text]
  • Oakville Transit Routes Major Transfer Points Oakville Transit Weekday Route
    1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 e Line Oakville Transit Oakville Transit RoutesLower Bas Major Transfer Points 0120.5 A A Weekday Route Map Kilometers Oakville GO Station 1 4 10 11 13 14 15 17 Fourth18 19 20 24 26 28 120 190 Town of Milton 3 Line ± Bronte GO Station 2 3 4 6 10 13 22 32 33 Solid line indicates regular service route. 3 14 15 32 Hopedale Mall 407 10 n Mil ixtee e Cr Uptown Core 1 45 19 20 t S eek B Dashed line indicates rush hour service Eas B Clarkson GO Station 4 21 25 102 MT route, or change in routing pattern. Route 24 travels South Common 24 MT into Mississauga to Please note that not all routes operate on South Common Centre Saturday, Sunday/Holiday. Maplegrove Village 4 114 21 25 Burnhamthorpe Rd. EastEast Burnhamthorpe Rd. West West 2 14 17 C Saturday Routes: Downtown Oakville MT MiWay Transit C 32 1 2 3 4 54 6 11 13 14 15 17 Lakeshore & Burloak 14 BT BT Burlington Transit Blvd. 19 20 21 24 26 28 32 Sunday/Holiday Routes: Road Line Churchill Line Blvd. The Collegeway D 1 2 3 4 45 6 13 14 15 17 19 403 D 20 24 28 32 Ninth Line Sixth Line Trafalgar Road Winston Churchill Blvd. Vega Blvd. Rd. Uptown Core Ridgeway 25 Sixteen Mile Sports Neyagawa Terminal Dr. 24 Complex City of Mississauga Regional 1 5 19 20 AE 33 Road 25 5 Dundas St.St.
    [Show full text]
  • Pre-Feasibility Noise and Vibration Study
    Bronte GO MTSA: Area Specific Plan Appendix E: Pre-Feasibility Noise and Vibration Study Pre-Feasibility Noise and Vibration Study Bronte Go MTSA Oakville, Ontario Project #TPB196008 Sajecki Planning Prepared for: Sajecki Planning 777 Richmond Street West, Suite 2025, Toronto, Ontario, M6J 3N5 November 2020 Pre-Feasibility Noise and Vibration Study Bronte Go MTSA Oakville, Ontario Project #TPB196008 Sajecki Planning Prepared for: Sajecki Planning 777 Richmond Street West, Suite 2025, Toronto, Ontario, M6J 3N5 Prepared by: Wood Environment & Infrastructure Solutions a Division of Wood Canada Limited 2020 Winston Park Drive Suite 600 Oakville, Ontario L6H 6X7 Canada T: 905-568-2929 November 2, 2020 Copyright and non-disclosure notice The contents and layout of this report are subject to copyright owned by Wood (© Wood Environment & Infrastructure Solutions a Division of Wood Canada Limited) save to the extent that copyright has been legally assigned by us to another party or is used by Wood under license. To the extent that we own the copyright in this report, it may not be copied or used without our prior written agreement for any purpose other than the purpose indicated in this report. The methodology (if any) contained in this report is provided to you in confidence and must not be disclosed or copied to third parties without the prior written agreement of Wood. Disclosure of that information may constitute an actionable breach of confidence or may otherwise prejudice our commercial interests. Any third party who obtains access to this report by any means will, in any event, be subject to the Third Party Disclaimer set out below.
    [Show full text]
  • (BRES) and Successful Integration of Transit-Oriented Development (TOD) May 24, 2016
    Bolton Residential Expansion Study (BRES) and Successful Integration of Transit-Oriented Development (TOD) May 24, 2016 The purpose of this memorandum is to review the professional literature pertaining to the potential develop- ment of a Transit-Oriented Development (TOD) in the Bolton Residential Expansion Study area, in response to the Region of Peel’s recent release of the Discussion Paper. The Discussion Paper includes the establishment of evaluation themes and criteria, which are based on provincial and regional polices, stakeholder and public comments. It should be noted that while the Discussion Paper and the Region’s development of criteria does not specifi- cally advocate for TOD, it is the intent of this memorandum to illustrate that TOD-centric planning will not only adequately address such criteria, but will also complement and enhance the Region’s planning principles, key points and/or themes found in stakeholder and public comments. In the following are research findings related to TOD generally, and specifically, theMetrolinx Mobility Hub Guidelines For The Greater Toronto and Hamilton Area (September 2011) objectives. Additionally, following a review and assessment of the “Response to Comments Submitted on the Bolton Residential Expansion Study ROPA” submission prepared by SGL Planning & Design Inc. (March 15, 2016), this memorandum evaluates some of the key arguments and assumptions made in this submission relative to the TOD research findings. Planning for Transit-Oriented Developments TOD policy and programs can result in catalytic development that creates walkable, livable neighborhoods around transit providing economic, livability and equitable benefits. The body of research on TODs in the United States has shown that TODs are more likely to succeed when project planning takes place in conjunction with transit system expansion.
    [Show full text]
  • Transit Strategy
    Town of Oakville Planning Department Town of Oakville - Transit Strategy Oakville, Ontario January 2010 Town of Oakville Planning Department Town of Oakville - Transit Strategy Oakville, Ontario January 2010 iTRANS Consulting Inc. 100 York Blvd., Suite 300 Richmond Hill, ON L4B 1J8 Tel: (905) 882-4100 Fax: (905) 882-1557 www.itransconsulting.com Project # 5173 Town of Oakville Town of Oakville - Transit Strategy Client Project Team Project Manager Tricia Collingwood Project Team Joanne Phoenix iTRANS Project Team Principal / Project Manager Ray Bacquie, P.Eng., AVS. Technical Team Mark Mis, MBA Andrew Evans, MSc. Sherwin Gumbs, M.Eng., P.Eng. Tavia Chow Quality Control Wally Beck, C.E.T. January 2010 iTRANS Project # 5173 Town of Oakville Town of Oakville - Transit Strategy TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. Introduction ................................................................................................................... 1 2. Existing Conditions ....................................................................................................... 3 2.1 Existing Transit Mode Shares................................................................................ 3 2.1.1 Home-Work Transit Trips............................................................................ 4 2.1.2 Home-School Transit Trips........................................................................ 10 2.1.3 Home-Other Transit Trips.......................................................................... 15 2.2 Existing Population and Employment Density...................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Bronte GO Major Transit Station Area Study Draft Land Use Scenarios – Technical Backgrounder October, 2019
    Bronte GO Major Transit Station Area Study Draft Land Use Scenarios – Technical Backgrounder October, 2019 Appendix A. Community Services and Facilities Inventory Appendix B. MTSA Best Practices Appendix C. Public Engagement Workshop Summaries Appendix D. TAC Meeting #1 Summary Appendix A: Community Services and Facilities Inventory Summary of Community Services and Facilities Inventory Bronte Major Transit Station Area (MTSA) Study April 24, 2019 This document provides a summary of the inventory of existing community services and facilities (CS&F) within 1.6 kilometres of the Bronte GO Station, prepared as part of the Bronte Major Transit Station Area (MTSA) Study. The facilities, shown in Figure 1 and described in Table 1 below, include publicly-funded schools, cultural facilities, libraries, child care centres, parks, community and recreation centres, and human/social and emergency services. Although the MTSA Study Area focuses on lands within 800 metres of the Bronte GO Station, a wider 1.6 kilometre service Catchment Area is considered to capture facilities in the “first mile” and “last mile” of transit trips that would serve existing and new residents in the Study Area. The 1.6 kilometre radius that delineates the service Catchment Area is shown in Figure 1. FIGURE 1: Location of Community Services and Facilities Within the 1.6 kilometre CS&F Catchment Area Community services and facilities that are currently available within the 1.6 kilometre CS&F Catchment Area are described below. Page 1 of 6 Schools There are two public schools within the CS&F Catchment Area. Gladys Speers Public School and Brookdale Public School are located near the periphery of the 1.6 kilometre CS&F Catchment Area.
    [Show full text]
  • Shantz Aaron.Pdf (7.260Mb)
    Understanding Factors Associated With Commuter Rail Ridership A Demand Elasticity Study of the GO Transit Rail Network by Aaron Shantz A thesis presented to the University of Waterloo in fulfillment of the thesis requirement for the degree of Master of Environmental Studies in Planning Waterloo, Ontario, Canada, 2021 © Aaron Shantz 2021 Author’s Declaration I hereby declare that I am the sole author of this thesis. This is a true copy of the thesis, including any required final revisions, as accepted by my examiners. I understand that this thesis may be made electronically available to the public. ii Abstract Mode share in major North American cities is currently dominated by private automobile use. Planners have theorized that transitioning commuter rail systems to regional rail networks is a viable method to increase ridership and stabilize mode share. This process is currently underway in Ontario, Canada, as the amount and frequency of service is being increased throughout the GO Transit rail network via the GO Expansion Program. However, previous studies have shown that transit demand does not solely respond to service quantity expansions. Variables related to the built environment, regional economy, network characteristics, and socioeconomic status of the customer base can influence transit demand to varying degrees. Further, the literature states that the travel behavior of commuter rail users is unique, as access mode, distance, socioeconomic status, and the utility derived from varying trip types can differ compared to local transit users. These findings suggest that supplementary policies might be needed to reduce automobile reliance and stimulate demand for regional transit. Many transit researchers have conducted demand elasticity studies to identify what factors are significantly associated with transit ridership.
    [Show full text]
  • Subject: Metrolinx Initial Business Case Update – Niagara Falls Rail Service Extension Recommendations Key Facts Financial
    PW 6-2020 January 14, 2020 Page 1 Subject: Metrolinx Initial Business Case Update – Niagara Falls Rail Service Extension Report to: Public Works Committee Report date: Tuesday, January 14, 2020 Recommendations That Report PW 6-2020 BE RECEIVED for information. Key Facts The purpose of this report is to provide a review and analysis of the Metrolinx’s Updated Initial Business Case (IBC) for the Niagara Expansion. The updated IBC for extending rail service to Niagara recommends the Option 2 service pattern which results in 11 total daily train trips for Niagara (six (6) outbound trains from Niagara Falls to Union Station, five (5) trains inbound from Union Station to Niagara Falls), seven (7) days a week. As the next step of the expansion process, Metrolinx will refine the infrastructure scope and service patterns for Option 2. This analysis of refinements and optimizations will eventually be published as a Preliminary Design Business Case. Metrolinx’s Board approved moving forward to a Preliminary Design Business Case using Option 2 as the targeted service levels at its November 2019 board meeting. Financial Considerations There are no financial considerations related to this report. Analysis Metrolinx has a four (4) stage, iterative Business Case process. Projects progress through the following business case cycle: 1) Initial Business Case—compares investment options and selects preferred option for further refinement and design 2) Preliminary Design Business Case—takes the recommended option of the IBC and reviews different approaches to refine and optimize it 3) Full Business Case—confirms a specific option including benefits, realization, financing, and delivery plans for procurement 4) Post In-Service Business Case—reviews the actual costs and performance of the investment after the asset has gone into service There is no set period of time for when these business cases are undertaken or how long of a process it is from start to finish of the business case four stage cycle.
    [Show full text]
  • Town of Oakville Transportation Overview Study
    Town of Oakville - Town of Oakville Transportation Overview Study Town of Oakville Transportation Overview Study Town of Oakville Oakville June 2009 iTRANS Consulting Inc. 100 York Blvd., Suite 300 Richmond Hill, ON L4B 1J8 Tel: (905) 882-4100 Fax: (905) 882-1557 www.itransconsulting.com Proposal # 5173 i June 2009 Proposal # 5173 Town of Oakville - Town of Oakville Transportation Overview Study TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. Introduction ................................................................................................................................ 1 1.1 Overview............................................................................................................................ 1 1.2 Scope................................................................................................................................. 1 2. Direction from Previous Studies .............................................................................................. 2 2.1 Policy Direction .................................................................................................................. 2 2.1.1 Places to Grow Plan................................................................................................ 2 2.1.2 Sustainable Halton .................................................................................................. 3 2.2 Town of Oakville Intensification Areas............................................................................... 5 2.2.1 Bronte Village Revitalization Plan ..........................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Office Strategy
    OFFICE STRATEGY PREPARED FOR: CITY OF BRAMPTON REGION O FPEEL CUSHMAN & WAKEFIELD 1 May 4, 2016 Ms. Claudia LaRota Policy Planner Planning and Infrastructure Services City of Brampton 2 Wellington Street West Brampton, Ontario L6Y 4R2 Regarding: Office Strategy Dear Claudia, Cushman & Wakefield has collaborated with The Planning Partnership and Real Estate Search Corporation to provide this Office Strategy report on behalf of the City of Brampton. From a real estate perspective, this report is intended to provide an overview of the local and regional office market; consider the achievable share of office space growth in the future; and review the characteristics of Brampton’s established office concentrations and future development sites. The report also provides an analysis and recommendations regarding planning policy to encourage office development. Finally, an office strategy with an implementation plan and performance measures are provided. We are grateful for the assistance of City staff on this project – in particular in the provision of data and mapping to support our analysis. If you have any questions, please contact the undersigned. Respectfully submitted, Cushman & Wakefield Ltd. Andrew Browning Vice President Valuation & Advisory [email protected] 416 359 2510 CITY OF BRAMPTON CUSHMAN & WAKEFIELD CITY OF BRAMPTON – OFFICE STRATEGY EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Market Perspectives The City of Brampton seeks to be the preferred GTA Northwest location of choice for office development. As part of its Municipal Comprehensive Review process, the need for an Office Strategy Study was identified. The City needs to establish and implement policies to attract and retain office employment. The main goal of this Office Strategy is to provide strategic policy directions to support the development of the office sector in the city.
    [Show full text]
  • Annual Report 2016-17
    Annual Report 2016-17 TRANSFORMING MOBILITY Entry from Imagine Eglinton Children’s Art Contest by Arianna, age 6 -Envisioning Eglinton Avenue once the Eglinton Crosstown LRT is complete II METROLINX ANNUAL REPORT 2016-2017 “ Metrolinx is about creating real connections for real people.” METROLINX ANNUAL REPORT 2016-2017 III MESSAGE FROM THE CHAIR In 2016-2017, Metrolinx marked 10 years creating connections and transforming the way people move within and between communities in the Greater Toronto and J. ROBERT S. PRICHARD Hamilton Area (GTHA). In reflection, it’s always easy Transit Commission (TTC) stations Finally, I’d like express the deep to think in terms of projects and on all surface vehicles—a year respect and lasting gratitude of completed and milestones ahead of schedule. One card that the Board of Directors to Bruce achieved. But Metrolinx is about lets you travel throughout the McCuaig for his outstanding creating real connections for real region. That’s real convenience. leadership as Metrolinx President people. Our goal is to change & Chief Executive Officer the way residents of the GTHA This wouldn’t have been possible over more than six years. In interact with their region. without the efforts of our March, Bruce announced he exceptionally talented executive would be transitioning to a To that end, I’m proud to team and the dedicated front-line federal role in the Privy Council highlight events in the last year, staff who made it all happen— Office as Executive Advisor such as the completion of the people who live and work in the to support the launch of the Eglinton Crosstown Light Rail region, and understand the value Canada Infrastructure Bank.
    [Show full text]
  • Transportation Development Strategy Report - November 2012
    GTA West Corridor Environmental Assessment Study Transportation Development Strategy Report - November 2012 Table of Contents Executive Summary - Under Separate Cover 1. INTRODUCTION.........................................................................................................1 1.8. OVERVIEW OF LINKAGES BETWEEN THE GTA WEST AND NGTA STUDIES ..........................................................................................................................................13 1.1. STUDY BACKGROUND ................................................................................................1 1.9. OVERVIEW OF TRANSPORTATION DEVELOPMENT STRATEGY ..................14 1.2. STUDY PURPOSE ...........................................................................................................1 1.3. STUDY PROCESS AND SCHEDULE ..........................................................................2 2. STUDY REPORTS AND SUPORTING DOCUMENTS ....................................................17 1.3.1. Planning and Environmental Assessment Process ........................................2 2.1. OVERVIEW ....................................................................................................................17 1.4. PURPOSE, RELEVANCE AND POSITION OF REPORT WITHIN STUDY PROCESS ..........................................................................................................................3 2.2. OVERVIEW OF TRANSPORTATION AND ECONOMIC CONDITIONS REPORT ..........................................................................................................................17
    [Show full text]