DOCSLIB.ORG

Land Use Study: Development in Proximity to Rail Operations

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

Phase 1 Interim Report Land Use Study: Development in Proximity to Rail Operations City of Toronto Prepared for the City of Toronto by IBI Group and Stantec August 30, 2017 IBI GROUP PHASE 1 INTERIM REPORT LAND USE STUDY: DEVELOPMENT IN PROXIMITY TO RAIL OPERATIONS Prepared for City of Toronto Document Control Page CLIENT: City of Toronto City-Wide Land Use Study: Development in Proximity to Rail PROJECT NAME: Operations Land Use Study: Development in Proximity to Rail Operations REPORT TITLE: Phase 1 Interim Report - DRAFT IBI REFERENCE: 105734 VERSION: V2 - Issued August 30, 2017 J:\105734_RailProximit\10.0 Reports\Phase 1 - Data DIGITAL MASTER: Collection\Task 3 - Interim Report for Phase 1\TTR_CityWideLandUse_Phase1InterimReport_2017-08-30.docx ORIGINATOR: Patrick Garel REVIEWER: Margaret Parkhill, Steve Donald AUTHORIZATION: Lee Sims CIRCULATION LIST: HISTORY: Accessibility This document, as of the date of issuance, is provided in a format compatible with the requirements of the Accessibility for Ontarians with Disabilities Act (AODA), 2005. August 30, 2017 IBI GROUP PHASE 1 INTERIM REPORT LAND USE STUDY: DEVELOPMENT IN PROXIMITY TO RAIL OPERATIONS Prepared for City of Toronto Table of Contents 1 Introduction ......................................................................................................................... 1 1.1 Purpose of Study ..................................................................................................... 2 1.2 Background .............................................................................................................. 4 1.2.1 2014 Provincial Policy Statement ............................................................... 4 1.2.2 2013 FCM/RAC “Guidelines for New Development in Proximity to Railway Operations” ................................................................................................. 5 1.2.3 2013 Metrolinx “Adjacent Development Guidelines” ................................... 5 1.3 Study Area ............................................................................................................... 6 2 Rail Safety Trends in Canada ............................................................................................ 9 2.1 Main-track collisions and derailments .................................................................... 10 2.2 Non-main track collisions and derailments ............................................................ 11 2.3 Crossing accidents ................................................................................................. 12 2.4 Trespasser accidents ............................................................................................. 13 2.5 Summary ................................................................................................................ 13 3 Rail Incident History within the City of Toronto ............................................................ 14 4 Initial Discussions with Railway Line Owners and Operators ..................................... 17 4.1 Canadian National Railway .................................................................................... 17 4.2 Canadian Pacific Railway ...................................................................................... 17 4.3 Metrolinx................................................................................................................. 18 4.4 Toronto Terminals Railways Company .................................................................. 19 4.5 Toronto Port Lands Company ................................................................................ 19 4.6 VIA Rail Canada .................................................................................................... 19 4.7 Phase 2 Consultation ............................................................................................. 20 5 Base Maps ......................................................................................................................... 20 6 Database ............................................................................................................................ 21 7 Rail Typologies ................................................................................................................. 22 7.1 Methodology .......................................................................................................... 22 7.2 FCM/RAC Typologies ............................................................................................ 23 7.3 City of Toronto Typology ........................................................................................ 24 7.4 Future Uses of Toronto Rail Lines ......................................................................... 27 August 30, 2017 i IBI GROUP PHASE 1 INTERIM REPORT LAND USE STUDY: DEVELOPMENT IN PROXIMITY TO RAIL OPERATIONS Prepared for City of Toronto Table of Contents (continued) 7.4.1 Weston, Kingston and Oakville Subdivisions ............................................ 27 7.4.2 Galt, Bala and North Toronto Subdivisions ............................................... 28 7.4.3 MacTier, Don Branch, Belleville and Havelock Subdivisions ................... 28 8 Next Steps ......................................................................................................................... 29 Appendix A Rail Safety Trends Appendix B Database and Base Maps August 30, 2017 ii IBI GROUP PHASE 1 INTERIM REPORT LAND USE STUDY: DEVELOPMENT IN PROXIMITY TO RAIL OPERATIONS Prepared for City of Toronto 1 Introduction In recent years there have been increasing concerns about rail safety and the transportation of MISSISSAUGA 1979 dangerous goods, with events such as the Mississauga derailment in 1979 and the Lac- On November 10, 1979 just before midnight, a Mégantic disaster in 2013 (see sidebar). These Canadian Pacific (CP) freight train consisting of 106 events have raised public awareness of the cars of mixed cargo, which included dangerous goods/chemicals, derailed at Mavis Road north of movement of dangerous goods by rail and brought Dundas Street in Cooksville (Mississauga). Twenty- concerns about the safety of the interactions three rail cars went off the tracks, and most caught fire between railway operations and the urban including tanker cars which were carrying propane. environment to the fore. Three loaded propane tank cars exploded.1 The City of Toronto has experienced significant The fire resulting from this explosion was further fuelled growth in recent years and some of this by the chemical contents on other derailed cars. Cars development has occurred alongside the rail carried a variety of dangerous chemicals, including network. In order to support the City’s continued chlorine. In response to the potential risk of chlorine gas spreading over the surrounding population, nearly growth, the City of Toronto retained IBI Group with 1 Stantec to study land use and development in 250,000 people were evacuated – the largest evacuation in North America at the time2. Fortunately, proximity to rail operations. no deaths or injuries were reported.1 The rail corridors in Toronto were built in a variety The Mississauga Railway Accident Inquiry findings, of configurations, with different widths of rights-of- generally referred to as the Grange Commission way, orientations to the surrounding lands and in a Report, were published in December 1980 and variety of urban environments. While the function included recommendations for improvements for rail of almost all of these lines has changed transportation of dangerous goods. considerably over time, their configuration has not. LAC-MEGANTIC 2013 In a period of less than 60 years, from 1853 to 1911, the rail network throughout the City of On July 5, 2013 at around 1:15 am, a train carrying 7.7 Toronto was established, with the last major line million litres of crude oil in 72 tanker cars derailed near the centre of town Lac-Mégantic, Quebec. The train had been being the entry into Toronto of the Canadian parked on a portion of a main track with a descending Northern Railway’s Montreal to Toronto line grade, with engine and hand brakes applied. Due to a through the Don Valley. Since that time the combination of events, the train began to roll downhill network has not changed very much in terms of towards Lac-Mégantic, approximately 11 km (7 miles) configuration. The last major change was the away. As it rolled downhill, the train picked up speed, 3 introduction of the CN “bypass” line which re- peaking at just over 100 km/h (65 mph). routed CN through freight trains north of Steeles Of the 72 tanker cars, 63 derailed, and most of the Avenue, completed in 1965. derailed cars were damaged and punctured. Approximately 6 million litres of crude oil was released and caught fire almost immediately. The fire and subsequent explosions resulted in 47 deaths and destroyed much of the downtown. Approximately 2,000 3 people were evacuated. The Transportation Safety Board completed an investigation in 2014, and made five recommendations regarding the securement of trains, tank car standards, route planning, risk assessments, and emergency response assistance plans. 1 Mississauga Train Derailment, City of Mississauga, http://www.mississauga.ca/portal/home?paf_gear_id=9700018&itemId=5500001, accessed August 18, 2017. 2 10 of Canada’s Worst Train Accidents, Maclean’s, July 9, 2013, http://www.macleans.ca/society/life/10-of-canadas-worst-train-accidents/, accessed August 18, 2017. 3 Lac-Mégantic Runaway Train
Recommended publications
  • Table 31 Kitchener.Indd

    Table 31 Kitchener.Indd

    Kitchener CONTACT US Route number 30-31-33 Numéro du trajet Kitchener GO Train and Bus Schedule/ Gormley v: 202009 1 2 3 4 5 6 MISSISSAUGA / BRAMPTON 7 8 9 * 0 # 1-888-438-6646 Horaire des trains et des autobus GO 31 31A 31B 30 Maple 416-869-3200 31E 31F 31H 31 31B 31E 7 0 4 31J 31M Y 31H 31L 31N W RICHMOND H HILL TTY/ATS: 33 33A 33B 31N 31 31E 31H York Mills Richmond Hill 33D 33E Bramalea 1-800-387-3652 Transit 31L 31N Rutherford B R R Terminal A D M A D L IR E Etobicoke North Yorkdale A A V R Langstaff O D 31 31A 31B B Main St. N @ Bramalea Malton Barrie H 31M KT 30 31 33 U 31E 31F Richmond Bovaird Dr. W R O TORONTO N Hill T A R 33 33B 33D T M IO VAUGHAN R I A S S Weston Old Cummer F S T A I 33E 33F 33G L S G S TORONTO A A Steeles Ave. E @ First UGulf Blvd. / R G York gotransit.com/schedules R D A 33 33A 33B Brampton Steeles Ave. E @ RutherfordR Rd. S Kitchener D University Oriole Union Stn – 33E 1 31 31A 31B 40 Shopper’s Y H See Mississauga/Brampton inset Downsview HW W GO Bus Term. Kitchener World B Park 31E 31F 31H R York Mills A Hurontario St. @ Hwy 407 Y M A 7 L 0 Keele St. @ Bus Terminal 31J P E 4 Park & Ride 4 A Y R D W Hwy 401 2 R H T D Bloor S 33 33A 33B 33 33A 33B 7 D Etobicoke IR N A E V North Yorkdale E 33E O U 33E B Bus Terminal Q @GOtransitKT Guelph E 31 31A 31B 33 33C 33D Mount Weston TORONTO V 31 31A 31B A Pleasant S 31E 31F 31M 33E 33F 33G Union Stn – E 31M 31F Kitchener L T E S H Milton GO Bus Term.
  • Regional Express Rail Update

    Regional Express Rail Update

    Clause 5 in Report No. 10 of Committee of the Whole was adopted by the Council of The Regional Municipality of York at its meeting held on June 23, 2016 with the following additional recommendation: 3. Receipt of the memorandum from Daniel Kostopoulos, Commissioner of Transportation Services, dated June 22, 2016. 5 Regional Express Rail Update Committee of the Whole recommends adoption of the following recommendations contained in the report dated June 1, 2016 from the Commissioner of Transportation Services: 1. Metrolinx be requested to mitigate the impacts of Regional Express Rail service by addressing the gap between their Initial Business Case for Regional Express Rail and York Region’s needs for grade separations, additional GO stations and parking charges. 2. The Regional Clerk circulate this report to Metrolinx, Ontario Ministry of Transportation and Clerks of the local municipalities. Report dated June 1, 2016 from the Commissioner of Transportation Services now follows: 1. Recommendations It is recommended that: 1. Metrolinx be requested to mitigate the impacts of Regional Express Rail service by addressing the gap between their Initial Business Case for Regional Express Rail and York Region’s needs for grade separations, additional GO stations and parking charges. 2. The Regional Clerk circulate this report to Metrolinx, Ontario Ministry of Transportation and Clerks of the local municipalities. Committee of the Whole 1 June 9, 2016 Regional Express Rail Update 2. Purpose This report provides an update to Council on the Provincial Regional Express Rail (RER) Service Plan and associated staff activities as York Region’s response to the RER Service Plan to be implemented by the Province over the next 10 years.
  • 3131 Lower Don River West Lower Don River West 4.0 DESCRIPTION

    3131 Lower Don River West Lower Don River West 4.0 DESCRIPTION

    Lower Don River West Environmental Study Report Remedial Flood Protection Project 4.0 DESCRIPTION OF LOWER DON 4.1 The Don River Watershed The Don River is one of more than sixty rivers and streams flowing south from the Oak Ridges Moraine. The River is approximately 38 km long and outlets into the Keating Channel, which then conveys the flows into Toronto Harbour and Lake Historic Watershed Ontario. The entire drainage basin of the Don urbanization of the river's headwaters in York River is 360 km2. Figure 4.1 and Figure 4.2, on the Region began in the early 1980s and continues following pages, describe the existing and future today. land use conditions within the Don River Watershed. Hydrologic changes in the watershed began when settlers converted the forests to agricultural fields; For 200 years, the Don Watershed has been many streams were denuded even of bank side subject to intense pressures from human vegetation. Urban development then intensified settlement. These have fragmented the river the problems of warmer water temperatures, valley's natural branching pattern; degraded and erosion, and water pollution. Over the years often destroyed its once rich aquatic and during the three waves of urban expansion, the terrestrial wildlife habitat; and polluted its waters Don River mouth, originally an extensive delta with raw sewage, industrial/agricultural marsh, was filled in and the lower portion of the chemicals, metals and other assorted river was straightened. contaminants. Small Don River tributaries were piped and Land clearing, settlement, and urbanization have buried, wetlands were "reclaimed," and springs proceeded in three waves in the Don River were lost.
  • Download This Investigation Report In

    Download This Investigation Report In

    RAILWAY INVESTIGATION REPORT R11T0016 MAIN TRACK DERAILMENT CANADIAN PACIFIC RAILWAY FREIGHT TRAIN 220-24 MILE 105.1, MACTIER SUBDIVISION BUCKSKIN, ONTARIO 26 JANUARY 2011 The Transportation Safety Board of Canada (TSB) investigated this occurrence for the purpose of advancing transportation safety. It is not the function of the Board to assign fault or determine civil or criminal liability. Railway Investigation Report Main-Track Derailment Canadian Pacific Railway Freight Train 220-24 Mile 105.1, MacTier Subdivision Buckskin, Ontario 26 January 2011 Report Number R11T0016 Summary On 26 January 2011, at approximately 0310, Eastern Standard Time, as Canadian Pacific Railway (CP) freight train 220-24 was travelling southward at about 45 mph, one of its cars derailed at Mile 105.1 of the CP MacTier Subdivision, near Buckskin, Ontario. The train continued on to the Buckskin north siding switch at Mile 103.7 where an additional 20 cars, including dangerous goods tank car PROX 33743, loaded with non-odorized liquefied petroleum gas (UN 1075), derailed. Some of the derailed cars side-swiped northbound CP freight train 221-25, which was stationary in the Buckskin siding, derailing its lead locomotive, and damaging the second locomotive and the first 9 cars on train 221. As a precaution, 15 families from the nearby area were evacuated. There were no injuries and no loss of product. Ce rapport est également disponible en français. - 2 - Other Factual Information Canadian Pacific Railway (CP) and Canadian National (CN) operate parallel trans-continental rail routes throughout the area. Under a bidirectional running agreement, both railways operate primarily empty trains northbound on CP track between Mile 20.1 and Mile 112.7 of the Parry Sound Subdivision, and loaded southbound trains on CN track between Mile 146.2 and Mile 247.5 of the CN Bala Subdivision, respectively (see Figure 1).
  • Acoustic Telemetry in Toronto Harbour: Assessing Residency, Habitat Selection, and Within-Harbour Movements of Fishes Over a Five-Year Period

    Acoustic Telemetry in Toronto Harbour: Assessing Residency, Habitat Selection, and Within-Harbour Movements of Fishes Over a Five-Year Period

    Acoustic telemetry in Toronto Harbour: assessing residency, habitat selection, and within-harbour movements of fishes over a five-year period Jonathan D. Midwood1, Andrew M. Rous2, Susan E. Doka1, and Steven J. Cooke2 1Central and Arctic Region Fisheries and Oceans Canada 867 Lakeshore Road Burlington, ON L7S 1A1 2Carleton University Department of Biology 1125 Colonel By Dr. Ottawa, ON, K1S 5B6 2019 Canadian Technical Report of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences 3331 1 Canadian Technical Report of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences Technical reports contain scientific and technical information that contributes to existing knowledge but which is not normally appropriate for primary literature. Technical reports are directed primarily toward a worldwide audience and have an international distribution. No restriction is placed on subject matter and the series reflects the broad interests and policies of Fisheries and Oceans Canada, namely, fisheries and aquatic sciences. Technical reports may be cited as full publications. The correct citation appears above the abstract of each report. Each report is abstracted in the data base Aquatic Sciences and Fisheries Abstracts. Technical reports are produced regionally but are numbered nationally. Requests for individual reports will be filled by the issuing establishment listed on the front cover and title page. Numbers 1-456 in this series were issued as Technical Reports of the Fisheries Research Board of Canada. Numbers 457-714 were issued as Department of the Environment, Fisheries and Marine Service, Research and Development Directorate Technical Reports. Numbers 715-924 were issued as Department of Fisheries and Environment, Fisheries and Marine Service Technical Reports. The current series name was changed with report number 925.
  • Volume 5 Has Been Updated to Reflect the Specific Additions/Revisions Outlined in the Errata to the Environmental Project Report, Dated November, 2017

    Volume 5 Has Been Updated to Reflect the Specific Additions/Revisions Outlined in the Errata to the Environmental Project Report, Dated November, 2017

    DISCLAIMER AND LIMITATION OF LIABILITY This Revised Final Environmental Project Report – Volume 5 has been updated to reflect the specific additions/revisions outlined in the Errata to the Environmental Project Report, dated November, 2017. As such, it supersedes the previous Final version dated October, 2017. The report dated October, 2017 (“Report”), which includes its text, tables, figures and appendices) has been prepared by Gannett Fleming Canada ULC (“Gannett Fleming”) and Morrison Hershfield Limited (“Morrison Hershfield”) (“Consultants”) for the exclusive use of Metrolinx. Consultants disclaim any liability or responsibility to any person or party other than Metrolinx for loss, damage, expense, fines, costs or penalties arising from or in connection with the Report or its use or reliance on any information, opinion, advice, conclusion or recommendation contained in it. To the extent permitted by law, Consultants also excludes all implied or statutory warranties and conditions. In preparing the Report, the Consultants have relied in good faith on information provided by third party agencies, individuals and companies as noted in the Report. The Consultants have assumed that this information is factual and accurate and has not independently verified such information except as required by the standard of care. The Consultants accept no responsibility or liability for errors or omissions that are the result of any deficiencies in such information. The opinions, advice, conclusions and recommendations in the Report are valid as of the date of the Report and are based on the data and information collected by the Consultants during their investigations as set out in the Report. The opinions, advice, conclusions and recommendations in the Report are based on the conditions encountered by the Consultants at the site(s) at the time of their investigations, supplemented by historical information and data obtained as described in the Report.
  • 2020 Open Data Inventory

    2020 Open Data Inventory

    le n it tio T ip lic t r b s c u or e Item # P Sh D Access Level 1 AMEX Chargeback Information Information on chargebacks from Payment Acquirer and Amex Under Review 2 Applicant Data Through Taleo (Applicant Information provided by job applicants Under Review Tracking System Data) 3 Bicycle Parking Program Database This system and database is used to manage and administer GO Under Review Transit's Bicycle Parking program 4 Board of Directors Conflicts Log This dataset contains information on Directors' conflict of Under Review interest declarations at Metrolinx 5 Board of Directors Remuneration and This dataset contains information on Board Directors' Under Review Attendance attendance at and remuneration for Metrolinx meetings 6 Call Transfers from PRESTO to Service Providers ​Call transfers to Service Providers by PRESTO Contact Centre Under Review Agents 7 Carpool Parking Program Database This system and database is used to manage and administer GO Under Review Transit's Carpool Parking program 8 CCMS (Customer Communications Management Displays all announcement activity for a selected time period Under Review System) Summary - By Station for a line, station or the whole system. 9 CCMS (Customer Communications Management ​Displays number of messages (total) sent to each customer Under Review System) Summary by Channel channel over a time period. 10 CCMS (Customer Communications Management ​Displays all messages sent through CCMS for selected time Under Review System) Summary period. Shows what we sent as well as where it was sent and
  • Festival Guide

    Festival Guide

    FESTIVAL GUIDE DU GUÍA DEL GUIDE FESTIVAL FESTIVAL July 10–August 15, 2015 10 juillet au 15 août 2015 10 julio – 15 agosto 2015 LEAD PARTNER PARTENAIRE PRINCIPAL SOCIO PRINCIPAL PREMIER PARTNERS GRANDS PARTENAIRES SOCIOS PREMIERES OPENING CEREMONY CREATIVE PARTNER OFFICIAL BROADCASTER PARTENAIRE CRÉATIF POUR LA CÉRÉMONIE D’OUVERTURE DIFFUSEUR OFFICIEL SOCIO CREATIVO PARA LA CEREMONIA DE INAUGURACIÓN EMISORA OFICIAL OFFICIAL SUPPLIERS FOURNISSEURS OFFICIELS PROVEEDORES OFICIALES PROUD SUPPORTERS FIERS PARRAINEURS COLABORADORES PRINCIPALES Acklands-Grainger ATCO Structures & Logistics Ltd. Bochner Eye Institute BT/A Advertising Burnbrae Farms The Canadian Press Carbon60 Networks The Carpenters’ Union CGC Inc. Division Sports-Rep Inc. ELEIKO EllisDon-Ledcor Esri Canada eSSENTIAL Accessibility Freeman Audio Visual Canada Gateman-Milloy Inc. George Brown College Gerflor Gold Medal Systems La Presse LifeLabs Medical Laboratory Services MAC Cosmetics Minavox Modu-loc Fence Rentals Morningstar Hospitality Services Inc. Nautique Boats ONRoute Highway Service Centres Ontario Power Generation PortsToronto Riedel Communications Roots Rosetta Stone SpiderTech Sportsnet 590 The Fan S4OPTIK Starwood Hotels and Resorts TBM Service Group TLN Telelatino Toronto Port Lands Company UP Express VIA Rail Canada VOIT Vision Critical Waste Management Yonex YouAchieve ZOLL 407 ETR FUNDING PARTIES HOST CITY HOST FIRST NATION BAILLEURS DE FONDS VILLE HÔTE PREMIÈRE NATION HÔTE PROVEEDORES DE FINANCIAMIENTO CIUDAD ANFITRIONA PRIMERA NACIÓN ANFITRIONA Live Sites/Sites
  • Peer Review EA Study Design Billy Bishop Toronto City Airport BBTCA

    Peer Review EA Study Design Billy Bishop Toronto City Airport BBTCA

    Imagine the result Peer Review – EA Study Design Billy Bishop Toronto City Airport (BBTCA) Runway Expansion and Introduction of Jet Aircraft Final Report August 2015 BBTCA Peer Review of EA Study Design Report ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS ii 1.0 INTRODUCTION 1-1 1.1 Background 1-1 1.2 Current Assignment 1-3 2.0 PEER REVIEW APPROACH 2-1 2.1 Methodology 2-1 3.0 FINDINGS OF PEER REVIEW OF AECOM’S DRAFT STUDY DESIGN REPORT 3-1 3.1 EA Process and Legislation 3-1 3.2 Public Consultation & Stakeholder Engagement 3-1 3.3 Air Quality 3-2 3.4 Public Health 3-5 3.5 Noise 3-6 3.6 Natural Environment 3-10 3.7 Socio-Economic Conditions 3-11 3.8 Land Use & Built Form 3-14 3.9 Marine Physical Conditions and Water Quality 3-15 3.10 Transportation 3-15 3.11 Archaeology & Cultural Heritage 3-18 4.0 SUMMARY RECOMMENDATIONS 4-1 APPENDIX A Presentation Given to the Working Group (22 June 2015) B Presentation of Draft Phase I Peer Review Report Results (13 July 2015) i BBTCA Peer Review of EA Study Design Report ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS AERMOD Atmospheric Dispersion Modelling System ARCADIS ARCADIS Canada Inc. BBTCA Billy Bishop Toronto City Airport CALPUFF Meteorological and Air Quality Monitoring System CCG Canadian Coast Guard CEAA Canadian Environmental Assessment Act CO Carbon Monoxide COPA Canadian Owners and Pilots Association dBA Decibel Values of Sounds EA Environmental Assessment EC Environment Canada GBE Government Business Enterprise GWC Greater Waterfront Coalition HEAT Habitat and Environmental Assessment Tool INM Integrated Noise Model Ldn Day-Night
  • Cross-Boundary Transit Service Integration Pilot Project

    Cross-Boundary Transit Service Integration Pilot Project

    9.8 Date: May 25, 2021 Originator’s files: To: Chair and Members of General Committee From: Geoff Wright, P.Eng, MBA, Commissioner of Meeting date: Transportation and Works June 9, 2021 Subject Cross-Boundary Transit Service Integration Pilot Project Recommendation 1. That the report to General Committee entitled “Cross-Boundary Transit Service Integration Pilot Project” dated May 25, 2021 from the Commissioner of Transportation and Works be received for information. 2. That Phase 1 of the Service Integration Pilot Project recommendations for enhanced cross-boundary travel be received for information. Executive Summary The Ministry of Transportation has convened a Fare and Service Integration (FSI) Provincial-Municipal Table that includes representatives of all transit agencies and aims to improve connections and the customer experience for inter-municipal transit travel. The Toronto Transit Commission (TTC) has engaged a consultant team to develop an agency-driven FSI model to present to the Provincial-Municipal Table in partnership with surrounding transit agencies including MiWay. Currently MiWay, along with several other 905 agencies, are prohibited from providing local service within City of Toronto, resulting in TTC providing duplicate service for their residents. In addition, transit fares are not integrated between the TTC and MiWay. In partnership with the TTC, the Burnhamthorpe Road corridor has been selected for a transit service integration pilot project in the near-term (targeting fall 2021). 9.8 General Committee 2021/05/25 2 Background For decades, transit service integration has been discussed and studied in the Greater Toronto Hamilton Area (GTHA). The Ministry of Transportation’s newly convened Fare and Service Integration (FSI) Provincial-Municipal Table consists of senior representatives from transit systems within the Greater Toronto Hamilton Area (GTHA) and the broader GO Transit service area.
  • Rapid Transit in Toronto Levyrapidtransit.Ca TABLE of CONTENTS

    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.
  • New Station Initial Business Case Milton-Trafalgar Final October 2020

    New Station Initial Business Case Milton-Trafalgar Final October 2020

    New Station Initial Business Case Milton-Trafalgar Final October 2020 New Station Initial Business Case Milton-Trafalgar Final October 2020 Contents Introduction 1 The Case for Change 4 Investment Option 12 Strategic Case 18 Economic Case 31 Financial Case 37 Deliverability and Operations Case 41 Business Case Summary 45 iv Executive Summary Introduction The Town of Milton in association with a landowner’s group (the Proponent) approached Metrolinx to assess the opportunity to develop a new GO rail station on the south side of the Milton Corridor, west of Trafalgar Road. This market-driven initiative assumes the proposed station would be planned and paid for by the private sector. Once built, the station would be transferred to Metrolinx who would own and operate it. The proposed station location is on undeveloped land, at the heart of both the Trafalgar Corridor and Agerton Employment Secondary Plan Areas studied by the Town of Milton in 2017. As such, the project offers the Town of Milton the opportunity to realize an attractive and vibrant transit-oriented community that has the potential to benefit the entire region. Option for Analysis This Initial Business Case (IBC) assesses a single option for the proposed station. The opening-day concept plan includes one new side platform to the north of the corridor, with protection for a future second platform to the south. The site includes 1,000 parking spots, a passenger pick-up/drop-off area (40 wait spaces, 10 load spaces), bicycle parking (128 covered spaces, 64 secured spaces) and a bus loop including 11 sawtooth bus bays.