DOCSLIB.ORG

Final Report

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

RPTA Comprehensive Arterial Bus Rapid Transit Planning Study Final Report September 2009 RPTA Comprehensive Arterial Bus Rapid Transit Planning Study Final Recommendations September 2009 Submitted To: Valley Metro/RPTA Submitted By: Table of Contents 1. INTRODUCTION..............................................................................................................................................1 BRT Planning in the Valley................................................................................................................... 1 Defining Bus Rapid Transit................................................................................................................... 2 2. RECOMMENDATIONS...................................................................................................................................4 2.1. ELEMENTS OF BRT ...................................................................................................................... 4 Running Way & Transit Signal Priority................................................................................................ 5 Stations ............................................................................................................................................... 10 Vehicles............................................................................................................................................... 14 Fare Collection................................................................................................................................... 15 Real-time Passenger Information ....................................................................................................... 15 Service Planning ................................................................................................................................. 17 Branding Elements.............................................................................................................................. 18 Station Access and Station-area Development.................................................................................... 20 Summary of BRT Elements and System Recommendations................................................................. 24 2.2. ROUTE-SPECIFIC RECOMMENDATIONS....................................................................................... 26 Arizona Avenue/Country Club Road - FY2011 (July 2010)................................................................ 26 Grand Avenue ..................................................................................................................................... 33 Scottsdale/Rural.................................................................................................................................. 37 South Central Avenue/Baseline Road Corridor.................................................................................. 44 Chandler Boulevard............................................................................................................................ 54 2.3. PROSPECTS FOR VERY SMALL STARTS FUNDING ....................................................................... 62 3. CONCLUSION ................................................................................................................................................65 FIGURES Figure 1 - Red Truncation/Green Extension TSP Concept................................................. 6 Figure 2 - Bus Queue Jump Signal/Bypass Lane Concept ................................................. 7 Figure 3 - Queue Jump, Transit Signal, and Far-side Bus Stop in City of Chandler.......... 8 Figure 4 - Curb Extension for Transit Service.................................................................... 8 Figure 5 - Main Street LINK Station ................................................................................ 11 Figure 6 - Main Street LINK Route Structure .................................................................. 12 Figure 7 - New Flyer LINK Vehicle................................................................................. 14 Figure 8 - Real-time Bus Information for Washington DC Metro Buses......................... 16 Figure 9 - Transit-Oriented Design vs. Auto-Oriented Design......................................... 20 Figure 10 - Streetscape in Verrado (Buckeye).................................................................. 21 Figure 11 - Residential and Office Uses Over Retail in Verrado (Buckeye).................... 22 Figure 12 - Arizona Avenue/Country Club LINK Corridor ............................................. 27 Figure 13 - Grand Avenue Limited Corridor.................................................................... 34 Figure 14 - Scottsdale Road BRT Corridor ...................................................................... 38 Figure 15 - Proposed South Central Avenue/Baseline Road BRT Routes and Station Locations......................................................................................................... 45 Figure 16 - Proposed Chandler Boulevard BRT Corridor and Station Locations ............ 55 TABLES Table 1 - BRT Running Ways and Intersection Priority Treatments.................................. 9 Table 2 - BRT Branding Service Outcomes Decision Matrix for Valley Metro Link BRT Services.............................................................................................................. 19 Table 3 - Summary of BRT Elements............................................................................... 24 Table 4 - Arizona Avenue LINK Service Recommendations .......................................... 28 Table 5 - Service Recommendations for Grand Avenue Limited..................................... 35 Table 6 - Transit Service Recommendations for Scottsdale Road Corridor..................... 39 Table 7 - Capital Cost Estimates for Scottsdale Road Corridor ....................................... 41 Table 8 - Recommended Service Levels for South Central Avenue/Baseline Road BRT Routes ................................................................................................................ 47 Table 9 - South Central Express Capital Cost Estimates.................................................. 48 Table 10 - South Central BRT A Capital Cost Estimate .................................................. 49 Table 11 - South Central BRT B Capital Cost Estimate................................................... 50 Table 12 - Chandler Boulevard BRT Service Level Recommendations .......................... 56 Table 13 - Chandler Boulevard Capital Cost Estimate..................................................... 57 Table 14 - Very Small Starts and Valley Metro Arterial BRT Routes ............................. 63 APPENDICES APPENDIX I: South Tempe High Capacity Transit Corridor Study Area APPENDIX II: Detailed Operating Cost Estimates APPENDIX III: Calculations for Vehicle Requirements Final Recommendations 1. INTRODUCTION BRT Planning in the Valley The 2003 MAG High Capacity Transit Study identified a number of corridors for high‐capacity transit improvements including light rail, dedicated bus rapid transit (BRT), and commuter rail. The Regional Transportation Plan (RTP), which was originally adopted in November of 2003, incorporated many of these corridors. In November 2004, Maricopa County voters passed Proposition 400, which reauthorized a county‐wide half‐cent sales tax originally approved in 1985, and provides funding for projects listed in the RTP. Eight arterial BRT corridors were identified in the RTP. The 2007 RTP Evaluation examined the Transit Life Cycle Program to evaluate the planning and funding assumptions of the transit portion of the RTP. The 2007 RTP Evaluation found inconsistencies in the classification of arterial BRT services and recommended that “a comprehensive arterial BRT study be completed to determine the appropriate level of capital treatments by corridor within the constraint of the total capital budget for the Arterial BRT program.” The 2007 RTP Evaluation noted the total cost of BRT guideway improvements in $2002 in the Transit Life Cycle Program, which was referenced as $92,500,500 ($113,764,900 in $2009). As mentioned in the working paper for Tasks 4 and 6, the 2007 RTP Evaluation allocated arterial BRT capital funding proportionately along the corridors with dedicated BRT routes, but noted that actual implementation may differ. Since approval of the RTP, the Main Street LINK arterial BRT service has begun passenger service operations, and planning for the Arizona Avenue BRT service is in the Final Design stage and will shortly be entering construction. In addition to the regional studies mentioned above, the City of Phoenix Public Transit Department undertook the “Plan for RAPID Central‐ South Mountain.” (Recommendations from this study are noted in the section on the South Central/Baseline corridors.) Given the context for BRT planning in the Valley, this project, the Comprehensive Arterial Bus Rapid Transit Planning Study, is tasked with identifying demand for BRT and defining operational characteristics, capital infrastructure needs, and fleet requirements for the Arizona Avenue, Grand Avenue, Scottsdale Road/Rural Road, South Central Avenue/Baseline Road, and Chandler Boulevard arterial BRT lines. The study considers how operational characteristics and needs of the BRT corridors may change as the regional transit network develops over the life of the 20 year transit program. Finally,
Recommended publications
  • Impacts of Queue Jumpers and Transit Signal Priority on Bus

    Impacts of Queue Jumpers and Transit Signal Priority on Bus

    IMPACTS OF QUEUE JUMPERS AND TRANSIT SIGNAL PRIORITY ON BUS RAPID TRANSIT by R. M. Zahid Reza A Thesis Submitted to the Faculty of College of Engineering and Computer Science in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Master of Science Florida Atlantic University Boca Raton, Florida August 2012 Copyright by R. M. Zahid Reza 2012 ii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I am heartily thankful to my supervisor Dr. Aleksandar Stevanovic for his expertise and circumspective guidance and support all through my graduate studies at the Florida Atlantic University. I also want to thank Dr. Khaled Sobhan for giving me an opportunity to pursuing higher study and Dr. Evangelos Kaisar for his helpful suggestions and comments during my research work. I would like to expand my thanks to Dr. Milan Zlatkovic, from the University of Utah whose sincere judgment and recommendations helped me to carry out the study. Finally, I would like to express my special thanks to my family whose continuous supports and encouragement was constant source of stimulus for this work. iv ABSTRACT Author: R. M. Zahid Reza Title: Impacts of Queue Jumpers and Transit Signal Priority on Bus Rapid Transit Institution: Florida Atlantic University Thesis Advisor: Dr. Aleksandar Stevanovic Degree: Master of Science Year: 2012 Exclusive bus lanes and the Transit Signal Priority are often not effective in saturated peak-traffic conditions. An alternative way of providing priority for transit can be queue jumpers, which allows buses to bypass and then cut out in front of waiting queue by getting an early green signal. Utah Transit Authority deployed Bus Rapid Transit system at Salt Lake County, Utah along W 3500 S.
  • BRTOD – State of the Practice in the United States

    BRTOD – State of the Practice in the United States

    BRTOD – State of the Practice in the United States By: Andrew Degerstrom September 2018 Contents Introduction .............................................................................................1 Purpose of this Report .............................................................................1 Economic Development and Transit-Oriented Development ...................2 Definition of Bus Rapid Transit .................................................................2 Literature Review ..................................................................................3 BRT Economic Development Outcomes ...................................................3 Factors that Affect the Success of BRTOD Implementation .....................5 Case Studies ...........................................................................................7 Cleveland HealthLine ................................................................................7 Pittsburgh Martin Luther King, Jr. East Busway East Liberty Station ..... 11 Pittsburgh Uptown-Oakland BRT and the EcoInnovation District .......... 16 BRTOD at home, the rapid bus A Line and the METRO Gold Line .........20 Conclusion .............................................................................................23 References .............................................................................................24 Artist rendering of Pittsburgh's East Liberty neighborhood and the Martin Luther King, Jr. East Busway Introduction Purpose of this Report If Light Rail Transit (LRT)
  • York Region Transit (YRT/Viva) Ridership Statistics - March 2014

    York Region Transit (YRT/Viva) Ridership Statistics - March 2014

    Transportation and Community Planning MEMORANDUM TO: Committee of the Whole FROM: Daniel Kostopoulos, P.Eng. Commissioner of Transportation and Community Planning DATE: May 1, 2014 RE: York Region Transit (YRT/Viva) Ridership Statistics - March 2014 This memorandum provides an overview of YRT/Viva ridership statistics for March 2014. YRT/Viva’s March revenue ridership was 1.88 million, representing a decrease of approximately 5,200 revenue riders, or a decrease of 0.3 per cent compared to March 2013. Weather Heavy snowfalls and colder temperatures contributed to the lower ridership in March 2014 as ridership decreased during days with extreme cold temperatures and heavy snowfalls. Between March 3 and 6, 2014, York Region experienced four consecutive days with mean temperature below -10º Celsius and one day of snow. During this period, ridership showed a seven per cent decrease when compared to the same time period in 2013. The mean temperature in March 2014 was -4.8º Celsius, compared to -0.3º Celsius in March 2013[1]. Total snowfall accumulation was 29.1 cm in March 2014[1] compared to only 10.2 cm in the same month last year. There were seven days requiring winter maintenance in York Region compared with three days in March 2013. Employment The national unemployment rate in March 2014 was 6.9 per cent, a decrease of 0.3 per cent from the 7.2 per cent rate in March 2013[2]. York Region is located within the Employment Insurance Economic Region of Toronto which recorded an unemployment rate of 8.3 per cent in March 2014, a decrease of 0.2 per cent as compared to the 8.5 per cent rate in March 2013[3].
  • [Title Over Two Lines (Shift+Enter to Break Line)]

    [Title Over Two Lines (Shift+Enter to Break Line)]

    BUS TRANSFORMATION PROJECT White Paper #2: Strategic Considerations October 2018 DRAFT: For discussion purposes 1 1 I• Purpose of White Paper II• Vision & goals for bus as voiced by stakeholders III• Key definitions IV• Strategic considerations Table of V• Deep-dive chapters to support each strategic consideration Contents 1. What is the role of Buses in the region? 2. Level of regional commitment to speeding up Buses? 3. Regional governance / delivery model for bus? 4. What business should Metrobus be in? 5. What services should Metrobus operate? 6. How should Metrobus operate? VI• Appendix: Elasticity of demand for bus 2 DRAFT: For discussion purposes I. Purpose of White Paper 3 DRAFT: For discussion purposes Purpose of White Paper 1. Present a set of strategic 2. Provide supporting analyses 3. Enable the Executive considerations for regional relevant to each consideration Steering Committee (ESC) to bus transformation in a neutral manner set a strategic direction for bus in the region 4 DRAFT: For discussion purposes This paper is a thought piece; it is intended to serve as a starting point for discussion and a means to frame the ensuing debate 1. Present a The strategic considerations in this paper are not an set of strategic exhaustive list of all decisions to be made during this considerations process; they are a set of high-level choices for the Bus Transformation Project to consider at this phase of for regional strategy development bus transformation Decisions on each of these considerations will require trade-offs to be continually assessed throughout this effort 5 DRAFT: For discussion purposes Each strategic consideration in the paper is 2.
  • Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD) What Is the MUTCD?

    Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD) What Is the MUTCD?

    National Committee on Uniform Traffic Control Devices Bus/BRT Applications Introduction • I am Steve Andrle from TRB standing in for Randy McCourt, DKS Associates and 2019 ITE International Vice President • I co-manage with Claire Randall15 TRB public transit standing committees. • I want to bring you up to date on planned bus- oriented improvements to the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD) What is the MUTCD? • Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD) – Standards for roadway signs, signals, and markings • Authorized in 23 CFR, Part 655: It is an FHWA document. • National Committee on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (NCUTCD) develops content • Sponsored by 19 organizations including ITE, AASHTO, APTA and ATSSA (American Traffic Safety Services Association) Background • Bus rapid transit, busways, and other bus applications have expanded greatly since the last edition of the MUTCD in 2009 • The bus-related sections need to be updated • Much of the available research speaks to proposed systems, not actual experience • The NCUTCD felt it was a good time to survey actual systems to see what has worked, what didn’t work, and to identify gaps. National Survey • The NCUTCD established a task force with APTA and FTA • Working together they issued a survey in April of 2018. I am sure some of you received it. • The results will be released to the NCUTCD on June 20 – effectively now • I cannot give you any details until the NCUTCD releases the findings Survey Questions • Have you participated in design and/or operations of
  • Surface Transportation Optimization and Bus Priority Measures Future of MBTA Bus Operations

    Surface Transportation Optimization and Bus Priority Measures Future of MBTA Bus Operations

    Surface Transportation Optimization and Bus Priority Measures Future of MBTA Bus Operations Project Sponsored by Thursday, May 29, 2014 Executive Summary • Bus transit is a critical component of the MBTA services and will be for the foreseeable future • Corridor study demonstrated ability to increase reliability for multiple routes • Some fleet replacement and maintenance facility issues coming to a head • Opportunities exist to cost‐effectively reduce MBTA’s carbon footprint through fleet and infrastructure investments 2 Agenda • Why Bus Transportation Important • Operational Reliability through Bus Priority Measures • Alternative Propulsion for a Sustainable Future • Bringing it all together: Pilot Opportunities 3 Why is Bus Transportation Important • Large percentage of MBTA ridership (~30%) o Still Growing…11% growth in unlinked passenger trips from Jan 2007 to Mar 2012 • Environmental justice Minority Low Income English Proficiency* Bus 37% 21% 0.63% Rapid Transit 27% 13% 0.14% Commuter Rail 11% 2% 0.02% 4 Why is Bus Transportation Important • Mobility o 34% of bus users have no household vehicle • Service availability (Coverage) o % of street miles covered by transit market Bus Subway Commuter Rail Total 73% 7% 3% • Lower capital cost to implement bus improvements vs. rail • Public transportation’s role in global warming 5 Project Methodology • Researched bus priority best practices • Researched alternative propulsion systems • Fact finding mission – London, UK • Developed corridor selection criteria/methodology • Developed conceptual
  • Transit Capacity and Quality of Service Manual (Part B)

    Transit Capacity and Quality of Service Manual (Part B)

    7UDQVLW&DSDFLW\DQG4XDOLW\RI6HUYLFH0DQXDO PART 2 BUS TRANSIT CAPACITY CONTENTS 1. BUS CAPACITY BASICS ....................................................................................... 2-1 Overview..................................................................................................................... 2-1 Definitions............................................................................................................... 2-1 Types of Bus Facilities and Service ............................................................................ 2-3 Factors Influencing Bus Capacity ............................................................................... 2-5 Vehicle Capacity..................................................................................................... 2-5 Person Capacity..................................................................................................... 2-13 Fundamental Capacity Calculations .......................................................................... 2-15 Vehicle Capacity................................................................................................... 2-15 Person Capacity..................................................................................................... 2-22 Planning Applications ............................................................................................... 2-23 2. OPERATING ISSUES............................................................................................ 2-25 Introduction..............................................................................................................
  • Powerpoint Template

    Powerpoint Template

    The Challenges of Planning and Executing Major Underground Transit Programs in Los Angeles Bryan Pennington, Senior Executive Officer, Program Management • Nation’s third largest transportation system • FY2018 Budget of $6.1 billion • Over 9,000 employees • Nation’s largest clean-air fleet (over 2,200 CNG buses) • 450 miles of Metro Rapid Bus System • 131.7 miles of Metro Rail (113 stations) • Average Weekday Boardings (Bus & Rail) – 1.2 million • 513 miles of freeway HOV lanes 2 • New rail and bus rapid transit projects • New highway projects • Enhanced bus and rail service • Local street, signal, bike/pedestrian improvements • Affordable fares for seniors, students and persons with disabilities • Maintenance/replacement of aging system • Bike and pedestrian connections to transit facilities 3 4 5 6 7 • New rail and Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) capital projects • Rail yards, rail cars, and start-up buses for new BRT lines • Includes 2% for system-wide connectivity projects such as airports, countywide BRT, regional rail and Union Station 8 Directions Walk to Blue Line and travel to Union Station Southwest Chief to Los Angeles Union Station 9 • Rail transit projects • Crenshaw LAX Transit Project • Regional Connector Transit Project • Westside Purple Line Extension Project • Critical success factors • Financial considerations/risk management • Contract strategy • Lessons learned • Future underground construction • Concluding remarks • Questions and answers 10 11 •Los Angeles Basin •Faults •Hydrocarbons •Groundwater •Seismicity •Methane and Hydrogen Sulfide 12 •Crenshaw LAX Transit Project •Regional Connector Transit Project •Westside Purple Line Extension Project • Section 1 • Section 2 • Section 3 13 • 13.7 km Light Rail • 8 Stations • Aerial Grade Separations, Below Grade, At-Grade Construction • Maintenance Facility Yard • $1.3 Billion Construction Contract Awarded to Walsh / Shea J.V.
  • 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.
  • Framework for Transit Equity: Metrobus Service Guidelines

    Framework for Transit Equity: Metrobus Service Guidelines

    Executive Committee Action Item IV-A December 10, 2020 Framework for Transit Equity: Metrobus Service Guidelines Page 36 of 105 Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority Board Action/Information Summary MEAD Number: Resolution: Action Information 202236 Yes No TITLE: Framework for Transit Equity: Metrobus Guidelines PRESENTATION SUMMARY: Action item to request adoption of Metrobus Service Guidelines PURPOSE: Staff will recommend Board adoption of new Metrobus Service Guidelines. DESCRIPTION: This presentation will update the Board on changes to the draft Service Guidelines based on comments from Metro’s jurisdictional partners and local bus service providers. Summary results from the application of the guidelines to Metrobus Lines/Routes will be provided based on data from July 2019-February 2020. A discussion of how the results can be used to improve bus service and equity will be provided. Staff will recommend Board adoption of Metrobus Service Guidelines to inform future service plans. Contractors and Interested Parties Involved in the Service Guidelines and Annual Line Performance Work: AECOM, Foursquare Integrated Transportation Planning, and IBI Group Key Highlights: • Metrobus Service guidelines are fundamental to ensuring equitable service across the region and are one of the main building blocks for service planning, budget decisions, and conducting a network redesign. Metrobus Service guidelines have not been updated since 2000. • Improving Metrobus directly helps address longstanding inequities in the region. • Updating Metrobus service guidelines was a Bus Transformation Project recommendation and was widely supported by our jurisdictional partners. The guidelines will create a clear and formalized approach to routing, service, and budget decisions. • Feedback from jurisdictions and local bus providers is incorporated into the service guidelines.
  • (YRT/Viva) Ridership Statistics – 2015 Fourth Quarter

    (YRT/Viva) Ridership Statistics – 2015 Fourth Quarter

    Transportation Services Memorandum TO: Committee of the Whole FROM: Daniel Kostopoulos, P.Eng. Commissioner of Transportation Services DATE: February 4, 2016 RE: York Region Transit (YRT/Viva) Ridership Statistics – 2015 Fourth Quarter This memorandum provides an overview of YRT/Viva ridership statistics for the fourth quarter (Q4) of 2015, representing the months from October to December 2015. YRT/Viva’s 2015 Q4 revenue ridership was 5.75 million, representing a decrease of approximately 168,200 revenue riders or a decrease of 2.8 per cent compared to Q4 2014. YRT/Viva’s 2015 year-end ridership reached 22.1 million, a decrease of approximately 321,500 revenue riders, or 1.4 per cent decreased compared to 2014. There were 63 weekdays, 14 Saturdays and 15 Sundays/Holidays in both Q4 2015 and Q4 2014. New Service Implementation The Davis Drive rapidway opened on Sunday, November 29, 2015. Viva yellow operates on Davis Drive from the Newmarket GO Bus Terminal to the Highway 404/Davis Drive carpool lot. On average in December, Viva yellow had 695 boardings during the weekdays, 520 boardings on Saturdays and 426 on Sundays/Holidays. Weather Total precipitation in Q4 of 2014[1] was 182.3 millimetres, compared to 181.4 millimetres in Q4 of 2015[1]. The average temperature was 3.9 degrees Celsius in Q4 of 2014[1] and 6.2 degrees Celsius in Q4 of 2015[1]. Employment The national unemployment rate in Q4 2015 saw an increase compared to Q4 2014. The national unemployment rate in October 2015[2] was 7.0 per cent, up 0.5 per cent from 6.5 February 4, 2016 2 Committee of the Whole York Region Transit (YRT/Viva) Ridership Statistics – 2015 Fourth Quarter per cent in October 2014.
  • Relief Line South Environmental Project Report, Section 5 Existing and Future Conditions

    Relief Line South Environmental Project Report, Section 5 Existing and Future Conditions

    Relief Line South Environmental Project Report Section 5 - Existing and Future Conditions The study area is unique in that it is served by most transit modes that make up the Greater 5 Existing and Future Conditions Toronto Area’s (GTA’s) transit network, including: The description of the existing and future environment within the study area is presented in this • TTC Subway – High-speed, high-capacity rapid transit serving both long distance and local section to establish an inventory of the baseline conditions against which the potential impacts travel. of the project are being considered as part of the Transit Project Assessment Process (TPAP). • TTC Streetcar – Low-speed surface routes operating on fixed rail in mixed traffic lanes (with Existing transportation, natural, social-economic, cultural, and utility conditions are outlined some exceptions), mostly serving shorter-distance trips into the downtown core and feeding within this section. More detailed findings for each of the disciplines have been documented in to / from the subway system. the corresponding memoranda provided in the appendices. • TTC Conventional Bus – Low-speed surface routes operating in mixed traffic, mostly 5.1 Transportation serving local travel and feeding subway and GO stations. • TTC Express Bus – Higher-speed surface routes with less-frequent stops operating in An inventory of the existing local and regional transit, vehicular, cycling and pedestrian mixed traffic on high-capacity arterial roads, connecting neighbourhoods with poor access transportation networks in the study area is outlined below. to rapid transit to downtown. 5.1.1 Existing Transit Network • GO Rail - Interregional rapid transit primarily serving long-distance commuter travel to the downtown core (converging at Union Station).