Bolton Service Feasibility Study

2010 | 1608133

D16-09037 20 , Suite 600 , ON M5J 2W3 Page 2 of 2 20 rue Bay, bureau 600 Toronto, ON M5J 2W3 www..com www.gotransit.com Distribution:

November 11, 2010 Pacific Railway CN Rail Dear Stakeholders, Ministry of Transportation Region of Peel Subject: Bolton Commuter Rail Feasibility Study Region of York City of Toronto Town of Caledon Metrolinx has completed the Bolton Commuter Rail Service Feasibility Study. Please find City of enclosed a copy of the study. The study was a comprehensive review of the technical Toronto Transit Commission requirements to implement a commuter rail service between the communities of Bolton (in the Town of Caledon) and the City of Toronto. Toronto and Region Conservation Authority The study found that introducing the service is feasible, which supports the vision outlined in the Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority provincial government’s MoveOntario 2020 plan, as well as Metrolinx’ Regional Transportation George Brown College Plan (RTP) and GO 2020.

The feasibility study will be a valuable input to the update of the Regional Transportation Plan (RTP – ‘’) and GO 2020, which is being undertaken in 2011. Metrolinx and GO Transit are currently reviewing 10-year capital budgets. In light of competing service expansion priorities, rail service expansion to Bolton is not being contemplated within a 10-year timeframe.

In the meantime, we will continue to monitor demand of the existing GO bus services, and implement service improvements as warranted for the overall development of transit service in the study area. Also, we plan to actively work with the respective regional and local municipalities to implement planning measures for the protection of the proposed commuter rail layover and station sites identified in the study.

If you have any questions regarding this letter, please contact me.

Kind Regards,

Daniel Haufschild, Director, Policy and Planning TABLE OF CONTENTS

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY...... 1 3.0 EXISTING TRANSIT ALTERNATIVES AND ADJACENT HIGHWAY AND RAIL CORRIDORS ....6

1.0 INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND...... 6 3.1 Existing Transit Alternatives ...... 6 3.1.1 GO Train-Meet Service ...... 6 1.1 Scope of Study ...... 7 3.1.3 ...... 6 1.2 Geographic Scope of Study...... 7 3.1.4 Bus Coach Service...... 6 1.2.1 CP Mactier Subdivision ...... 7 3.2 Expansion of the Provincial Highway Network ...... 6 1.2.2 GO Weston Subdivision and Rail Corridor...... 8 3.2.1 Highway 427...... 6 1.2.3 CP North Toronto Subdivision ...... 8 3.2.2 GTA West Corridor...... 6 1.2.4 CN Subdivisions ...... 9 3.2.3 Highway 400...... 7 1.3 Feasibility Study Report Methodology ...... 10 3.2.4 HOV Lane Network Plan – 400 Series ...... 7 1.4 Documentation Review ...... 10 3.2.5 Highway 50...... 7 3.2.6 Summary of Highway Initiatives ...... 7 3.3 Adjacent Rail Corridors ...... 7 2.0 PROJECT APPROACH ...... 1 3.3.1 GO Corridor ...... 7 3.3.2 GO Richmond Hill Corridor...... 8 2.1 Study Organization...... 1 3.2.3 GO Stouffville Corridor ...... 8 2.1.1 Data Collection ...... 1 3.2.4 GO Georgetown Corridor ...... 8 2.1.2 Site Inspections ...... 1 3.3.5 Orangeville Railway ...... 8 2.2 Internal Involvement ...... 1 2.2.1 GO Transit...... 2 4.0 RAIL CORRIDOR STUDY – EXISTING CONDITIONS ...... 8 2.2.2 Canadian Pacific ...... 2

2.2.3 Canadian National Railway Company ...... 2 4.1 Existing Infrastructure Conditions...... 8 2.3 External Involvement...... 2 4.2 CP Mactier Subdivision ...... 9 2.3.1 Federal Government Agencies...... 2 4.2.1 Osler to Emery (mileage 0.0 – 9.2)...... 10 2.3.2 Provincial Government Agencies ...... 2 4.2.1.1 Track Conditions and Configuration1 ...... 10 2.3.2.1 Metrolinx...... 2 4.2.1.2 Speed, Curve and Grade Conditions...... 10 2.3.2.2 Ministry of Transportation Ontario ...... 2 4.2.1.3 Rail/Road At-Grade Crossings ...... 11 2.3.3 Municipal and Regional Agencies ...... 3 4.2.1.4 Structures Conditions ...... 11 2.3.3.1 Regional Municipality of York ...... 3 4.2.1.5 Culvert Conditions ...... 15 2.3.3.2 Regional Municipality of Peel ...... 3 4.2.2 Emery to Elder South (mile 14.13) ...... 15 2.3.3.3 City of Toronto and Toronto Transit Commission ...... 3 4.2.2.1 Track Conditions and Configuration ...... 15 2.3.3.4 City of Vaughan...... 4 4.2.2.2 Speed, Curve, and Grade Conditions...... 16 2.3.3.5 Town of Caledon ...... 4 4.2.2.3 Rail/Road At-Grade Crossings ...... 16 2.3.3.6 York Region Transit...... 5 4.2.2.4 Structures Conditions ...... 18 2.3.4 Consultation with Other Agencies ...... 5 4.2.2.5 Culvert Conditions ...... 18 2.3.4.1 Toronto and Region Conservation Authority...... 5 4.2.3 Vaughan Intermodal Terminal ...... 19 2.3.4.2 Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority...... 5 4.2.4 Elder South to Humber Station Road Bolton (mile 23.9) ...... 19 2.3.4.3 George Brown College ...... 5 4.2.4.1 Track Conditions and Configuration ...... 19

4.2.4.2 Speed, Curve and Grade Conditions...... 19

Bolton Commuter Rail Feasibility Report………. | i MMM Group Limited | December 2010………. | 4.2.4.3 Road/Rail At-Grade Crossings ...... 20 6.4.4 Bolton to Union via CN Halton/York/Newmarket Subdivision Option 4...... 38 4.2.4.4 Structures Conditions ...... 20 6.4.5 Summary of Service Provisions...... 38 4.2.4.5 Culvert Conditions ...... 21 4.2.5 Humber Station Road to Palgrave...... 21 7.0 RIDERSHIP DEMAND FORECASTS ...... 39 4.2.5.1 Track Condition and Configuration ...... 21 4.2.5.2 Speed, Curve and Grade Conditions...... 22 7.1 Methodology...... 39 4.2.5.3 Rail/Road At-Grade Crossings ...... 22 7.1.1 Overview ...... 39 4.2.5.4 Structures Conditions ...... 22 7.1.2 Model Development ...... 39 4.3 CP North Toronto Subdivision ...... 22 7.1.3 Model Structure...... 39 4.3.1 CP North Toronto Subdivision Overview ...... 22 7.1.4 Traffic Zone System ...... 39 4.3.2.1 Track Conditions and Configuration ...... 23 7.1.5 Travel Modes...... 39 4.3.2.2 Speed, Curve and Grade Conditions...... 23 7.1.6 Calibration and Validation of the Model...... 39 4.3.2.3 At-Grade Crossings...... 23 7.2 Ridership Demand Model – Forecasts by Service Option ...... 39 4.3.2.4 Structures Conditions ...... 23 7.2.1 Option 1...... 40 4.3.2.5 Culvert Conditions ...... 24 7.2.2 Option 3...... 41 4.4 CN York and Halton Subdivisions ...... 24 7.2.3 Option 4...... 41 4.4.1 CN York and Halton Subdivision Overview ...... 24 7.2.4 Option 2...... 42 4.4.2 Track Conditions and Configuration ...... 25 7.3 Growth Factor Assessment ...... 42 4.4.3 Maximum Permissible Speeds ...... 25 7.4 Peak Period Forecasts for 2021 and 2031 ...... 42 4.4.4 At-Grade Crossings...... 25 7.4.1 Peak Period Forecasts – Option 1...... 42 4.4.5 Structures Conditions ...... 25 7.4.2 Peak Period Forecasts – Option 3...... 43 4.4.6 Culvert Conditions ...... 27 7.4.3 Peak Period Forecasts – Option 4...... 43 7.4.4 Peak Period Forecasts – Option 2...... 44 5.0 NATURAL HERITAGE ...... 28 7.5 Projections for Off Peak and Full Day Services...... 45 7.5.1 Option 1 – Off Peak and Full Day Services ...... 46 5.1 Significant Habitat of Endangered and Threatened Species ...... 28 7.5.2 Option 3 – Off Peak and Full Day Services ...... 46 5.2 Significant Wetlands...... 28 7.5.3 Option 4 – Off Peak and Full Day Services ...... 47 5.3 Significant Woodlands...... 29 7.5.4 Option 2 – Off Peak and Full Day Services ...... 48 5.4 Significant Valleys ...... 31 7.6 Ridership Forecast Summary...... 48 5.5 Significant Wildlife Habitat...... 32 5.6 Fish Habitat ...... 33 8.0 CORRIDOR CAPACITY ASSESSMENT...... 49 5.7 Sand Barrens, Savannahs and Tallgrass Prairies...... 33 5.8 Environmentally Significant Areas ...... 33 8.1 CP Mactier Subdivision – Capacity Assessment...... 49 5.9 Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan (ORMCP) 2002...... 33 8.2 CP North Toronto Subdivision – Capacity Assessment...... 49 8.2.1 CP North Toronto Subdivisions – Future Initiatives ...... 49 6.0 SERVICE REQUIREMENTS DEVELOPMENT...... 34 8.3 GO Weston Subdivision – Capacity Assessment...... 49 8.3.1 GO Weston Subdivision – Future Initiatives ...... 49 6.1 Service Requirements Development – Overview ...... 34 8.3.1.1 Georgetown Corridor Service Expansion ...... 50 6.2 Operational Scenario Development...... 34 8.3.1.2 Pearson ...... 50 6.3 Service Requirements Development Background ...... 34 8.4 CN Halton & York/GO Newmarket Subdivisions – Capacity Assessment ...... 50 6.4 Overview of Service Option Evaluation ...... 36 8.5 USRC – Capacity Assessment...... 50 6.4.1 Direct Bolton to Union Station Operating Scenario Option 1 ...... 36 8.6 CN Oakville Subdivision – Capacity Assessment...... 50 6.4.2 Shuttle Service Bolton to Weston Operating Scenario Option 2...... 36 8.6.1 CN Oakville Subdivision – LakeshoreWest Corridor Service Expansion...... 51 6.4.3 Direct Bolton to Summerhill Service Operating Scenario Option 3...... 37 8.6.2 Willowbrook Yard Expansion...... 51

Bolton Commuter Rail Feasibility Report………. | ii MMM Group Limited | December 2010………. | 8.7 Other Initiatives Impacting Bolton Corridor Capacity ...... 51 10.3.7 Weston Station Pedestrian Tunnel Requirements...... 70 8.7.1 Grade Separation ...... 51 10.3.8 Station Pedestrian Tunnel Requirements...... 70 8.7.2 Davenport Diamond Grade Separation ...... 51 10.3.9 Parking Lot Requirements...... 71 8.7.3 Milton Corridor Service Expansion 10.3.10 Station Facilities ...... 71 10.4 Equipment Layover/Maintenance Facility Requirements – Mactier Subdivision...... 71 9.0 STATION FACILITY LOCATION ASSESSMENT...... 52 10.5 Midday Storage Facility – Mactier Subdivision ...... 72 10.5.1 On Corridor Midday Storage Facility ...... 72 9.1 Overview ...... 52 10.5.2 Off Corridor Midday Storage...... 72 9.2 Identification of Potential Station Sites – Mactier Subdivision ...... 52 10.6 Infrastructure Requirements – North Toronto Subdivision...... 72 9.2.1 ...... 53 10.6.1 Base Case Requirements ...... 72 9.2.2 Finch Avenue (Emery)...... 54 10.6.2 Additional Service/Counter-flow Requirements ...... 73 9.2.3 Highway 407/Islington (Woodbridge)...... 55 10.7 GO Station Facilities – North Toronto Subdivision ...... 73 9.2.4 Rutherford Road (Vaughan – Elder Mills)...... 56 10.7.1 Spadina/ Platform and Pedestrian Tunnel Requirements ...... 73 9.2.5 Major Mackenzie Drive (Kleinburg) ...... 57 10.7.2 Platform and Pedestrian Tunnel Requirements...... 73 9.2.6 Bolton Station...... 58 10.7.3 Parking Lot Requirements – North Toronto Subdivision...... 73 9.2.7 Overnight/Layover Maintenance Facility Site Assessment...... 59 10.8 Midday Storage Facilities – North Toronto Subdivision ...... 73 9.3 Identification of Potential Station Sites – Mactier Subdivision ...... 61 10.8.1 On Corridor Midday Storage Facilities...... 73 9.3.1 ...... 61 10.8.2 Off Corridor Midday Storage Facilities...... 74 9.3.2 Emery Station (Finch Avenue)...... 62 10.9 Infrastructure Requirements – CN Subdivision...... 74 9.3.3 Woodbridge Station (Highway 407/Islington Avenue) ...... 63 10.9.1 Infrastructure Requirements...... 74 9.3.4 Vaughan (Elder Mills) Station – (Rutherford Road) ...... 63 10.10 Station Platform and Pedestrian Tunnel Requirements – CN Subdivisions ...... 75 9.3.5 Kleinburg Station (Major Mackenzie Drive) ...... 64 10.10.1 Woodbridge (Islington) Station ...... 75 9.3.6 Bolton Station...... 65 10.10.2 Station ...... 75 9.4 Identification of Potential Station Sites – North Toronto Subdivision ...... 65 10.10.3 Downsview Station ...... 75 9.4.1 Spadina/Dupont Station ...... 65 10.11 Midday Storage Facilities – CN Subdivisions ...... 76 9.4.2 Summerhill Station ...... 66 9.5 Overview Station Facilities – CN Subdivisions ...... 66 11.0 AT GRADE RAIL/ROAD CROSSINGS ASSESSMENT – MACTIER SUBDIVISION...... 78 9.5.1 Woodbridge Station (Highway 407/Islington Avenue) ...... 66 9.5.2 York University and Downsview Stations ...... 67 11.1 General Corridor Crossing Assessment...... 78 11.2 Grade-Separation Criteria ...... 79 10.0 RAIL INFRASTRUCTURE REQUIREMENTS ...... 68 11.3 Individual Corridor Crossing Assessment...... 79 11.4 City of Toronto At-Grade Rail/Road Crossings...... 79 10.1 Infrastructure Requirements Overview ...... 68 11.5 Islington Avenue (Mile 9.95)...... 81 10.2 Infrastructure Requirements – CP Mactier Subdivision ...... 68 11.6 Kipling Avenue (Mile 11.77) ...... 81 10.2.1 Base Case Requirements...... 68 11.7 Woodbridge Foam Private Road (Mile 11.90) ...... 72 10.2.2 Additional Service Counter-flow Requirements ...... 69 11.8 Rutherford Road (Mile 14.13)...... 72 10.3 GO Station Facilities – Mactier Subdivision...... 70 11.9 Major Mackenzie Drive (Mile 15.47) ...... 83 10.3.1 Station Tunnel Requirements – Mactier Subdivision ...... 70 11.10 Nashville Road (Mile 16.70) ...... 83 10.3.2 Bolton Station Pedestrian Tunnel Requirements...... 70 11.11 Huntington Road (Mile 17.28)...... 84 10.3.3 Kleinburg Station Pedestrian Tunnel Requirements...... 70 11.12 Kirby Road (Mile 18.48)...... 84 10.3.4 Vaughan (Elder Mills) Station Pedestrian Tunnel Requirements...... 70 11.13 Cold Creek Road (Mile 19.51)...... 85 10.3.5 Woodbridge Station Pedestrian Tunnel Requirements...... 70 11.14 Albion-Vaughan Road (Mile 19.71) ...... 85 10.3.6 Emery Station Pedestrian Tunnel Requirements...... 70 11.15 Coleraine Drive (Mile 21.85)...... 86 11.16 King Street (Mile 22.85)...... 86

Bolton Commuter Rail Feasibility Report………. | iii MMM Group Limited | December 2010………. | 11.17 Humber Station Road (Mile 23.80) ...... 88 APPENDICIES 11.18 Castlederg Side Road (Mile 24.75) ...... 87 11.19 Humber Station Road (Mule 25.58)...... 88 A) Minutes of Stakeholder Meetings 11.20 Duffry’s Lane (Mile 27.30) ...... 88 B) Corridor Drawings CP Mactier Subdivision 11.21 Mount Hope Road (Mile 30.14) ...... 89 C) Corridor Drawings CN Halton and York Subdivisions 11.22 Hunsden Side Road (Mile 30.46) ...... 89 D) Corridor Drawings – GO Georgetown Corridor MRC Concept 11.23 Mount Pleasant Road (Mile 31.31) ...... 90 E) Existing Structures Drawings 11.24 Mount Wolfe Road (Mile 32.42)...... 90 F) Proposed Capacity Expansion Plans 11.25 Tottenham Road (Mile 33.24)...... 91 G) Proposed Service Schedules 11.26 Conclusions and Recommendations ...... 92 H) Construction Schedule and Budget I) Ridership Alternatives Background Data 12.0 NON-RAIL INFRASTRUCTURE REQUIREMENTS ...... 106

12.1 Access Roads and Intersections – Mactier Subdivision ...... 106 12.1.1 Mount Dennis GO Station...... 106 12.1.2 Emery GO Station ...... 106 12.1.3 Woodbridge GO Station ...... 106 12.1.4 Vaughan (Elder Mills) GO Station ...... 107 12.1.5 Kleinburg GO Station ...... 107 12.1.6 Bolton GO Station ...... 107 12.2 Major Utility Relocations...... 107

13.0 TRAIN EQUIPMENT ASSESSMENT ...... 108

13.1 Conventional GO Equipment...... 108 13.2 Diesel Multiple Unit (DMU) ...... 108 13.3 Low Powered Locomotives...... 109 13.4 Optimizing Consist Size versus Projected Ridership...... 110 13.5 Equipment Cost Comparison...... 111

14.0 PROPERTY REQUIREMENTS ...... 112

15.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ...... 112

Bolton Commuter Rail Feasibility Report………. | iv MMM Group Limited | December 2010………. | Table I: Future Population % Change 2011 Ex ecutive Summary Municipality Horizon to 2031 In June 2007, the Province of Ontario announced the launch of the MoveOntario 2020 initiative, a multi-year rapid transit action 2011 2021 2031 plan to develop 900 kilometres of new or improved rapid transit lines in and around the Greater Toronto and Hamilton Area (GTHA). City of Toronto 2,855,00 2,915,00 3,000,00 +5% The province committed $11.5 billion with an anticipated further federal contribution of $6.0 billion designed to address the existing City of Vaughan 296,200 360,600 418,800 +41% congestion issues and anticipated growth in the GTHA. Town of Caledon 65,848 84,444 108,000 +64% Bolton Community* 20,330 28,000 37,838 +86% The Province announced that the Greater Toronto Transportation Authority (GTTA) renamed as Metrolinx, would oversee the project and * included in Caledon the development of a Regional Transportation Plan (RTP) for the GTHA. The Metrolinx RTP identified among numerous transportation Significant growth in the future population of the City of Vaughan and Town of Caledon indicates potential travel demand to support a requirements, the need to extend regional rail services to communities on the periphery of the GTHA. One community identified in the commuter rail service between the City of Vaughan / Town of Caledon and downtown Toronto. 15 Year Plan for new regional rail service was the Town of Caledon, which includes the community of Bolton.

In 2008, the Province approved a series of “Quick Wins” projects recommended by Metrolinx. These projects represented initiatives Service Alternatives that could produce tangible benefits within five years. Many of these initiatives were identified as precursors to larger projects identified The study focused primarily on the CP Mactier Subdivision extending from the Davenport Road/ West area of Toronto, in the 15 or 25 year horizons of the RTP. One Quick Win project proposed included the improvement of service frequencies and bus/ northward through the communities of Woodbridge, Vaughan, Kleinburg and Bolton/Caledon to the intersection of the Mactier rail connections for the Bolton GO Transit bus services. It was anticipated that the implementation of bus service improvements would Subdivision and Highway 9. stimulate ridership and support the initiation of the Union Station to Bolton GO transit commuter rail expansion identified in the Metrolinx 15 year plan. Three service implementation options were examined: 1. Direct rail service between Bolton and Union Station via the GO Transit Weston Subdivision. In an effort to provide comfortable and convenient longer-distance transportation service to current and future customers, GO Transit developed a Strategic Plan (GO 2020). This plan is consistent with the Province of Ontario’s Growth Plan for the Greater Golden 2. Shuttle rail service between Bolton and Weston/Mount Dennis station connecting to the existing GO Transit Georgetown rail corridor at Weston/Mount Dennis: Horseshoe (GGH), and the strategies and improvements contained in the Metrolinx RTP. A. Midday equipment storage located at Bolton. The Strategic Plan presents GO Transit’s direction to the year 2020, including the objectives and service strategies. This document, (as B. Midday equipment storage located in the Ray Avenue vicinity (City of Toronto). well as the program of rapid transit improvements) identified in the Metrolinx RTP, provide the basis for GO Transit’s 10-year capital program, three-year operating plan and annual business plans and budgets. 3. Direct rail service between Bolton and the Toronto Transit Commission’s (TTC) subway at Summerhill station (located adjacent to the former CP ) via CP North Toronto Subdivision. This option would also allow The GO 2020 plan identifies the requirements to provide peak period train service at 30 minute frequencies on the Bolton Corridor. This a connection to the TTC University/Spadina Subway at Dupont Station. feasibility study examined the service and infrastructure requirements to provide a new commuter rail service to Bolton on an existing GO Transit requested that an additional fourth service option be considered that included the use of the CP Mactier Subdivision from freight rail corridor where no passenger service currently exists. This analysis included a review of: Bolton to Highway 407; the CN Halton and York Subdivisions from Islington Avenue to Snider; the GO Newmarket Subdivision from hh Projected ridership demand; Snider to Parkdale; the GO Weston Subdivision from Parkdale to Bathurst Street; and the USRC from Bathurst Street to Union Station. hh Operating scenarios and service schedule alternatives; The feasibility study scope also included the evaluation of equipment alternatives including conventional GO rolling stock consisting hh Conceptual station and layover facilities; of GO MP40 locomotives and bi-level coach cars; Diesel Multiple Unit (DMU) equipment; and low power locomotive technology with hh Equipment specification and configuration; standard bi-level coaches. hh Track capacity; hh Potential property acquisition; and Passenger Ridership Demand h h Rail and non-rail infrastructure components. York Region’s Emme/2 demand forecasting model was used to forecast the future commuter rail ridership. The projected passenger service demand for future years was based on 20 minute headways during peak periods. Tables II, III and IV below show full day Population Growth and annual forecasted travel demand for the Bolton commuter rail service. The ridership demand represented in Option 1 excludes a The population of the cities and towns along the Bolton corridor continues to grow, which consequently impacts the travel demand. The passenger stop at Bloor as it was anticipated that service would not be provided to this station. rail corridor passes through the City of Toronto, City of Vaughan and Town of Caledon. The projected population of each municipality is shown in Table I:

Bolton Commuter Rail Feasibility Report | 1 MMM Group Limited | December 2010 Ridership was not specifically modeled to support Service Option 2, however, the elimination of passenger boardings at Weston, Mount New Stations: Service Options 1&2 Dennis and Bloor indicated in the Option 1 sample, provided a derived anticipated ridership. Ridership demand for years 2015, 2021 and The GO Transit Bolton commuter rail service will serve up to eight passenger stations within the corridor length of approximately 43 km 2031 for all four service options are presented in Tables II, III, and IV below. or 30 Miles. The minimum and maximum distance between any two adjacent stations is approximately 2.4 and 10.3 km or 1.34 and 7.43 miles respectively. Two out of eight stations already exist in the GO Transit system network and six new stations were identified Table II: Ridership Demand Year 2015 along the corridor. The details of locations and jurisdiction for each station can be found in Table VI. In order to lessen the anticipated Year 2015 AM Peak Boardings Annual * capacity constraints on the Georgetown corridor, a station stop at the existing Bloor station was eliminated for Bolton corridor trains. Option 1 6,318 1,579,477 Service option 1 would provide a direct rail service to Union Station while service option 2 would require a passenger transfer between Option 2 3,336 834,036 Bolton and Georgetown corridor trains at Weston/Mount Dennis stations. Option 3 3,184 795,968 Option 4 6,074 1,518,569 Table VI: Stations for Bolton Commuter Rail Service Option 1 Station Location Jurisdiction Table III: Ridership Demand Year 2021 Union Station (Existing) Toronto Year 2021 AM Peak Boardings Annual* Mount Dennis Station (New) Eglinton Avenue West Toronto Option 1 7,618 1,904,505 GO Weston (Existing) Toronto Option 2 4,023 1,005,666 Emery Station (New) Finch Avenue West Toronto Option 3 3,839 959,764 Woodbridge Station (New) Islington Avenue Vaughan- York Region Option 4 7,324 1,831,063 Vaughan Station (New) Rutherford Road Vaughan- York Region Kleinburg Station (New) Major Mackenzie Drive Vaughan- York Region Table IV: Ridership Demand Year 2031 Bolton Station (New) Humber Station Road Caledon- Peel Region Year 2031 AM Peak Boardings Annual* Option 1 11,593 2,898,140 New Stations: Service Option 3 Option 2 6,121 1,530,350 Service option 3 would provide station stops at six new stations and one existing station on the Mactier Subdivision and two new Option 3 5,842 1,460,050 stations on the North Toronto Subdivision. No direct rail service would be provided to Union Station however passenger access to Union Option 4 11,146 2,786,380 Station could be attained by transferring to the GO Georgetown corridor trains at Weston and/or Mount Dennis stations and the TTC * based on 252 annual operating days subway system at Spadina/Dupont and Summerhill stations. Service Schedules Table VII: Stations for Bolton Commuter Rail Service Option 3 Service schedules were developed for each of the service scenarios. Transit times for each service scenarios are illustrated in Table V Station Location Jurisdiction below. The transit times were developed using existing maximum speeds for expedited freight traffic. Summerhill (New) Yonge Street Toronto Spadina/Dupont (New) MacPherson Avenue Toronto Table V: Run Time Comparisons Mount Dennis Station (New) Eglinton Avenue West Toronto # Stations Trip Duration Service Option # Served (minutes) GO Weston (Existing) Weston Road Toronto Option 1 via Weston 8 56 Emery Station (New) Finch Avenue West Toronto Option 2 Shuttle 8 58 Woodbridge Station (New) Islington Avenue Vaughan- York Region Option 3 Summerhill 9 50 Vaughan Station (New) Rutherford Road Vaughan- York Region Option 4 via CN Subs 7 56 Kleinburg Station (New) Major Mackenzie Drive Vaughan- York Region Bolton Station (New) Humber Station Road Caledon- Peel Region

Bolton Commuter Rail Feasibility Report | 2 MMM Group Limited | December 2010 New Stations: Service Option 4 Equipment Layover/Maintenance Facility Service Option 4 would provide service to four new stations on the CP Mactier Subdivision (Bolton, Kleinburg, Vaughan and Nine possible sites between Coleraine Drive in Bolton and Highway 9 in Caledon were analyzed to determine suitability for the Woodbridge), one existing station at York University and one new station in the vicinity of Downsview Airport on the Newmarket development of an overnight equipment layover/maintenance facility. Site locations were assessed based on the following criteria: Subdivision. Service Option 4 would also provide direct rail access to Union Station. hh Relative proximity to the proposed station site at Bolton; hh Sufficient land to support a minimum of five layover tracks; Table VIII Stations for Bolton Commuter Rail Service Option 4 h Access to existing road networks; Station Location Jurisdiction h Union Station (Existing) Front Street Toronto hh Complementary land use of adjacent properties; Downsview (New) Sheppard Ave Toronto hh Land characteristics including grade, parallel rather than perpendicular access to main track from yard tracks and east side York University (Existing) Canartic Drive Toronto of right-of-way orientation (preference stated by CP); and Woodbridge Station (New) Islington Avenue Vaughan- York Region hh Infrastructure enhancements required to access site. Vaughan Station (New) Rutherford Road Vaughan- York Region Kleinburg Station (New) Major Mackenzie Drive Vaughan- York Region Many of the proposed sites were eliminated due to access inadequacy, impact on adjacent land owners, excessive distance from Bolton Bolton Station (New) Humber Station Road Caledon- Peel Region station or insufficient land space to provide layover and maintenance facilities.

One site located north of King Street and south of Humber Station Road met the above criteria for a layover/maintenance facility. The Station Facilities site not only provided sufficient land area and roadway access to support a layover and maintenance facility but provided sufficient The locations for new GO Transit stations were explored and investigated in order to ensure that service could be provided to all major space to construct a platform for a passenger station at Bolton. The site situated on the east side of the right-of-way, would require the communities along the line and that direct access from major arterial roads was possible. The proposed station sites are located on least supporting track infrastructure between the station at Bolton and the layover facility of all other sites examined. undeveloped land parcels that may be available for purchase. Each station platform was designed to accommodate a train consisting of a minimum of six cars and a maximum of twelve cars. Additionally the design of the station facilities at each of the stations on the CP Right-of-Way Assessment Mactier Subdivision accommodated the following provisions: The CP Mactier Subdivision extends 126.9 miles from at point near Osler Street in Toronto to the community of Mactier in Northern hh Parking (reserved, handicapped, and taxi stand); Ontario. The Mactier Subdivision provides access to the Vaughan Intermodal Terminal, CP's largest and busiest intermodal facility. hh Kiss ‘n’ Ride facilities; In addition, significant volumes of automotive traffic is generated from the Honda facility in Alliston. The Mactier Subdivision is CP's hh Pedestrian facilities such as elevators, tunnels and pathways; primary route for north/west destined traffic generated from and Toronto. hh Bus Loop (except Mount Dennis and Emery); The existing CP Mactier Subdivision right-of-way was evaluated and the conditions assessed to ensure that the plant capabilities could hh Overhead canopy to shield passengers from weather; support service options 1, 2 and 3. CP representatives worked cooperatively to develop a base case infrastructure plan that could hh Bicycle Storage; support a maximum of four uni-directional trains operating at 40 minute frequencies. The base case plant essentially would require hh Station Building; the construction of a new GO single track between the Bolton layover/maintenance facility at Humber Station Road and Kipling Road hh Ticket Vending Machines; in Woodbridge and between Islington Avenue and the existing two track segment at Emery. It also required that the former east track between Lawrence and Eglinton Avenues be restored to main track standards and that a new single track segment be constructed hh Public Washrooms; between Eglinton Avenue and Black Creek Drive. A single track section between Kipling Avenue and Islington Avenue was included in hh Station to Platform Accessibility Provisions; and the base case. This allowed the expansion of five existing structures to be deferred to a subsequent infrastructure development phase. hh Accessibility Platforms. An extension of the CTC signal system from Bolton to Palgrave (the next siding to the north of Bolton) was also stated as a base case Station facilities on the North Toronto Subdivision anticipated requirements for Kiss' n' Ride facilities and bus loops. A station building requirement. was designed at Summerhill station while ticket vending machines were envisioned at Spadina/Dupont. The proposed design of the The base case infrastructure plan supported recent freight operation changes including an increase to the maximum freight train length station facilities on the Newmarket Subdivision will be defined under the Barrie Corridor expansion. to over 10,000 feet; and the re-routing of northwest traffic originating in Montreal via Toronto and the Mactier Subdivision.

The base case plan also included requirements to close private crossings in the vicinity of Vaughan yard and defined the location of platforms for stations south of Woodbridge based on the terminating station (e.g. either Mount Dennis for Option 2, Summerhill for Option 3 or Toronto Union for Service Option 1). The base case indicated that if Service Option 3 (Summerhill on the CP North Toronto Subdivision) was to be implemented the construction of one additional track between Black Creek Drive and Osler Avenue on

Bolton Commuter Rail Feasibility Report | 3 MMM Group Limited | December 2010 the Mactier Subdivision would be required. The base case did not however address infrastructure requirements on the North Toronto The configuration of the connecting track would limit parking capacity at the Woodbridge station and require the establishment of a Subdivision. platform track either on a curved alignment or situated on the west side of the connecting track adjacent to the CP right-of-way. The preferred platform location was on the east side of the connecting track along the inside curve. In order to improve platform access and In order to comply with the GO2020 plan service requirements, CP was asked to accommodate the operation of three uni-directional maximize parking area, an alternate parcel of land located northeast of Islington Avenue and the Halton main track was identified for trains schedules at 30 minute headways on the base case plant. further consideration to enhance parking capacity. CP also provided an Additional Service/Counter-flow infrastructure plan that essentially created an independent single track commuter At Grade Crossings right-of-way within the Mactier Subdivision property boundary. Incremental improvements included new track construction to eliminate the single track gauntlet track between Kipling and Islington Avenue and construction of a third main track between Emery and There are 27 at-grade rail / road crossings between Union Station and Highway 9 along the Mactier Subdivision rail corridor including Lawrence Avenue. In addition, passing tracks to permit the operation of counter-flow GO train movements were suggested at various two private crossings. All of these crossings were evaluated to determine if the present and future conditions and projected rail and road locations. In order to finalize the location of passenger sidings, further assessment during the detailed design phase is required. traffic volumes (up to year 2031) would require the construction of grade separations. Unless significant changes in train or vehicular traffic volumes and/or adjacent road networks occurs, fifteen crossings will require grade separation over the study period based only on All new track structure was situated to the east of the existing alignment to comply with CP's requirement for an east track service for Exposure Indices. GO trains and to preserve capacity for future freight requirements. The analysis has indicated that six crossings warrant grade separation now. Of these crossings, five have been recommended for grade Due to the substantial infrastructure improvements required to support counter-flow movements, Service Option 2A (Shuttle service separation. The sixth crossing where the exposure index exceeds the threshold is not recommended for grade separation based on the with midday storage at Bolton) was considered an infeasible alternative for the service inauguration in year 2015 (see Table IX for surrounding residential land use. Grade crossing analysis indicate the requirement for four grade separations by 2011. Two such crossings infrastructure costs). identified have been recommended for grade separation under this study. The other two crossings at Old Weston and Denision Roads The infrastructure assessment to support Service Option 4 reviewed the requirements on the CP Mactier Subdivision between Bolton and have been recognized in the Georgetown EA for future grade separation. By years 2021 and 2031, another five crossings have been Islington Avenue; the route portions of the CN Halton and York Subdivisions; and the connecting tracks between the CP Mactier and CN identified for grade separation based on exposure index. Four of these crossings are recommended for future grade separation by this Halton and between the CN York and GO Newmarket Subdivisions. study. The fifth crossing is located north of proposed location for the Bolton layover facility and exceeds the threshold based solely on freight train cross traffic volumes. The Service option 4 assessment did not include a capacity analysis on the GO Newmarket, CN Oakville and GO Weston Subdivisions or the Union Station Rail Corridor. For the purpose of service schedule development, it was assumed that the Newmarket Subdivision would Total costs for new grade separations are estimated at $62M. consist of a two track, signalized network and that GO Transit station service would be provided at York University and the Downsview Property Acquisition - CPR Mactier Subdivision Airport area in the City of Toronto. The track improvement requirements for the base case and Additional Service/Counter-flow plans would require some land acquisitions. CP indicated that the base case requirements on the CP Mactier Subdivision between Bolton and Islington Avenue would also apply Eight locations adjacent to the Mactier Subdivision have been identified for a total estimated land requirement of 2.53ha. Should to Service Option 4 however; the design and orientation of the connecting track to the Halton Subdivision would require further electrification of the corridor become a future requirement however, the right-of-way limits must be re-evaluated to ensure adequate assessment. Two connecting track alternatives were developed and assessed. property exists.

Alternative 1 provided a connecting track extending southward on the CP Mactier Subdivision under the existing CN Halton Subdivision Property Acquisition – North Toronto Subdivision overpass and eastward along the south side of the CN Halton Subdivision. Elevation differential between the CP Mactier and CN Halton It appears that track improvement requirements for the base case and the Additional Service/Counter-flow plans can be accomplished Subdivision would require that a tunnel be constructed under Islington Avenue. This alignment would permit GO train access to the CN within the existing limits of the CPR North Toronto Subdivision right-of-way. Halton Subdivision without impacting the CN freight operation. Insufficient space existed however, between Islington Avenue and the next structure to the east at Pine Valley Drive to achieve a grade of less than 2%. Property Acquisition – Halton Subdivision Alternative 2 included the establishment of a connection from the Mactier to Halton Subdivision to the north side of the Halton It appears the track improvement requirements for the base case and the Additional Service/Counter-flow plans to support the Subdivision right-of-way, west of Islington Avenue. The expansion of the CN overpass structure at Islington Avenue would be required. construction of the connecting track between the CP Mactier and CN Halton Subdivisions may include the acquisition of land between Due to excessive grades, it was necessary to establish the connecting track switch north of the Highway 407 bridge structure on the the CP-Mactier Subdivision and Islington Avenue to permit the construction of the connecting track, platform and station facilities. As Mactier Subdivision. requested corridor property limits were not obtained from CN, the CN right-of-way property limits must be verified.

Bolton Commuter Rail Feasibility Report | 4 MMM Group Limited | December 2010 Equipment Specifications Low powered locomotives were defined as a unit equipped with 3000 horse power or less. The maximum gradient on the subject corridor between mile 5.88 and 5.97 is 2.06% and the maximum degree of curve is 4.83 degrees. The low powered locomotives The scope of the feasibility study included an assessment of rolling stock equipment required to operate the rail commuter service. examined did not provide sufficient tractive effort to maintain the service performance standards attained by the standard GO consists. Ridership forecasts indicate that peak period trains will require five to six standard bi-level coaches to accommodate the anticipated demand in years 2011 and 2015. In years 2021 and 2031 (assuming five peak period trains operated) four and six bi-level coaches would The use of MP36 locomotive with conventional bi-level equipment is recommended at this juncture. be required respectively.

Currently GO Transit standard train equipment consists of one MP 40 engine and up to 12 bi-level coaches or one F59PH engine and up Train Equipment Costs for each service option for the Bolton and Georgetown (where applicable) corridors are provided in Table IX. to 10 bi-level coaches. Table X: Train Equipment Capital Costs. Year 2015 Due to the limited ridership demand and the resultant reduction in coach requirements, alternatives to the higher horse powered Service Option Bolton Corridor # Georgetown locomotives were investigated. 1. Direct Bolton to Union via Weston $60.3M NA One alternative to the MP40 locomotive that was investigated was the lower horse power Motive Power Inc. locomotive (MP36PH-3S), 2. Shuttle Bolton to Mount Dennis $38.7M $10.4M * equipped with a 3600 HP diesel-electric turbocharged 16 cylinder engine, capable of a maximum operating speed of 88 MPH. The use 3. Direct Bolton to Summerhill $38.7M NA of the MP36 locomotive for the Bolton corridor trains would provide ample horse power capability and provide a lower capital cost 4. Bolton to Union via CN Subdivisions $57.6M NA option to the standard MP40 locomotive. #Costs include standard GO coach configuration and MP36 locomotive. *Additional bi-level coaches The MP40 and MP36 locomotives have a capital cost of $5M and $4.2M respectively. Conventional bi-level coaches and cab car required to accommodate transfer of Bolton Corridor riders. equipment have an approximate cost of $2.7M and $3.3M respectively. Capital Costs – Infrastructure & Passenger Facilities The feasibility study also assessed the possible use of Diesel Multiple Units (DMU) and low powered locomotives with standard bi-level The capital costs estimated to provide the required infrastructure for the Bolton corridor commuter rail service was developed based on coaches for the Bolton corridor service. the rail infrastructure improvements specified by CP. CP developed a base case infrastructure plan that supported a maximum of four uni-directional trains operating at forty minute headways. CP indicated that the base case could also support three trains at 30 The investigation determined that new DMU equipment that meets North American regulatory standards is currently available from one minute headways. Service Options 1 and 3 were assessed on the base case plan and determined to be feasible alternatives. Due to the manufacturer only. US Railcar LLC recently acquired the assets of the defunct Colorado Railcar. limited number of uni-directional trains supported by the base case plan, it was concluded that a shuttle service that provided midday The DMU capital costs are significantly higher than conventional GO equipment. US Railcar indicated that the cost of a multi-level equipment storage at Bolton (Option 2A) could not be implemented on the base plan. The establishment of a midday layover site in the powered DMU is approximately $7.5M while a non-powered trailer car is approximately $7M. Given the cost differential between DMU vicinity of Mount Dennis station under Service Option 2B provided a feasible alternative on the base case plan. and conventional equipment and limited availability of North American compliant equipment, further investigation into DMU equipment Service Option 4 was assessed on the Mactier Subdivision route segment and determined to be feasible on the base case plan. In is not recommended at this time. addition, two alignments on the CN Subdivisions were assessed. Option 4A provided for a continuation of the connecting track on the Older RDC equipment would meet the required regulatory standards, however, the availability of such equipment is limited. north side of the CN Halton Subdivision right-of-way to Pine Valley Drive with an at-grade connection to the south side. A new track would be constructed from Pine Valley Drive to the existing CN By-pass Track at Snider West.

Table IX: Summary of Infrastructure Costs - includes 15% engineering fees, 15% contingency and flagman costs.

Option 1 Option 2A Option 2B Option 3 Option 4 Summary (Weston) (Shuttle Midday Storage Bolton) (Shuttle Midday Storage Ray Ave.) (Summerhill) (CN Subs) Base Case Additional Service Base Case Additional Service Base Case Additional Service Base Case Additional Service Base Case Additional Service Track $30,112,550.00 $15,969,200.00 $46,081,750.00 $30,112,550.00 $15,969,200.00 $38,895,352.00 $18,788,640.00 $34,408,270.00 $ 5,659,680.00 Signals $ 5,905,500.00 $ 3,380,000.00 $11,858,000.00 $ 5,905,500.00$ $ 3,380,000.00 $8,980,000.00 $ 3,770,000.00 $ 7,231,500.00 $ 2,028,000.00 Structures & Culverts $71,804,000.00 $70,735,400.00 $139,089,400.00 $71,804,000.00 $70,735,400.00 $81,304,000.00 $86,735,400.00 $64,454,000.00 $26,885,400.00 Station Facilities $30,075,000.00 $ 6,900,000.00 $30,162,500.00 $29,587,500.00 $10,350,000.00 $39,087,500.00 $10,350,000.00 $23,012,500.00 $ 6,900,000.00 Parking $31,869,060.00 $31,889,060.00 $31,869,060.00 0 $31,8629,060.00 $0.00 $22,393,320.00 0 Tunnels $11,875,000.00 $ 8,200,000.00 $25,475,000.00 $20,300,000.00 $8,200,000.00 $25,475,000.00 $ 8,200,000.00 $ 8,850,000.00 $ 8,200,000.00 Total Base Case Costs $181,641,110 $105,184,600 $284,535,710 $189,578,610 $108,634,600 $225,610,912 $127,844,040 $160,349,590 $49,673,080 Total Additional Service $286,825,710 $284,535,710 $298,213,210 $353,454,952 $210,022,670

Bolton Commuter Rail Feasibility Report | 5 MMM Group Limited | December 2010 Option 4B extended the connecting track on the north side of the right-of-way to Snider West and included an at grade crossing over the service on the Weston Subdivision. Infrastructure costs are higher than those estimated for Service Option 4 but significantly lower than existing crossovers at Snider West to the CN By-pass track. costs estimated for Service Option 3. It must be noted that should future development of a Midtown corridor occur, the infrastructure constructed to support Service Option 1 would complement the new corridor expansion. Option 4A provided an operationally preferred alignment. It must be noted that CN was not available to comment on the routing or the infrastructure costs derived for Option 4. Possible construction of a grade separation between the connecting track and the CN Halton The anticipated ridership for Service Option 2, is only slightly higher than Option 3. In addition to the infrastructures costs associated Subdivision must also be considered. Such an improvement would increase the costs estimated for Option 4 in Table IX by with Service Option 2, midday storage facility costs and the incremental equipment acquisition costs to accommodate Bolton corridor $52.4 M. Table IX provides a comparison of infrastructure costs by service option. passengers on connecting Georgetown trains must also be considered. At least two additional coaches for each connecting Georgetown train would be required to maximize seating arrangements. The assignment of one MP40 locomotive to each connecting Georgetown CP developed a second infrastructure plan that could support additional trains or counter-flow movements. corridor train would be required on a conventional equipment consist to provide sufficient haulage capacity. The transfer of Bolton This plan provided a dedicated single track for passenger service extending from Bolton to Mount Dennis with sidings provided to passengers to Georgetown trains would leave no surplus capacity to attract new passengers to the connecting trains. Operational facilitate passenger train meets. impacts to the Georgetown corridor trains are not favourable under Service Option 2. The coordination of passenger transfers between the Bolton and Georgetown corridor trains would require specific procedures to reduce station dwell and improve passenger loading and unloading. During service disruptions to either corridor service or to the Airport Rail service, the coordination of passenger transfers Cnclo usions would require a significant effort to reduce further service delay and passenger confusion.

Operating costs for Option 2B are expected to be higher than either Service Option 1 or 4 as Service Option 2B would require the Both Metrolinx “The Big Move” and the GO2020 Plans have recommended that a new commuter rail service be implemented on the construction and ongoing maintenance of a dedicated midday storage facility. Bolton corridor within the next 15 years. The GO2020 plan defines the service as a peak period train service operating every thirty minutes. Ridership forecasts indicate that demand exists to support an inaugural service consisting of 3 peak trains. This level of service Service Option 3 (Summerhill) attracts the least riders to the line under all service implementation horizons while it incurs the highest can be managed on the base case plant proposed by CP provided that counter-flow train movements are not considered. This Feasibility infrastructure costs. The infrastructure costs estimated for Service Option 3 require further analysis to determine the location and Study assessed the infrastructure and station facility requirements, potential ridership demand, service arrangements and associated impact of the midday storage facility. Possible sites identified were not without certain social impacts that may preclude serious further costs to support rail service to the community of Bolton over four different routing options. consideration.

The assessments for each routing option are contained herein. The resultant conclusions identify the most favourable routing option Equipment costs are lower for Service Option 3 however, this is directly attributed to the lower ridership demand. Future potential assessed and do not provide a specific recommendation either to support or dismiss the implementation of a rail service to Bolton. connections between the CP North Toronto Subdivision and other corridor services must however be considered. The Summerhill service could provide connections to existing and new rail services on the GO Weston Subdivision and access to Union Station and Pearson Service Options 1 and 4 attract similar ridership to the corridor while Service Options 2 and 3 attract significantly fewer riders. International Airport. Future Midtown corridor expansion could provide connections to the Milton and proposed Seaton and Locust Hill Service Option 4 provides direct rail service to Union Station and avoids the majority of capacity constraints on the GO Weston rail corridors. Additionally, a Summerhill service could interconnect with the current and future proposed services of the Toronto Transit Subdivision. This option however, does not avoid the capacity constraints entirely. Under Option 4, Bolton corridor trains would share the Commission at Eglinton LRT and the TTC subway stations at Spadina and Summerhill. Weston Subdivision right-of-way with the Barrie and Georgetown corridor GO trains and the Pearson Airport Rail service trains between Parkdale and Union Station. Bolton corridor trains would share the Newmarket Subdivision with the Barrie corridor trains. Additional Bolton corridor trains would and thus, optimize the use of the constructed capital improvements on the Newmarket Subdivision. 1.0 Introduction and Background Infrastructure Costs for Service Option 4 are the lowest of all options estimated, however, it must be stressed that CN has not approved the proposed capacity improvements. It must also be noted that costs attributed to Bolton corridor trains for use of the Newmarket, The (GTA) has been identified as one of the fastest growing regions in North America. The rapid pace of Weston, USRC and Union Station are excluded from the infrastructure cost estimates. population expansion in and around the GTA is expected to continue over the next few decades. Option 4 has the fewest number of stations of all options and a scheduled trip time comparable to Option 1. Based on these findings Renewed focus on the positive benefits of public transit and the resultant reduction in greenhouse gas emissions has created a and with the provisos that CN review and approve the infrastructure assessment and that an assessment of the Georgetown corridor supportive environment for transit expansion and development with committed funding at the federal, provincial and municipal levels of confirms adequate capacity exists to accommodate the Bolton corridor trains, Service Option 4 is considered the preferred Option of the government. four alternatives assessed. It must also be noted that costs attributed to Bolton corridor trains for use of the Newmarket and Weston Subdivisions, USRC and Union Station are excluded from the infrastructure cost estimates. The MoveOntario 2020 initiative quantified the resultant negative impact of traffic congestion in terms of loss of productivity and increased greenhouse gas emissions. Option 1 will have the most direct impact on line capacity on the Georgetown corridor. The addition of the Bolton corridor trains may be manageable in the inaugural stages of the Bolton service however capacity limitations on the Weston Subdivision may preclude The mandate of Metrolinx is to identify, prioritize and develop the Regional Transportation Plan (RTP) and provide a strategy for future expansion of the Bolton service. Analysis performed under the Georgetown corridor EA will determine the viability of a Bolton the implementation of a sustainable transportation system in the GTA and surrounding regions. The implementation of the RTP will

Bolton Commuter Rail Feasibility Report | 6 MMM Group Limited | December 2010 provide the public with a compelling, convenient and expansive public transportation system that will positively impact the reduction in Dundas Street West area of Toronto, northward through the communities of Woodbridge, Vaughan, Kleinburg and Bolton/Caledon and productivity loss and greenhouse gas emissions. terminates in the Town of Mactier in .

The RTP identified the CP Mactier Subdivision as a viable route option to provide a new commuter rail service to the communities on the north/west periphery of Toronto. Suburban growth to the north of Toronto including the communities of Woodbridge, Vaughan, Kleinburg and Bolton has placed stress on the existing road network as only very limited intercity bus and passenger rail service is currently provided within and between the regions.

VIA’s “Canadian” transcontinental service operated over the CPR Mactier Subdivision until it was re-routed over the CN Bala Subdivision in the mid 1980’s. Currently, there is no passenger service operating on the CP Mactier Subdivision, and all passenger related facilities have been removed from the rail line.

1.1 Scope of Study The initiation of this feasibility study has been identified as the first step in a four-step process required to investigate feasible routing options for the implementation of an all rail service between Bolton and Toronto. The study examined the rail and non-rail infrastructure requirements, ridership forecasts, operational scenarios, train service options, conceptual station site layouts and rolling stock and property requirements for each routing option. During the investigation process, environmental issues with potential to impact the Environmental Assessment stage of the project were documented. Figure 1.1: CPR Eastern Rail Network – (Mactier Subdivision highlighted in Yellow) The study also included the construction cost estimates and staged construction schedule for each routing option. Source: Railway Association of

Two major freight facilities are situated adjacent to the Mactier Subdivision: 1.2 Geographic Scope of Study hh Vaughan Intermodal Terminal, CP’s busiest and largest capacity intermodal facility, located to the west of the rail siding at The geographic area examined in the performance of this feasibility study included the following rights-of-way: Elder in Vaughan; and hh CP Mactier Subdivision: mile 0.0 to mile 32.55 hh Honda’s automotive facility; located in Alliston. hh CP North Toronto Subdivision: mile 2.2 to mile 5.4 These facilities generate significant freight traffic on the corridor and create a heavy demand on available track capacity. hh CN Halton Subdivision: mile 4.16 to mile 0.0 hh CN York Subdivision: mile 24.3 to mile 23.8 The CP Mactier Subdivision is the only north/south oriented Class 1 main track corridor within the GTHA that does not presently accommodate a GO Transit rail service (except portions of CN’s Halton Subdivision and CP's Hamilton Subdivision). Connections between subdivisions in the vicinity of the following locations included:

hh CP Mactier Subdivision mile 2.4 to GO Weston Subdivision mile 6.45 hh CP Mactier Subdivision mile 10.1 to CN Halton Subdivision mile 4.11 hh CN York Subdivision mile 23.8 to GO Newmarket Subdivision mile 12.93.

The feasibility study report did not include a detailed capacity analysis or an evaluation of the impacts of the expanded service on the current and future infrastructure arrangements of the GO Weston Subdivision, Union Station Rail Corridor, Newmarket and CN Oakville subdivisions. Platform arrangements and capacities at Union Station were also excluded from the project scope.

1.2.1 CP Mactier Subdivision The CP Mactier Subdivision originates at the connecting point with CP's east/west corridor (Galt and North Toronto Subdivisions) and is the primary route used by western Canada destined traffic originating in the GTHA and Montreal. Figure 1.1 identifies the of the Mactier Subdivision (in orange) with the CP east/west corridor (in red). The Mactier Subdivision extends from the Davenport Road/

Bolton Commuter Rail Feasibility Report | 7 MMM Group Limited | December 2010 Geographically located between the Georgetown and Barrie GO corridors, the Mactier Subdivision is situated within an area that A. Midday equipment storage located at Bolton; and experiences high private automobile use due to limited public transit service availability. This area is rapidly developing, with a mix of B. Midday equipment storage located in the Ray Avenue vicinity; and residential and employment uses. Figure 1.2. Identifies the North/South orientated subdivisions within the GTHA. 3. Direct rail service between Bolton and the Toronto Transit Commission’s (TTC) Yonge Street subway at Summerhill station via CP Mactier and North Toronto Subdivisions. This option would establish an interconnection to the TTC University subway line at Dupont Station and the TTC Yonge subway Line at Summerhill. 1.2.2 GO Weston Subdivision and Union Station Rail Corridor The evaluation of the GO Weston Subdivision and Union Station Rail Corridor was limited to an assessment of the infrastructure requirements to provide passenger access from the Mactier to the Weston Subdivision at Weston and Mount Dennis stations and the development of a new connecting track between the two subdivisions in the Ray Avenue to Black Creek Drive vicinity.

1.2.3 CP North Toronto Subdivision Although the primary geographic focus of the study was the CP Mactier Subdivision, a high level assessment was performed on the CP North Toronto Subdivision to determine the infrastructure requirements to support the Summerhill service option. The findings and conditions reported in the North Toronto Corridor Feasibility study Final Report of August 1992 produced by Cole, Sherman Architects, Planners were reviewed and updated where necessary.

The CP North Toronto Subdivision extends 5.9 miles between Leaside and West Toronto and connects to the CP Mactier, Belleville and Galt Subdivisions. The North Toronto Subdivision is a critical link in CP's east/west corridor that extends from Montreal to

Figure 1.2: North/South Subdivisions within GTHA , Michigan and further west to Chicago, Illinois. The North Toronto Subdivision consists of two main tracks situated in a highly urbanized area within the City of Toronto. A detailed assessment of the existing conditions of the North Toronto Subdivision is provided in Section 4.3. The development of a new regional rail transit system within this territory presents opportunities to connect limited transit serviced communities with current and future rail, bus and light rail transit corridors within the GTHA.

The high importance of this corridor to CP’s overall rail network, current capacity limitations, heavily urbanized areas and rapid expansion of the suburban communities through which the rail line passes present challenges that must be met with conciliatory agreement between CP, the municipalities, conservation authorities, GO Transit, MTO and all other stakeholders. Increasing land development adjacent to the rail corridor requires that properties for future rail facilities be identified and protected for the GO Transit rail corridor service and that these activities are conducted with priority and urgency.

The primary focus of the study was on the CPR Mactier Subdivision from the Davenport Road/Dundas Street West area of Toronto, northward through the communities of Woodbridge, Vaughan, Kleinburg to Bolton/Caledon. A detailed assessment of the existing conditions on the CP Mactier Subdivision is provided in Section 4.2 of this report. The original project scope however, also included an assessment of service options that would use the GO Weston, USRC and the CP North Toronto Subdivisions.

The three service options initially examined included the following routes:

1. Direct rail service between Bolton and Union Station via CP Mactier, GO Weston Subdivisions and USRC; 2. Shuttle rail service between Bolton and Weston/Mount Dennis (CP Mactier Subdivision) connecting to the existing GO Georgetown rail corridor at Weston and / or Mount Dennis:

Bolton Commuter Rail Feasibility Report | 8 MMM Group Limited | December 2010 Figure 1.3 below highlights the proposed station locations on the three routing options.

Bolton

Kleinburg

Vaughan (Elder Mills)

Woodbridge

Emery

Weston Summerhill Mount Dennis

Spadina/Dupont

Union

Figure 1.3: Scope of Study Bolton Rail Corridor Service Routing Options 1-3 Figure 1.4: Service Option 4 (highlighted in red)

1.2.4 CN Subdivisions The Service Option 4 assessment included an evaluation of ridership demand; the development of service schedules including service GO Transit requested that a fourth routing option be investigated. This route specified the use of the CP Mactier Subdivision from stops at York University and Downsview; and an infrastructure assessment to determine the connecting track alignment requirements Bolton to a point near Islington Avenue, where the CN Halton Subdivision crosses over the CP Mactier Subdivision. The construction and identify major capacity constraints on the Halton/York Subdivision portion of the route. Infrastructure requirements to support the of a new connecting track between the two rights of way would be required to provide a contiguous route. The route would extend Bolton Corridor trains on these CN Subdivisions were developed by the consultant as consultation with CN Railway personnel could not over the Halton and York Subdivisions to an existing connection with the GO Newmarket Subdivision at Snider and would then traverse be arranged. A detailed assessment of the existing conditions on the CN Subdivisions is provided in Section 4.4 of this report. southward over the Newmarket Subdivision from Snider to Parkdale. The final corridor segment would include the use of the GO Weston Subdivision from Parkdale to Bathurst and the USRC from Bathurst to Union Station. Figure 1.4 highlights in red Service Option 4.

Bolton Commuter Rail Feasibility Report | 9 MMM Group Limited | December 2010 1.3 Feasibility Study Report Methodology 1.4 Documentation Review The feasibility study report is organized around the following principal categories: This feasibility study included the evaluation of a previously unassessed corridor, however several pertinent documents were identified that required review. These documents included the following: 1. Evaluation of existing rail infrastructure conditions. 2. Capacity analysis. hh Metrolinx Regional Transportation Plan, released September 2008; 3. Ridership demand forecasting. hh Moving Toronto Into the Future: Toronto Transit Commission; 4. Rail service operational scenarios. hh GO2020 December 12, 2008; and 5. Train service options. hh North Toronto Corridor Feasibility Study Final Report August 1992, Cole Sherman.

6. Station facility requirements. In addition, GO Transit requested that the conclusions and recommendations contained in the report entitled Consulting Services for 7. Rail infrastructure requirements. a Light Rail Feasibility Study on the Stouffville Corridor Draft Final Report dated October 9, 2009 and prepared by Jacobs Engineering 8. Non-rail infrastructure requirements. Group be use as the basis for the assessment of rolling stock requirements for the Bolton Corridor service. The equipment review also 9. Rolling stock requirements. included analysis of relevant and available manufacturers specification documentation. 10. Property requirements.

The report documents potentially significant issues that may affect the environmental assessment phase, and proposes infrastructure programs to support service expansion alternatives incremental to the base case requirements.

The report is divided into Rail and Non-Rail based infrastructure initiatives, and assesses facility requirements on a segment by segment basis.

Bolton Commuter Rail Feasibility Report | 10 MMM Group Limited | December 2010 2.0 Project Approach 2.1.1 Data Collection The detailed technical work plan was based on the study tasks as described in the RQQ. Additional activities which addressed key 2.1 Study Organization elements within those tasks were also added to the technical work plan. The principle approach was to maximize use of existing data accessible to MMM Group Limited and collect additional data where required. The scope of services is comprised of the Feasibility Study and Management of the Services. The study was organized to focus on GO Transit’s scope of services including an evaluation of existing conditions within the corridor to determine incremental infrastructure and service modifications required to accommodate both freight and commuter travel demands. 2.1.2 Site Inspections

The municipalities impacted by the introduction of Bolton commuter service were contacted to ensure requirements specific to their Multiple site visits including a high rail trip were undertaken at different occasions to establish the current infrastructure conditions and communities were considered in the service analyses and that potential municipal infrastructure improvements were consistent with develop an understanding of the current freight operating plan. The information obtained from the site inspections was used in the the infrastructure improvements proposed for the Bolton corridor. Likewise, Conservation Authorities local to the corridor were briefed development of the capacity analysis and to determine the projected and incremental infrastructure requirements. on the initiative. CP Railway representatives were engaged in the development of service schedules and infrastructure requirements and provided the current and future anticipated freight traffic frequency volumes needed to evaluate the necessary infrastructure 2.2 Internal Involvement improvements required to sustain both commuter and freight services within the corridor. Canadian National (CN) representatives The internal groups assembled to conduct this feasibility study included GO Transit, Canadian Pacific (CP) and MMM Group Ltd. CN was were requested to participate in an evaluation of the conditions and constraints on the Halton, York and Newmarket Subdivisions. CN also consulted with respect to the development of Service Option 4 requirements. however was not available for consultation and the proposed capacity improvements developed for service option 4 did not include comment from their representatives. GO Transit provided data pertaining to the service requirements and implementation horizons identified for the Bolton corridor in the GO2020 Plan. Additionally, GO Transit provided implementation details regarding the Georgetown corridor expansion project that could To ensure that the feasibility study considered and incorporated the issues, concerns and opportunities expressed by all stakeholders potentially impact the service options, service schedules and infrastructure plans for the Bolton corridor. Equipment specifications for including provincial and regional agencies other impacted municipalities, agencies consulted included: locomotives and coaches currently utilized on GO's network were also provided. 1. Canadian Pacific; The portion of the Weston Subdivision that runs parallel to the CP Mactier Subdivision was purchased by GO Transit from CN in March 2. Canadian National Railway Company; 2009. As CN will continue to operate the Weston Subdivision on behalf of GO Transit, representatives of the railway were advised of the 3. Regional Municipality of York; potential impacts of the Bolton corridor project on the GO Weston Subdivision. 4. Regional Municipality of Peel; Capacity analysis and infrastructure improvement assessment conducted in this feasibility study focused principally on the impacts to 5. City of Toronto; the right of way of CP’s Mactier Subdivision. A cursory evaluation of capacity constraints on CP’s North Toronto Subdivision was also 6. Toronto Transit Commission; performed. As previously mentioned, the findings contained in the North Toronto Corridor Feasibility Study produced by Cole, 7. City of Vaughan; Sherman in 1992 were reviewed. Revised conditions on the North Toronto Subdivision subsequent to the issuance of the Cole, Sherman 8. Town of Caledon; Report were noted in this study report. 9. Toronto and Region Conservation Authority; The capacity and infrastructure improvement assessments on the GO Weston Subdivision right of way was limited to an analysis of the 10. York Region Transit; requirements to develop a new connection between the CP Mactier Subdivision and the GO Weston Subdivision. 11. Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority; 12. George Brown College; Service Option 4 required an assessment of the service and infrastructure requirements on the CN Halton and York Subdivisions between a new connecting track to be established in the northeast quadrant of the intersection of the CP Mactier and CN Halton Subdivisions 13. Metrolinx; and and the existing connecting track between CN's York and GO's Newmarket Subdivisions at Snider. 14. Ministry of Transportation, Ontario. Service schedules were developed for Option 4 that included planned station stops at GO Transit’s existing and Copies of all minutes of the meetings held with the above agencies are presented in Appendix A. The following sections contain a at a future station in the Downsview Airport vicinity on the Barrie Corridor. An infrastructure assessment of the Newmarket Subdivision summary of discussions and concerns expressed by each agency. was not included in this report, as the evaluation of this corridor segment will be included in the Barrie Corridor expansion initiative. For

Bolton Commuter Rail Feasibility Report | 1 MMM Group Limited | December 2010 the purpose of service schedule development, the Newmarket Subdivision was assumed to be equipped with double track and a CTC Subdivisions. CN was advised that this connecting track would be required under Service option 1 only. The connection location was signal system capable of accommodating the proposed schedules of both corridor services. described as situated in the vicinity of the proposed Mount Dennis Station near Eglinton Avenue.

Evaluation of capacity constraints and required infrastructure improvements on the GO Weston Subdivision and Union Station Rail CN was also advised of GO Transit’s interest in investigating the use of the CN Halton, York and GO's Newmarket Subdivisions Corridor conducted within the scope for this feasibility study were observational in nature with respect to potential impacts on the under service option 4. Requests for consultation with CN representatives did not culminate in a meeting to discuss the alternative proposed operational scenarios of the Bolton corridor service and were not qualified nor quantified in any fashion. Potential impacts to route however, conceptual corridor schematics outlining potential infrastructure requirements were developed by the consultant for CN’s Oakville Subdivision between Bathurst Street and Mimico East were noted as potential impacts to the Bolton service but were not furtherance to CN by GO Transit. investigated. All infrastructure requirement proposals and associated cost estimates contained in this report relating to the CN Subdivisions are subject to further review and comment by CN. 2.2.1 GO Transit GO Transit representatives provided direction and guidance regarding the service and routing requirements. Additionally, GO 2.3 External Involvement representatives provided progressive status reports involving the outputs of the Georgetown corridor Environmental Assessment that Federal, provincial, regional and municipal agencies were consulted and meetings were arranged to share the information related to the potentially impacted the routing options of the Bolton corridor service. Available performance specifications for the MP40 locomotives project, to obtain stakeholder input with respect to issues that could directly or indirectly impact the project and to obtain relevant data and seating capacity arrangements for the standard bi-level coaches were also communicated. and reports.

York Region’s Master Transportation Plan model was modified to include potential station locations along the rail corridor and utilized to 2.2.2 Canadian Pacific determine ridership demand projections for the years 2011, 2015, 2021 and 2031. Staged service schedules were then designed to meet CP provided all requested technical information needed to evaluate the required infrastructure improvements to sustain the proposed the projected ridership and service level criteria defined by GO 2020 Plan. Required infrastructure improvements were also developed to commuter rail service and current and projected freight traffic volumes. meet the staged service schedules that were predicated on ridership demand forecast outputs.

CP assigned representatives to provide the consultants with an understanding of current operating and infrastructure conditions and to convey current and future freight traffic frequencies, demand and patterns on the Mactier Subdivision. CP provided guided highrail trips 2.3.1 Federal Government Agencies for site inspections and was available for consultation on an ongoing basis. Transport Canada was consulted with respect to regulations relating to the grade-separation of road/rail at-grade crossings. This information and relevant criterion was used during the course of the study. In the determination of the infrastructure requirements, CP indicated that their primary concern was to protect the access/egress flow of traffic at the Vaughan Intermodal Terminal (IT). CP advised that during periods of high traffic demand, current capacity constraints on the Mactier Subdivision cause queuing of southward trains at various sidings located north of Vaughan IT that on the two track segment 2.3.2 Provincial Government Agencies located south of the Terminal. The introduction of a GO Transit commuter rail service would further intensify capacity usage within the Vaughan Intermodel Terminal vicinity. 2.3.2.1 Metrolinx Metrolinx was consulted regarding relevant issues within the Regional Transportation Plan (RTP) released in November 2008. CP provided a draft infrastructure improvement plan for the Mactier Subdivision that had been prepared prior to the commencement of this feasibility study. The study assessed infrastructure improvements required to alleviate traffic congestion at Vaughan IT and was 2.3.2.2 Ministry of Transportation Ontario based solely on freight demand. During a meeting with MTO, it was determined that two Ministry projects were relevant to the GO initiative: the GTA West Connector Once service alternatives and schedules were developed and shared with CP, CP representatives revised the infrastructure requirement and the Highway 427 expansion projects. General project information was disseminated to provide an understanding of the scope of plan to reflect base case infrastructure improvements required to accommodate up to a maximum of four peak period GO trains related issues and to ensure that a collaborative approach could be taken on initiatives common to the projects. Major issues identified operating at forty minute headways (under a direct service Bolton to Union Station scenario). Subsequent revisions reflected additional included: plant requirements to support additional service, considered enhancements to support counter-flow movements and the direct Bolton to hh Highway 427 extension up to Major Mackenzie Drive including three interchanges at Langstaff Road, Rutherford Road, Summerhill service alternative. and Major Mackenzie Drive. The Environmental Assessment (EA) was completed in 2009; hh A subdivision proposal on the land to the west of the CP rail corridor and north of Major Mackenzie Drive. Final approval 2.2.3 Canadian National Railway Company on the proposed subdivision (Nashville Heights) was announced by the City of Vaughan Council in the first week of February 2009; During the course of this feasibility study, the portion of the Weston Subdivision that lies adjacent to the CP Mactier Subdivision was purchased by GO Transit from Canadian National Railway Company (CN). As CN were retained to operate the line, they were advised of the possible location of a new connecting track to facilitate the movement of Bolton corridor trains between the Mactier and Weston

Bolton Commuter Rail Feasibility Report | 2 MMM Group Limited | December 2010 hh The Environmental Assessment (EA) for the GTA West corridor is currently underway. The terms of reference was approved in March of 2008. Currently MTO is examining deficiencies in the road network and alternatives to ease congestion. After the deficiencies are determined, MTO will examine possible corridor connections. The concentration of population and employment in the Waterloo region introduces new transportation challenges in the western portion of the Greater Golden Horseshoe. The objective of GTA West corridor is to link eastern urban growth centres with the western part of GTA. The GTA West corridor is expected to link to Highway 400 in the east and Highway 6 in the west. These initiatives are shown in Figure 2.1.

Figure 2.2: Western Vaughan IEA Study Area

2.3.3.2 Regional Municipality of Peel Figure 2.1: Highway 427 Extension and other Initiatives Peel Region staff provided information with respect to several road improvement projects and studies, including the Bolton Arterial Road (BAR) and the Transportation Master Plan for the Town of Caledon. In 1991, the Town of Caledon initiated the Bolton Arterials Roads 2.3.3 Municipal and Regional Agencies Environmental Assessment (EA) to determine the preferred arterial roads in the Bolton community. The regional governments and local municipalities were consulted with respect to issues related to future infrastructure improvements Peel Region advised that plans to grade separate Regional roads at the rail corridor have not been included in the EA. Other issues along the corridor, municipal transit service improvements which may support the GO Transit service plan, major developments expected noted during the discussions included potential community sensitivity in Palgrave and the large Solmar residential development west along the corridor which may have an impact on ridership, and issues of community sensitivity and natural environment. of Coleraine Drive in Bolton. It was also noted that the design of the GO bus Park 'n' Ride facility located to the south end of Bolton is proceeding. No significant environmental issues were noted. 2.3.3.1 Regional Municipality of York York Region is currently in the final stages of updating their Transportation Master Plan (TMP). This update is intended to create a 2.3.3.3 City of Toronto and Toronto Transit Commission major shift within the Region towards accommodating travel demands by transit, including the proposed Bolton GO Transit service. A meeting was held jointly with the City of Toronto and the Toronto Transit Commission (TTC) to discuss issues related to potential Discussions were held with respect to the use of the Region’s Transportation Model for the purpose of transit demand forecasting for station locations for the Bolton rail corridor; associated station infrastructure including parking; and to identify potential development the Bolton corridor. York Region allowed the use of their model with certain conditions imposed. Among other projects, the extension of along the corridor right of way. Highway 427, the realignment of Major Mackenzie Drive, and Western Vaughan Transportation Improvements Individual Environmental Assessment (IEA) were discussed. The Western Vaughan IEA will identify transportation deficiencies in Western Vaughan and propose TTC staff provided information with respect to the Transit City Projects. The Toronto Transit City Light Rail project includes the alternatives to address transit concerns noted. The study area for the Western Vaughan IEA is shown in Figure 2.2. The consultant was introduction of seven new Light Rail Transit (LRT) corridors that will provide transit service to many Toronto neighborhoods. All seven also advised to incorporate the current York TMP recommendations into the feasibility study report. York Region provided information routes will connect with the existing TTC subway system, GO Transit rail lines, other Transit City routes, and planned rapid transit lines in with respect to the secondary plan development areas in Kleinburg and Woodbridge.

Bolton Commuter Rail Feasibility Report | 3 MMM Group Limited | December 2010 Durham, York and Peel regions. The proposed routes are shown in Figure 2.3. Three Light Rail lines included in the Transit City projects The discussion also included the possibility of linking the Bolton line directly to the Dupont and Summerhill TTC subway stations via the that will intersect the Bolton corridor include the Jane LRT, Finch LRT and Eglinton LRT lines. CP North Toronto Subdivision. Given the ridership on the Spadina Subway line, it was discussed that a Bolton commuter rail connection could provide an alternative service to the Central Business District.

2.3.3.4 City of Vaughan A meeting with the City of Vaughan included participants from the cities Planning and Engineering departments. The future development plans for the City including background details pertaining to the Nashville / Woodbridge area were explained. The following land use issues were noted:

Woodbridge: hh the fairground site is not available for the development of a GO station; hh industrial land will be re-developed in future; hh some land will be re-zoned for higher densities; hh the area is constrained in terms of access; hh 1000 residential units have been approved in the area; hh GO access is a good idea in relation to Highway 7 where a higher order transit service (VIVA) will be implemented; and hh GO was requested to consider a site immediately north of Highway 7 in conjunction with community arena parking.

Nashville: Figure 2.3: Transit City Routes hh planning of rural area is under way; and

The Finch LRT project was explained in detail. Key related issues included: hh the Focused Area Study is in progress (3 year project). It is a secondary plan study.

hh establishment of LRT stops are to be located immediately east and west of the rail corridor, at the adjacent signalized The GTA West connector and road plans in the area were also explained. The area south of Major Mackenzie Drive is owned by CP while intersections of Finch Avenue and Weston Road; the area north of Major Mackenzie Drive is residential. The alignment of Highway 427 with Major Mackenzie Drive has been established. hh LRT alignments are expected to be located in the centre of the roadway; The possibility of developing a GO station at the intersection of Major Mackenzie Drive and the CP line was discussed in detail. The h h pedestrian bridges are being considered in the area to improve connectivity across Finch Avenue. The City is considering northwest and southeast corners were considered appropriate for possible GO stations, subject to the availability of land. However, providing pedestrian access to a GO station from Finch Avenue as well as a link across the street; and approval for a residential development on the parcel of land in the northwest quadrant was announced by the City of Vaughan Council hh possible residential development in the southwest quadrant of the rail/road crossing could provide 1,500 new residential in the first week of February 2009. units. The proposed site is adjacent to a hydro corridor that could be used to provide potential parking facilities. In early February 2009, Vaughan Council approved a request for GO Transit commuter rail service along the corridor, including station The City of Toronto also provided information pertaining to the Eglinton light rail transit project and future development in this area. It locations in Woodbridge, Kleinburg and Nashville. was noted that:

hh a development application had just been filed for the Kodak lands north of Eglinton Avenue. This is also a proposed site 2.3.3.5 Town of Caledon for a possible TTC yard; and considered a possible midday equipment storage site for the Shuttle Service (2B) option; A meeting with the Town of Caledon was held to discuss the potential GO rail station locations within Bolton. Discussion also included hh the parcel of land located in the southwest quadrant of Eglinton Avenue and the rail line is currently zoned for a high- projected growth in the Caledon area (both short and long term) and future planned road improvements. The issues discussed included: density mixed-use development; hh future transit service may be at-grade or underground in this area; and Short Term:

hh no grade separations at the rail corridor beyond those under consideration for the airport rail link have been proposed. hh South Albion Bolton Community Plan; and h Both Finch and Eglinton sites are identified as potential GO stations in Toronto’s Official Plan. h Urban Boundary Expansion West of Coleraine Drive (New Employment Land).

Bolton Commuter Rail Feasibility Report | 4 MMM Group Limited | December 2010 Long Term: 2.3.4.2 Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority hh Population is expected to grow in Caledon and Bolton as follows: A meeting with Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority (NVCA) identified concerns regarding the GO Bolton corridor project. Caledon During the meeting representatives from NVCA explained that their jurisdiction commenced to the north of Highway 9. It was explained 2021: 84,444 (has not been changed from currently approved Official Plan) that unless the project were to extend north of Highway nine, NVCA would have no jurisdictional authority within the project limits. 2031: 108,000 (represents proposed new population in Caledon) However, it was noted that the watershed boundary of the Nottawasaga River does extend slightly to the south of Highway 9. During the meeting, it was explained that a possible rail siding to the north of Highway 9 may be considered. Considering that possibility, the Bolton NVCA identified the following as possible environmental concerns. 2021: 28,000 (represents an increase of 1,500 from the currently approved OP population of 26,500) hh Impacts to Natural Heritage features, wetlands, watercourses and Generic Regulation areas: 2031: 37,838 (represents proposed new population of Bolton)

hh two tributaries of Beeton Creek cross the rail line; and Road Improvements: hh the location of a non-provincially significant wetland was identified just west of the rail line. hh Improvement of Coleraine Drive to 4 lanes is planned; hh Boundary Area Transportation Study is underway; and 2.3.4.3 George Brown College hh Bolton Arterial Road, Caledon Transportation Needs studies are is underway. George Brown College was consulted via conference call to obtain their views on the proposal, specifically the potential GO station west of Spadina Road and south of George Brown College (near the TTC Dupont Subway Station). 2.3.3.6 York Region Transit The objectives of the meeting held with York Region Transit (YRT) were to introduce the project scope, explain the potential station It was noted that a parking lot located behind the college was included in the parcel of land identified for potential station facility usage. locations and connectivity to the transit / road network and discuss the YRT’s future transit plans and potential integration with GO The representative of George Brown College indicated that the parking lot is the property of Ontario Hydro which is accessed by George Transit service. Brown College under a 40 year term lease arrangement. Approximately 600 parking spaces are available and the entire lot is effectively used by students from late August until the end of April. This land is currently designated as Park Land and a committee of ORC and YRT explained that they are currently embarking on a five-Year Service plan update. It was explained that the next 5 years is seen as the City of Toronto representatives is in the process of changing the land designation to include Parking Lot use. It was also indicated that era of rapid transit expansion and includes the following projects: approximately 3,500 students from George Brown campuses currently use existing GO Transit services. George Brown College strongly supports the establishment of a GO rail station at this location. hh TTC Subway expansion to Vaughan City Centre; hh VIVA Next service expansion; hh 407 Transitway; and hh ZÜM (with ).

2.3.4 Consultation with Other Agencies 2.3.4.1 Toronto and Region Conservation Authority A meeting held with the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) discussed potential environmental concerns within their jurisdiction relating to the implementation of a GO train service to Bolton. Discussion included the potential station locations and associated environmental issues identified by TRCA. The environmental concerns raised by TRCA included:

hh impacts to natural features, natural heritage areas, wood lots and watercourses; hh the propulsion systems used in the locomotives (i.e. diesel or alternative energy); hh the need to upgrade culverts to prevent flooding; and hh impacts due to the expansion of bridges.

Bolton Commuter Rail Feasibility Report | 5 MMM Group Limited | December 2010 xisting ransit lternatives and djacent ighway initiated new studies to support the vision identified in the Growth Plan. The new studies and proposed improvements of the provincial 3.0 E T A A H highway network are outlined in the following subsections. and Rail Corridors This section of the report documents existing and future highway corridors adjacent to the study area. 3.1 Existing Transit Alternatives This section examines existing transit alternatives that provide transportation services within the territorial boundary of this study. 3.2.1 Highway 427 Highway 427 is a north-south provincial highway which currently terminates just north of Highway 7. The “427 Transportation Corridor 3.1.1 GO Train-Meet Service Environmental Assessment Study” an initiative to extend Highway 427 northward to Major Mackenzie Drive was completed in the fall of 2009. The construction of new interchanges at Langstaff Road, Rutherford Road and Major Mackenzie Drive are identified in the project GO Transit currently operates a GO train-meet bus service between Bolton and Toronto that provides connections to the Malton Station scope of work. The route alignment is shown in Figure 3.1. of the Georgetown GO corridor and services the communities of Bolton, Vaughan and Woodbridge (route 38). A second GO bus route (Route 38A) operates between Bolton and Toronto, providing service to Bolton, Nobleton, Kleinburg, and Woodbridge with intermediate stops within Toronto at , and Yorkdale. This bus service connects with the Georgetown Rail Corridor at the Etobicoke North rail station. Service frequency on these bus routes is however limited. Route 38 operates six scheduled southward and seven northward bus trips on weekdays while Route 38A operates two scheduled southward and northward bus trips on weekdays. There is no scheduled bus service between Bolton and Toronto on weekends or statutory holidays. Rider use reflects the limited service. In October 2009, monthly ridership included 3,219 passengers with a weekday average ridership of 153 and an estimated annual ridership of 34,000 bus riders.

3.1.3 VIA Rail VIA Rail does not currently provide passenger rail service in the Bolton vicinity. VIA currently operates three trains per week from Toronto to Sudbury and points further north/west. Toronto departures operate west from Union Station to the GO Weston and Newmarket Subdivisions and extend eastward onto the CN York Subdivision from Snider to Doncaster. The route then veers northward onto the CN Bala Subdivision. The southward movement also operates three weekly trains via the CN Bala Subdivision to Union Station.

VIA currently operates its Toronto service over the GO/CN Weston and CN Halton Subdivisions to Georgetown. The service operates over the GEXR Subdivision between Georgetown and London and the CN Strathroy Subdivision between London and Sarnia. The service schedule consists of three daily bi-directional trains operating between Toronto Union and Sarnia.

The enhancement of VIA Rail services is outside the mandate of the MoveOntario 2020 project scope as VIA is a federal agency. Additionally, investigation of a possible high speed rail line impacting the GTHA has focused on an east/west orientation between Figure 3.1: Highway 427 Extension Quebec City and Windsor. 3.2.2 GTA West Corridor 3.1.4 Bus Coach Service The GTA West Corridor, identified in the Growth Plan as a “Future Transportation Corridor”, represents a strategic road link between the Urban Growth Centres in the west of the GTA and Downtown Guelph, north of Highway 407. Greyhound Canada Transportation Corporation operates one bus in each direction between Toronto and Bolton daily. The route is described as a "bus stop service" with limited services provided. With one daily departure from Toronto at 09:10 and an arrival at 15:00, The Environmental Assessment (EA) for the GTA West corridor is underway. The terms of reference was approved in March of 2008. this service is not intended to provide an alternative transportation option to Bolton area commuters. Currently, MTO is identifying deficiencies in the road network and routing alternatives to ease congestion. If it is determined that new roads are needed, MTO will examine possible corridor connections. The preliminary study area is shown in Figure 3.2. 3.2 Expansion of the Provincial Highway Network In an effort to improve the existing capacity and safety of the provincial highway system, and to meet future demand, the Ministry of Transportation (MTO) is taking initiatives to identify new studies and projects. As part of the policies in the Growth Plan, MTO has

Bolton Commuter Rail Feasibility Report | 6 MMM Group Limited | December 2010 3.2.5 Highway 50 Highway 50 is located to the west of Highway 400 and is the regional boundary between York and Peel Regions. Highway 50 currently has a four lane cross section. The York Region Master Transportation Plan indicates future plans to expand the cross section to six lanes.

Highway 50 (Queen Street) passes through the central Bolton area and crosses over the Bolton rail corridor north of Healey Road. Ellwood Drive West directly connects Highway 50 to Coleraine Drive in close proximity to one of the proposed station sites in Bolton.

3.2.6 Summary of Highway Initiatives Numerous highway projects will add transportation capacity within the vicinity of this study; however these projects will not add significantly to the transit choices available to residents, visitors or employees for inter-municipal or inter-regional trips. The development of a rail commuter service improves the transit services currently available.

3.3 Adjacent Rail Corridors Figure 3.2: GTA West Corridor Study Area This section of the report discusses parallel rail corridors adjacent to the study area. Figure 3.4 indicates the rail corridors adjacent to 3.2.3 Highway 400 the Bolton corridor.

Highway 400 is a north-south, multi-lane highway, connecting Barrie in the north with Toronto. In anticipation of future development and consequential traffic demand, Highway Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) Lanes have been included in the Regional Transportation Master Orangeville Plan. Bolton Richmond Hill Corridor

Kleinburg 3.2.4 HOV Lane Network Plan- 400 Series Vaughan (Elder Mills) Stouffville Corridor OBRY Corridor Ontario’s High Occupancy Vehicle Lane Network Plan for the 400-Series Highways in the Greater Golden Horseshoe has been prepared Woodbridge Barrie Corridor by the Ministry of Transportation. The plans are expected to be implemented in three stages. The proposed HOV lanes are shown in Emery Figure 3.3. Weston Georgetown Corridor Mount Dennis Lakeshore East Corridor Union The proposed HOV lanes on Highway 427 identified in the extension of Highway 427 northward to Major Mackenzie Drive will be in Bloor close proximity to the Bolton rail corridor. Milton Corridor

Lakeshore West Corridor

Figure 3.4: Rail Corridors Adjacent to Bolton Corridor (shown in red)

3.3.1 GO Barrie Corridor GO Transit presently operates a rail commuter service on its Barrie corridor located approximately 5-10 kilometers to the east that essentially parallels the alignment of the CP Mactier Subdivision.

The Barrie corridor has also been identified for expansion in the MoveOntario 2020 plan and Metrolinx’s 15 year Regional Transportation Plan and includes provisions for all-day, two-way service between Toronto and Bradford and enhanced peak service to Barrie.

Figure 3.3: HOV Lane Additions

Bolton Commuter Rail Feasibility Report | 7 MMM Group Limited | December 2010 The Barrie corridor trains operate over the rights-of-way of GO Transit: The service provides six peak and three off peak trains in both the AM and PM periods. It provides service to eleven stations including Malton and Etobicoke North where the Bolton corridor train-bus service connects with the Georgetown corridor rail service. After April hh GO Newmarket Subdivision mile 2.4 to mile 62.84 2010, the Georgetown Corridor will likely undergo reductions to its off-peak service, but this is to be determined at the time of writing. hh GO Weston Subdivision mile 2.5 to mile 1.1 hh GO Union Station Rail Corridor Future expansion plans include the extension of the rail service to the cities of Guelph and Kitchener. The GO2020 plan provides for train service for Brampton every fifteen minutes during peak periods, with selected trips serving Georgetown and Guelph with counter-peak Bolton corridor Service Option 4 would utilize a portion of the Barrie corridor right of way between Snider mile 13.2 and Parkdale mile service every thirty minutes. All day train service twice hourly to Mount Pleasant, with bus service to Georgetown and Guelph. 2.4. The Barrie corridor trains currently share the Weston Subdivision with Georgetown corridor and VIA Rail trains between Parkdale and Bathurst Street. Electrification of the line is also a potential future consideration.

Current service provisions on the Barrie corridor include the operation of 4 a.m. and 4 p.m. peak service trains. These trains provide service to two stations located in the City of Vaughan at Major Mackenzie Drive and Rutherford Road. Additionally, station stops are 3.3.5 Orangeville Brampton Railway provided at Barrie, Bradford, East Gwillimbury, Newmarket, Aurora, King City, York University and Toronto Union Station. The expanded The Orangeville Brampton Railway (OBRY) was purchased from CP by the Orangeville Railway Development Corporation, a business Barrie corridor would also provide service to a new station in the Downsview Airport vicinity. entity incorporated by the City of Orangeville. The OBRY extends 55 kilometres from Streetsville Jct (junction with CP ) to Orangeville over the former CP Owen Sound Subdivision. It is operated under contract by Cando Contracting Limited and offers freight 3.3.2 GO Richmond Hill Corridor service to local rail customers two days per week and seasonal passenger train excursions. The GO Transit Richmond Hill Corridor operates over a portion of the CN Bala Subdivision extending from with the USRC The basic line characteristics includes a single track configuration, non-signalled territory designated as cautionary limits, with numerous at Don mile 2.0 to Richmond Hill mile 21.0. The Richmond Hill corridor runs essentially parallel to the CP Mactier, GO Barrie and GO at grade road crossings (some equipped with passive protection), significant curvature and grades and a maximum speed of 25 MPH Stouffville corridors and is situated to the east of the GO Barrie corridor. due largely to the condition of the track. Additionally, the line crosses the CN Halton Subdivision at grade in the vicinity of Brampton.

This corridor currently operates four a.m. and five p.m. peak period trains that provide service to Richmond Hill, Langstaff, Old Cummer, This rail corridor is not identified for potential transit expansion in the Metrolinx Regional Transportation Plan. Oriole and Toronto Union Station. The GO2020 Plan provides for a service expansion including train service for Richmond Hill every 15-20 minutes during peak periods, 4.0 rail Corridor Study – Existing Conditions with selected trips to Aurora Road, counter-peak service every 30 minutes and all day twice hourly service to Richmond Hill. 4.1 Existing Infrastructure Conditions 3.3.3 GO Stouffville Corridor This feasibility study analyzes four routing options involving the following railway rights-of-ways: The GO Stouffville corridor is aligned in a north/south orientation parallel to and just east of the Richmond Hill corridor. The service hh CP Mactier Subdivision mile 0.0 to mile 23.9 operates over the GO Uxbridge Subdivision from the junction point with the CN Kingston Subdivision at Scarborough (mile 61.0) to hh CP North Toronto Subdivision mile 2.2 to 5.4 Stouffville (mile 40.6). hh GO Weston Subdivision mile 6.45 to 1.1 The service provides five a.m. and five p.m. peak period trains with service provided to ten stations at Lincolnville, Stouffville, Mount Joy, hh USRC Bathurst Street to Union Station Markham, Centennial, Unionville, Milliken, Agincourt, Kennedy and Toronto Union Station. hh CN Oakville Subdivision Bathurst Street to Mimico East (mile 6.2) The GO2020 Plan provides for a service expansion including train service for Mount Joy every 15 minutes during peak periods, counter- hh CN Halton Subdivision mile 4.16 to mile 0.0 peak service every 30 minutes, selected trips serving Lincolnville and Uxbridge as demand warrants and all day twice hourly service to hh CN York Subdivision mile 24.3 to mile 23.8 Mount Joy with bus connection provided to Stouffville and Uxbridge. hh GO Newmarket Subdivision mile 12.93 to mile 2.4

Service schedules were developed for each routing option, however, such schedules excluded details pertaining to the movement of non- 3.3.4 GO Georgetown Corridor revenue equipment to Willowbrook yard. Analyses of the existing infrastructure conditions and available track capacity were performed The GO Georgetown corridor extends in an east/west orientation from Union Station over the GO Weston Subdivision to Halwest where on only the Mactier, North Toronto, Halton and York Subdivisions. it connects to the CN Halton Subdivision. The Georgetown corridor trains then operate westward on the busy freight corridor of the CN Halton Subdivision to Georgetown.

Bolton Commuter Rail Feasibility Report | 8 MMM Group Limited | December 2010 4.2 CP Mactier Subdivision within the double track segment between Emery and Lawrence Avenue could also be utilized to expand track capacity for GO trains under the Additional Service/Counter-flow plan. The Mactier Subdivision is a critical component of CP’s Eastern network and provides a primary connection to the Western Canada corridor. There are a total of 69 culverts along the Bolton railway corridor from Mile 9 to Mile 24. The addition of one main track will require culverts to be extended by approximately 5 m, in order to accommodate the new track bed. The Mactier Subdivision originates at a single junction switch to CP’s North Toronto Subdivision (east/west line of the Montreal/Chicago corridor) near Osler Street in the City of Toronto and extends 126.9 miles to the Town of Mactier (in Northern Ontario). A more accurate cost estimate would be derived during the detailed design phase. The preliminary total costs for base case structures and culvert enhancements is $ $71.8M for Options 1 & 2B and $ $81.3M for Option 3. An incremental cost of $70.7M for the Additional There is currently no passenger service operating on the Mactier Subdivision. Freight traffic operating over the corridor includes Service/Counter-flow plan for Service Options 1 and 2B and $70.7M for service Option 3 are estimated. These costs include engineering intermodal, automotive and mixed commodities including dangerous and special dangerous goods. fees, contingency and flagman charges. The track configuration consists of a single main track with one small section of double track (within the study area). The subdivision The following subsections describe the existing conditions on the Mactier Subdivision as shown in Figure 4.1. The corridor evaluation is includes nine sidings of varying lengths that facilitate meets between opposing trains with a minimum capacity of 6,250 feet. All other divided into four segments as follows: sidings exceed 7,000 feet in length. Distances between sidings range from between 6.8 miles to 17.3 miles. 1. Osler to Emery - existing double track segment and the south end of the Mactier Subdivision The method of control includes a Centralized Traffic Control (CTC) signal system installed between Osler and Bolton that provides remote 2. Emery to Elder South - existing single track segment requiring expansion of six structures to accommodate track control of signal and switch devices by CP’s Rail Traffic Controllers (RTC) located in Montreal Quebec. Between Bolton and Mactier, train expansions. movements are controlled by a manual system called Occupancy Control System (OCS) and movements are governed by an Automatic 3. Elder South to Humber Station Road - existing single track segment most impacted by freight train staging at Vaughan Block Signal System (ABS) that is actuated by the occupancy of the track. The RTC issues instructions and authorities verbally to train Intermodal Terminal. crews via the railway radio communication system in order to control the bi-directional movement of railway trains and equipment within 4. Humber Station Road to Palgrave - single track segment outside the limits where GO trains will operate. Includes signal the OCS controlled portion of the subdivision. system upgrades. The siding switches between Palgrave (first siding North of Bolton) and Mactier are auto-normal type switches that restore to normal position after the train movement passes through the switch device. As all freight movements operating on the Mactier Subdivision are equipped with a head-end crew only, the auto-normal switches provide for the re-alignment of the switch devices in lieu of manual alignment by a tail end crew member. This switch type facilitates the expeditious movement of freight traffic and requires the manual handling of a switch only when entering or exiting a siding or when switch or signal malfunctions occur.

There are 24 major existing structures along the study section of the CP Mactier Subdivision that include grade-seperated and water- crossing structures.

The major structures can be categorized into three groups:

hh Subway rail over road structure hh Overhead road over rail structure hh Bridge rail over waterway structure

Currently, a total of 17 subways, five overheads, and two bridges connect the corridor segments from Osler to Bolton.

The requirements to widen the existing structures is discussed in detail in the following subsections. The infrastructure requirements presented by CP indicated that new track alignments to support GO services were to be constructed on the east side of the right-of-way. CP indicated that future capacity for freight services must be preserved. The infrastructure assessment indicated that several existing structures have available capacity on the west side of the existing track. At these locations, the structures were expanded on the east side. CP indicated however, that under the base case plan, available capacity on the structures at and Langstaff Road could be utilized to permit capacity expansion for the GO train service. In addition, available capacity on the west side of the structures

Bolton Commuter Rail Feasibility Report | 9 MMM Group Limited | December 2010 between the yard facilities on the Galt and Mactier Subdivisions without impeding the east/west main traffic flow at West Toronto and the CP North Toronto Subdivision. The connecting track is also used to deliver traffic interchanged between CN and CP at Weston. The connecting track currently crosses both main tracks of the GO Weston Subdivision at-grade, however, these tracks are to be included as a design component of the grade separation of the GO Weston and the CP Galt and North Toronto Subdivisions at West Toronto. Maximum speed on the connecting track is restricted to 10 MPH..

A connecting switch located at mile 0.55 on the Mactier Subdivision, provides access to the CN connecting track at mile 5.48 Weston Subdivision. The connecting track is located between the two rights-of-way and currently has capacity to hold approximately 260 feet of equipment.

At Eglinton Avenue (mile 2.03), a switch to the former east main track has been removed however the rail and track alignment remains in place. The track has been re-designated as "other than main track" and has a maximum operating speed of 15 MPH. A set of manual crossovers exist at mile 2.40 that provide access to storage tracks on the east side of the right of way north of Ray Avenue at the former Kodak facility. These storage tracks provide a possible midday equipment facility site to support service Option 2B. Local facilities extending from the former east main track are accessed from a manual crossover connection located near Ray Avenue, while facilities on the west side of the right of way are access from the main track.

Just south of the crossover switch at Lawrence Avenue, there is a manual switch at mile 3.49 on the CP Mactier Subdivision that connects to the GO Weston Subdivision at mile 8.1. This switch is used for emergency detour routing between the railways and permits southward facing point movements from the CP Mactier to the GO Weston Subdivision and is located south of the current Weston GO Station. This connection was evaluated for possible use in routing Option 1 and was subsequently deemed infeasible for future consideration due to the proposed future elevation differential between the GO and CP rights-of-way.

Two main tracks extend from Lawrence Avenue (mile 3.51) to Emery (mile 9.2). A powered crossover connection is located at the start of two tracks at Lawrence and movements through the switches are restricted to 25 MPH.

Between Lawrence and Sheppard (mile 6.52) and between Sheppard and Emery (mile 9.2, end of two tracks) industrial spur tracks extend from both the westward and eastward tracks. Weekday rail service for these industries is provided by local assignments that originate at Lambton yard. Immediately south of the switch at Emery, the West Service track (storage capacity of 2830 feet) extends from the west main track.

4.2.1.2 Speed Curve and Grade Conditions Speeds within the Osler to Emery segment, range between 20 and 45 MPH. These speed restrictions are due principally to curvature. Table 4.1 below identifies the speed restrictions within this segment. Freight trains carrying dangerous commodities are further restricted within this segment. Table 4.2 provides a list of curve locations within this corridor segment. Figure 4.1

4.2.1 Osler to Emery (mileage 0.0 – 9.2) Table 4.1: Maximum Permissible Speeds Between Osler and Emery. Mile Permissible Speed MPH Expedited Freight Permissible Speed MPH Non- Expedited Freight 4.2.1.1 Track Conditions and Configuration 0.0 – 0.5 20 20 0.5 – 4.9 35 35 Between Osler and Emery, a single main track segment extends from the connecting switch to the North Toronto Subdivision at 4.9 – 9.0 45 45 Olser mile 0.0 to mile 3.49, (just south of Lawrence Avenue). Within this segment, a track switch exists at mile 0.23 that provides a 9.0 – 10.2 40 40 connection to CP’s Lambton Yard facility at Scarlett Road on the CP Galt Subdivision. This connecting track permits CP traffic to move

Bolton Commuter Rail Feasibility Report | 10 MMM Group Limited | December 2010 Table 4.2: Degree of Curve Osler to Emery Mactier Subdivision Capacity analysis and recommended track enhancements for this track segment can be found in Section 8.0 of this report. From MP To MP Degree of Curve 0.07 0.18 0.90 New passenger station facilities between Osler and Emery have been proposed in the vicinity of Eglinton Avenue and Finch Avenue. 0.20 0.34 1.60 An existing station (Weston) on the parallel GO Weston Subdivision that provides service to the Georgetown corridor is situated south 0.51 0.63 1.00 of John Street. Site specifications for station facilities and connectivity to existing and future transit services are further discussed in 0.86 1.51 0.58 Section 9.0. 3.85 3.91 1.00 4.14 4.39 1.00 4.41 4.47 4.00 4.2.1.3 Rail/Road At-Grade Crossings 4.47 4.52 4.27 There are seven at-grade crossings within this segment; one private and two public crossings located within the single track section 4.52 4.56 4.83 and four public crossings at grade within the two track section. Table 4.4 below details the at-grade crossing characteristics located 4.56 4.84 3.83 between Osler and Emery. Each crossing was evaluated to determine if traffic conditions would warrant the construction of a grade 5.34 5.50 4.10 separation. Individual assessments of the crossings can be found in Section 10.4. 7.33 7.46 3.50 7.88 7.99 4.00 Table 4.4: At-grade Crossings Osler to Emery The terrain between Osler and Emery is mildly graded with a maximum grade of 2.06% between mile 5.88 and 5.97. Table 4.3 below Road Name Mile Protective Devices Whistle Signal Prohibited (Y/N) lists the applicable grade % between Osler and Emery by mileage. Private Crossing 0.1 Lights, bells, gates Y Old Weston Road 0.23 Lights, bells, gates Y Table 4.3: % Grade Osler to Emery Mactier Subdivision Denison Road East 3.17 Lights, bells, gates Y From MP To MP % Grade From MP To MP % Grade John Street 3.84 Lights, bells, gates Y 0.00 0.24 0.50 5.09 5.26 1.80 King Street 3.95 Lights, bells, gates Y 0.24 0.55 0.09 5.26 5.43 0.52 Church Street 4.15 Lights, bells, gates Y 0.55 0.90 -0.48 5.50 5.67 -0.18 Oak Street 4.64 Lights, bells, gates Y 0.90 1.16 0.23 5.75 5.88 1.44 1.16 1.65 -0.72 5.88 5.97 2.06 1.65 2.18 1.00 6.11 6.24 0.49 2.18 2.35 0.01 6.24 6.39 0.83 4.2.1.4 Structures Conditions 2.35 2.45 0.20 6.39 6.50 -0.24 Within the single track segment there are four subways, one overhead and one bridge structure while there are six subway and two 2.45 2.86 0.06 6.50 6.58 -0.29 overhead structures within the double track segment. 2.86 2.94 0.19 6.58 6.88 0.55 2.94 3.32 0.07 7.04 7.15 0.72 3.32 3.50 0.52 7.15 7.24 0.65 3.50 3.65 0.66 7.24 7.39 0.75 3.65 3.82 0.39 7.39 7.79 0.78 3.82 3.88 0.24 7.79 7.88 -0.33 3.88 3.98 0.57 7.88 7.94 -0.78 3.98 4.16 0.68 7.94 8.05 -0.50 4.16 4.24 0.58 8.05 8.17 0.33 4.24 4.45 0.33 8.17 8.32 0.02 4.45 4.54 -0.28 8.32 8.39 0.36 4.66 4.73 0.46 8.39 8.49 0.19 4.73 4.81 0.41 8.49 8.64 0.26 4.81 4.88 1.26 8.64 8.69 0.02 4.88 4.95 1.40 8.88 9.22 -0.01

Bolton Commuter Rail Feasibility Report | 11 MMM Group Limited | December 2010 St Clair Avenue West Subway, Mile 0.50 Black Creek Drive Subway, Mile 1.66 This structure is a two-span ballast deck subway built in 1931. The 4-span ballast deck subway carries one CP track over Black The girders appear to be reinforced concrete, and each span Creek Drive on a high skew. The DPG girders are continuous with is approximately 35’. The structure is very wide, and currently constant depth, and support the concrete deck. The substructure carries one CP track on the east side, and two GO tracks on the has provision for one additional track on the west side. The middle of the deck. There is available space for an additional superstructure construction cost for one additional track is track between the existing CP and GO tracks. As part of the estimated to be $2.8M. West Toronto Diamond and the Georgetown Corridor expansion projects, the existing structure is to be expanded to provide four GO tracks and accommodate two CP tracks.

Eglinton Avenue West Subway, Mile 2.03 Rogers Road Overhead, Mile 1.34 (No photo) The 2-span ballast deck subway structure carries one existing CP track over Eglinton Avenue West. This structure was built in This 3-span overhead structure carries Rogers Road over one 1966 and is on a 42° skew. Each span is 67.5’, and steel girders existing CP track under the west span, and one GO track at the support the concrete deck. There is provision for one additional east side. The structure was built in 1954 and provides sufficient track on the west side. Due to property limitations, the track space to support additional tracks. Ownership of the right-of-way birth on the west side would be utilized to support the base case extending beneath the structure must be further investigated. requirements.

Black Creek Bridge, Mile 1.57 Ray Avenue Subway, Mile 2.40 This 5-span DPG open deck bridge carries one CP track over The 2-span ballast deck subway structure carries one existing CP Black Creek. The total length of the bridge is 271’, and the main track over Ray Avenue. This structure was built in 1938, and is span is 110’ with 11’ deep girders. There is no provision for made of reinforced pre-cast concrete girders with a total span of additional tracks. High Water Measurement on October 1954 57.5’. There is provision for one additional track on the west side. was 107.15 m, which indicates that the creek’s width could extend from the 2nd to 4th spans. The estimated cost for bridge construction to carry one additional track is $6.7M.

Bolton Commuter Rail Feasibility Report | 12 MMM Group Limited | December 2010 Jane Street Overhead, Mile 2.92 Wilson Avenue Subway, Mile 5.21 The multi span overhead structure carries Jane Street over two The 2-span ballast deck subway structure carries two existing existing CP tracks at the east side and one GO track at the west CP tracks over Wilson Avenue. From the existing drawings, side. There are three main spans, and the main piers are parallel the structure appears to be built in 1960s. Each span is 59’ on to the tracks on a 44° skew. Pier protections are constructed for 38° skew. The deck has provision for one additional track on all the main piers. The steel girders support the concrete deck. the west side. Use of this alignment must be further discussed There is sufficient space for one additional track under the east with CP. Costs associated with expanding the structure to span, and two additional tracks under the middle main span. accommodate one additional track to the east is estimated at Ownership of the right of way extending beneath the structure $3.45M. must be further investigated.

Lawrence Avenue West Subway, Mile 3.63 West Subway, Mile 6.52 The 2-span ballast deck subway structure carries one existing This 3-span ballast deck subway structure carries two existing CP track over Lawrence Avenue West. The reinforced concrete CP tracks over Sheppard Avenue West. The structure was built structure was built in 1961 on a 38° skew, and each span is 40’. in 1969 on 7° skew, and the spans are 48’-81.5’-48’. There are There is provision for one additional track on the west side. provisions for one additional track on the west side. Use of this alignment must be further discussed with CP. Costs associated with expanding the structure to accommodate one additional track to the east is estimated at $3.45M.

Highway 401 Overhead, Mile 5.11 Finch Avenue West Subway, Mile 7.81 The 1-span rigid-frame overhead carries Highway 401 over two The 2-span ballast deck subway structure carries two existing existing CP tracks. The structure was built in 1966 on a 29° CP tracks over Finch Avenue West. The structure was built in skew with 57’ span. Insufficient space under the structure exists 1969 on 18° skew, and each span is 60’ along the bridge. The to provide three tracks with standard track centre clearance. concrete deck is supported on steel girders. There is provision Widening of the structure to accommodate a third track for the for one additional track on the west. Costs associated with Additional Service/Counter-flow plan is estimated at $27M. expanding the structure to accommodate one additional track to If three tracks are placed under this structure with a spacing the east is estimated at $3.45M. of 14' between tracks, the distance from centre line of the exterior track to the face of the abutment on each side would be 14.5', which is less than the required 18'. The reconstruction of this structure with the proper span for three tracks would have a huge impact on the road traffic of Highway 401. If CP accepts reduced side clearances for the 3-track scenario, the reconstruction will cost approximately $20.5M.

Bolton Commuter Rail Feasibility Report | 13 MMM Group Limited | December 2010 Weston Road Subway, Mile 8.04 Table 4.6: Summary of Structures Between Osler and Emery Mactier Subdivision

The 2-span ballast deck subway structure carries two existing CP Provision No. of tracks over Weston Road. The structure was built in 1971 on 42° For Required Additional Superstructure Upgrade Structure Remarks skew, and each span is 57’ along the bridge. The superstructure Additional Tracks Tracks Type Costs Track Required

is made of pre-tensioned concrete box girders. The deck has Subway Overhead Bridge Mile Existing Tracks

capacity for three tracks, however, realignment of the existing St. Clair √ 0.50 1 1 W. 2* 1* RC Girders Attributed to 2-span, built 1931, ballast deck tracks will be required to accommodate one additional track. Avenue West Georgetown Shared with 2 CN tracks Use of this alignment must be further discussed with CP. Costs Corridor associated with the structure expansion to accommodate one Rogers Road √ 1.34 1 1 W. 2* 1* Concrete slab on 3-span, built 1954 shared with 1 CN Steel Girder track additional track is estimated at $3.45M. Black Creek √ 1.57 1 No 2* 1* DPG $6.7M 5-span, open deck main span 110’ Black Creek √ 1.66 1 No 2* 1* DPG Continuous $2.8M 4-span, ballast deck, provision on Drive Girders substructure at W., Eglinton √ 2.03 1 1 W. 2 1 DPG 2-span 67.5’ each, built 1966 ballast Ormont Drive Subway, Mile 8.88 Avenue West deck , 42o skew Ray Avenue √ 2.40 1 1 W. 2 1 RC Pre-Cast 2-span 28’ each, built 1938 ballast This 1-span post-tension concrete subway structure has a Girders deck ballast deck and carries three existing CP tracks over Ormont Jane Street √ 2.92 2 1 W. 2 - Steel Girders Multiple-span, built 1963, shared Drive. A spur line terminates north/east of the structure. There with CN tracks, space available for add tracks is provision for one additional track on the west. Use of this Lawrence √ 3.63 1 1 W. 1 - PT 2-span 40’ each, built 1961 ballast alignment must be further discussed with CP. Costs associated Avenue West deck, 38o skew ith expanding the structure to accommodate one additional track Highway 401 √ 5.11 2 No 2 1 Concrete Rigid $27M 1-span 57’, built 1966 29o skew to the east is estimated at $3.45M. Frame Wilson √ 5.21 2 1 W. 2 - PT $3.45M 2-span 59’ each, built 1960s ballast Avenue deck, 30o skew Sheppard √ 6.52 2 1 W. 2 - PT $3.45M 3-span, built 1969 ballast deck Avenue Finch Avenue √ 7.81 2 1 W. 2 - Steel Beam $3.45M 2-span, built 1969 ballast deck, 18o West skew Table 4.6 provides a description of the structures characteristics on the Mactier Subdivision between Osler and Emery. Weston Road √ 8.04 2 1 2 - Pre-Tensioned $3.45M 2-span, built 1971, ballast deck, 48o box girders skew realignment for additional track Costs associated with the construction of enhancements to existing structures between Osler and Emery to support Service Options of Ormont Drive √ 8.88 3 1 W. 3 - PT $3.45M 1-span ballast deck Base Case and Additional Service/Counter-flow plans All Day are $9.5M (applies to service option 3 only) and $43.9M respectively. *additional track required for Summerhill Service Option.

Notes Legends hh Subway rail over road structure hh S. at South side hh RC Reinforced Concrete hh Overhead road over rail structure hh N. at North side hh DPG Deck Plate Girder hh Bridge rail over waterway structure hh W West hh HDPG Half Deck Plate Girder hh PT Post-Tensioned hh DT Deck Truss hh Con. Concrete

Bolton Commuter Rail Feasibility Report | 14 MMM Group Limited | December 2010 4.2.1.5 Culvert Conditions Maximum degree of curve between mile Emery and Elder is 4.83 degrees (mile 9.91 and 10.05). Due to the degree of curve, maximum permissible speeds at this location is limited to 40 MPH. Degree of curve between Emery and Elder is provided in Table 4.8 below. There are no known culvert extensions required in this track segment. Table 4.8 Degree of Curve Mile 9.2 to mile 14.13 Mactier Subdivision 4.2.2 Emery to Elder South (mile 14.13) From om MP To MP Degree of Curve 9.53 9.69 2.17 4.2.2.1 Track Conditions and Configuration 9.91 10.05 4.83 10.63 10.90 1.00 The track extending between Emery and Elder South can be described as a single track segment consisting of four at grade road 11.64 11.85 1.00 crossings and five structures. 12.67 12.76 1.00 Within this segment there are limited local switching requirements however a private siding extends from the west side of the right of 12.76 12.85 0.97 way at mile 12.5 that provides access to the Woodbridge Foam facility. The Woodbridge Foam facility is served by the local assignments 12.85 12.97 1.02 originating at Lambton yard and is accessed via a southward facing switch at the north end of the facility. 12.97 13.08 0.98 13.08 13.20 1.00 The switch located at the end of two tracks at Emery is a #20 equilateral switch. This switch is designed to permit southward trains to 13.68 13.89 4.02 diverge to the east and west tracks at equal speeds. Track grades on the Mactier Subdivision between Emery and Elder are considered relatively flat with a maximum grade of 1.05% The south switch to the siding at Elder is located at mile 14.13. The siding extends 6,250 feet and is situated on the west side of the between mile 10.58 and mile 10.69. Table 4.9 below indicates the existing grades % on the Mactier Subdivision between mile 9.2 and right of way. It is through the siding at Elder that trains access the Vaughan Intermodal Terminal. mile 15.4.

4.2.2.2 Speed Curve and Grade Conditions Table 4.9: % Grade Mile 9.2 to mile 15.47 Mactier Subdivision Maximum permissible speeds between Emery and Elder range between 30 and 50 MPH with the most severe restriction imposed From MP To MP % Grade From MP To MP % Grade between mile 10.8 and mile 10.9. 9.22 9.35 -0.34 12.07 12.28 0.70 9.39 9.50 0.25 12.28 12.44 0.62 Table 4.7 below provides the maximum permissible main track speeds between mile 9.2 and mile 15.47. Table 4.2 above indicates 9.50 9.69 0.78 12.44 12.49 0.60 additional speed restrictions for trains handling dangerous commodities. 9.69 9.88 -0.46 12.49 12.64 0.81 Table 4.7: Maximum Permissible Main Track Speeds 9.88 10.02 -0.80 12.64 12.72 0.84 10.02 10.18 -1.16 12.72 13.02 0.60 Permissible Speed MPH Non- Expedited Mile Permissible Speed MPH Expedited Freight 10.18 10.39 0.10 13.02 13.20 0.78 Freight 10.39 10.49 0.31 13.20 13.44 0.69 9.0 – 10.2 40 40 10.49 10.58 0.52 13.44 13.51 0.80 10.2 – 10.8 45 45 10.58 10.69 1.05 13.51 13.68 0.64 10.8 – 10.9 30 30 10.69 10.77 0.80 13.68 13.89 0.67 10.9 to 14.13 50 45 10.77 10.88 0.72 14.12 14.48 0.50 10.88 11.24 0.82 11.24 11.39 0.76 11.39 11.43 0.54 11.43 11.54 0.74 11.54 11.79 0.68 11.79 11.88 0.46 11.88 12.07 0.47

Bolton Commuter Rail Feasibility Report | 15 MMM Group Limited | December 2010 4.2.2.3 Rail/Road At-Grade Crossings There are four at-grade crossings between Emery and Elder including one private crossing that provides access to the Woodbridge Foam CNR Overpass, Mile 10.10 facility located at mile 11.90. The 3-span overhead structure carries one CN track over one existing CP track. The main span is TPG and side spans are An at-grade crossing of Islington Avenue is located at mile 9.95. The crossing is located on a 4.83 degree spiral curve. Due to curvature, constructed of reinforced concrete. The spans are 39’-72’-39’. a speed restriction of 40 MPH is imposed between mile 9.0 and 10.2. At grade crossings also exist at Kipling Avenue mile 11.77 and at The structure is on a high skew with the CP track which is Rutherford Road mile 14.13 (situated immediately south of the south siding switch at Elder). situated on a curve in the vicinity of the structure. Realignment of Further details regarding the analysis of at grade crossings are provided in Section 10.4 of this report. Table 4.10 below provides the the existing CP track will allow the placement of one additional location of at Grade Crossings between Emery and Elder South. track.

Table 4.10: At Grade Crossings Mactier Subdivision between Emery and Elder South Road Name Mile Protective Devices Whistle Signal Prohibited (Y/N) Islington Avenue 9.95 Lights, bells, gates Y Kipling Avenue 11.77 Lights, bells, gates Y Private Road Woodbridge Foam 11.90 Lights, bells Y Highway 407 Subway, Mile 10.30 Rutherford Road 14.13 Lights, bells, gates Y The 4-span ballasted deck subway structure carries one CP track over Highway 407. The concrete deck is supported on DPG 4.2.2.4 Structures Conditions girders. The structure was constructed in 1990s, and has no provision for additional tracks. The estimate cost to construct The existing structures between Emery and Elder include three subway structures over Steeles Avenue West at mile 9.54, Highway 407 another structure to carry one additional track is $8M. (mile 10.30) and Highway 7 (mile 11.15), an overhead structure at mileage 10.10 that carries the CN Halton Subdivision over the Mactier Subdivision, and a bridge at the located at mileage 10.48.

Steeles Avenue West Subway, Mile 9.54 The 2-span ballast deck subway structure carries one existing CP track over Steeles Avenue West. The structure was built in 1973 on 42° skew, and each span is 78’ along the bridge. The superstructure is made of post-tensioned circular vided concrete Humber River Bridge, Mile 10.48 deck. There is provision for one additional track on the west side. The 4-span open deck bridge structure carries one CP track over Use of this alignment must be further discussed with CP. the Humber River. The spans are 63’-110’-110’-63’. The two main spans are TPGs, and the two side spans are DPGs. The structure has no provision for additional tracks. The estimate cost to construct another structure to carry one additional track is $8M.

Bolton Commuter Rail Feasibility Report | 16 MMM Group Limited | December 2010 Langstaff Road Subway, Mile 12.50 Highway 7 Subway, Mile 11.15 The 1-span ballast deck subway structure carries one existing The 3-span open deck subway structure carries one existing CP CP track over Langstaff Road. The structure was built in 2000’s. track over Highway 7. The structure was built in 1938 with spans The two separated post-tensioned decks can accommodate one of 41.5’-62’-41.5’. All the spans are DPGs. There is no provision track each, and they are off-setted longitudinally to account for for additional tracks. The estimated construction cost for a new the skew of the structure. There is provision for one additional structure to carry one additional track is $4.75. track on the west side. Use of this alignment must be further discussed with CP.

Highway 27 Subway, Mile 13.70 Woodbridge Avenue Subway, Mile 11.49 The 2-span ballast deck subway structure carries one existing CP The 3-span open deck subway structure carries one existing CP track over Highway 27. The structure was built in 1939 on 20° track over Woodbridge Avenue. The structure was built in 1938, skew, and each span is 35’ along the bridge. The concrete deck and the spans are 29’-51.5’-29’. All the spans are DPGs. There is supported on DPGs. There is no provision for additional tracks. is no provision for additional tracks. The estimated construction The construction cost estimate for the structure enhancement to cost for the structure enhancement to carry one additional track carry one additional track is $3.45M. is $3.45M.

William Street Subway, Mile 11.56 The 1-span ballast deck subway structure carries one existing CP track over William Street. The structure was reconstructed in 1974, and the TPG span is 27’. There is no provision for additional tracks. The estimated construction cost for the structure enhancement to carry one additional track is $2.15M.

Bolton Commuter Rail Feasibility Report | 17 MMM Group Limited | December 2010 Table 4.11 below summarizes the characteristics of the existing structures located between Emery and Elder South.. Table 4.12 below indicates the list of culverts within this segment.

Table 4.12: Culvert Extension Locations Emery to Elder South Table 4.11: Summary of Existing Structures Emery to Elder South Mactier Subdivision No. of No. Mileage Size & Type Provision For Required Additional Superstructure Upgrade 1 9.60 1-30”TCPX30’-0” Structure Additional Remarks Tracks Tracks Type Costs Track 2 9.94 1-30”TCPX23’-0”

Subway Overhead Bridge Mile Existing Tracks Required 3 10.24 1-8’x4’SAX16’-6” Steeles Avenue 9.54 1 1 W. 2 1 Round Voided PT 2-span 78’ each, built 1973 √ West ballast deck, 42o skew 4 10.87 1-24”CPX42’-6” CNR Crossing 10.10 1 1 2 1 Main Span TPG 3-span 39’-72’-39’, skew 5 10.98 1-4’CAX113’ √ Side Spans RC and curvature 6 11.29 1-30”CMPX84’-0” realignment 10.30 1 No 1 Base Case 1 DPG 4-span, built 1990s ballast 7 11.50 1-30”CPX72’-0” required for √ 2 Additional deck 8 11.62 1-4’CAX135’4” additional track 9 11.87 1-20”CPX14’-0” Highway 407 1 No 1 1 DPG $8M 4-span, built 1990s ballast √ deck 10 12.11 1-30”CPX86’-0” Humber River √ 10.48 1 No 1 1 DPG $8M 4-span 63’-110’-110’-63’, 11 12.45 1-36”CPX52’-0” built 1971 open deck 12 12.60 1-24”CCPX57’-0” Highway 7 11.15 1 No 2 1 DPG $4.75M 3-span 41.5’-62’-41.5’, built 13 12.60A 1-30”CMPX57’-0” √ 1938 open deck, 14 12.80 1-2’x2’RCBX17’-0” Woodbridge 11.49 1 No 2 1 DPG $3.45M 3-span 29’-51.5’-29’, built √ 15 13.20 1-2’x2’RCBX24’-0” Avenue 1938 open deck, 16 13.26 1-3’x3’RCBX24’-0” William Street 11.56 1 No 2 1 TPG $2.15M 1-span 27’, reconstructed √ 1974 ballast deck 17 13.32 1-4’x3’RCBX19’-2” Langstaff Road 12.50 1 1 W. 2 - PT 1-span, built 2000s, ballast 18 13.49 1-3’x4’RCBX22’-0” √ deck due to skew two decks 19 13.59 1-30”CCPX39’-0” are offset 20 13.71 1-30”CCPX34’-0” Highway 27 13.70 1 No 2 1 DPG $3.45M 2-span 35’ each, built 1939 √ 21 13.72 1-2’x2’RCBX35’-0” ballast deck, 20o skew 22 13.88 1-3’x4’RCBX21’-0” 23 14.09 1-24”CMPX24’-0” Six existing structures between Emery and Elder will require structural enhancements to support additional track alignments. $3.45M 24 14.09A 1-24”TCPX13’-6” will be required under the base case plan to expand the structure at Highway 27. The Additional Service/Counter-flow plan costs are 25 14.13 1-12”CCPX69’-6” estimated at $29.8.

The proposed site of the Woodbridge station is located on the east side of the right of way between the CN Halton Subdivision overpass 4.2.3 Vaughan Intermodal Terminal and the Highway 407 subway structure. A station is also proposed in Vaughan in the vicinity of Rutherford Road. Further descriptions Vaughan Intermodal Terminal is located in the City of Vaughan and is CP's busiest and largest intermodal terminal. Maintaining and requirements for the station facilities are discussed in Section 9.0. traffic fluidity into and out Vaughan IT was identified as a fundamental requirement in the consideration of the infrastructure capacity evaluation and enhancement design. 4.2.2.5 Culvert Conditions The terminal is situated on the west side of the CP Mactier Subdivision right of way and is accessed from the siding at Elder. The siding There are twenty five culverts that will require extensions to accommodate the construction of one new track between Emery and the at Elder extends 6,250 feet in length from the south siding switch at mile 14.13 to the north siding switch located at mile 15.47. The at south siding switch Elder. Culvert extensions within this segment are estimated at $1.6M. grade crossings at Rutherford Road and Major Mackenzie Drive are situated immediately north and south of the siding switches.

The siding at Elder is used primarily to access Vaughan IT however, when traffic permits it is also used to facilitate meets for opposing trains on the single track segment. Movements within the siding are restricted to 10 MPH.

Bolton Commuter Rail Feasibility Report | 18 MMM Group Limited | December 2010 switches extending from the north end of the siding at Elder provide access to Vaughan IT. The north wye switch to Vaughan IT is a 4.2.4 Elder South to Humber Station Road Bolton (mile 23.9) dual control switch remotely controlled by CP’s RTC. The south wye switch is an auto-normal switch. Southward movements entering the siding at Elder receive a signal that indicates when the route is lined to the north wye lead track entering Vaughan Intermodal Terminal. 4.2.4.1 Track Conditions and Configuration The single track section extends from the south siding switch Elder mile 14.13 to Humber Station Road Bolton mile 23.9. There are no Western Canada destined trains originating at CP’s Agincourt yard in Markham, Scarborough proceed to Vaughan IT where intermodal local industries serviced between Elder and the south siding switch Bolton however several facilities extend from the main track and traffic is added to the balance of the train. Upon arrival at Vaughan IT, the trains enter the terminal via the south siding and south wye siding at Bolton. One additional industry exists north of Bolton on the east side of the right of way at mileage 22.9. These facilities switches at Elder. Intermodal traffic is added in the terminal and the trains depart Vaughan IT via the north wye and siding switches at receive week day rail switching service. Elder. The siding at Bolton extends from the west side of the main track and has a length of 8,570 feet. Industrial facility switches extending Southward trains with traffic destined to Vaughan IT pull into the yard via the north siding and north wye switches at Elder. off the siding are located in close proximity to the north siding switch. Movements operating through the siding at Bolton are restricted Access to and movement within the facility is authorized by the Vaughan Intermodal Operations Coordinator. to 10 MPH.

Two parallel lead tracks extend into the terminal that are equipped with manual crossovers between the lead tracks that increase routing The siding at Bolton is often used to stage southward trains when access to Vaughan IT is restricted. The staging of trains at Bolton flexibility. extends the single track usage to the next siding north at Palgrave (mile 30.3) and restricts use of the track for opposing train meets for over 14.5 miles. An at grade crossing at Huntington Road crosses both lead tracks. This crossing is equipped with a signal indicator which advises train crews to proceed to the next terminal signal. All other at grade crossings within the terminal must be protected manually either by a 4.2.4.2 Speed, Curve and Grade Conditions train crew member or other facility employee. Maximum track operating speeds are restricted to a maximum of 50 MPH for expedited freight and 45 MPH for non-expedited freight There is a loop track within the IT facility at Vaughan that enables the train equipment to depart in the proper oriented direction without between mile 14.13 and 18.1 and 55 MPH for expedited freight and 45 MPH for non-expedited freight between mile 18.1 and mile 31.7. wyeing the locomotive consists. Figure 4.2 presents an aerial view of Vaughan Intermodal Terminal relative to the rail corridor. Movements carrying Special Dangerous Commodities are further restricted to 35 MPH between mile 14.13 and 26.4.

Figure 4.2: Aerial Image of Vaughan Intermodal Terminal Track curvature between Elder South mile 14.13 and 23.9 does not exceed four degrees with the maximum degree of curve of 3.98 degrees located between mile 26.75 and 26.81. There are, however, 11 curves of 4 degrees or greater between mile 25.60 and mile Elder wye 31.17. The location and degree of curve between mile 15.47 and 23.9 are presented in Table 4.13 below.

Kleinburg Major Mackenzie Dr Table 4.13: Curve Locations Mile 14.13 to Mile 23.9 Mactier Subdivision.

Major Mackenzie Dr Main Track From MP To MP Degree of Curve McGillivray Rd 14.23 14.34 3.13 14.95 15.05 2.00 15.16 15.26 3.00 Siding 16.27 16.48 2.98 16.48 16.58 3.00

Cadetta Rd 17.11 17.27 2.02 Vaughan Intermodal Terminal 17.94 18.04 3.50 19.18 19.24 1.00 Loop Track 19.24 19.35 0.98 19.35 19.43 1.00

Hurlington Rd 19.43 19.53 1.02 21.38 21.64 1.00 22.39 22.60 1.00 22.60 22.77 0.97 22.77 23.07 1.00 Old Castemmore Rd Rutherford Rd 23.33 23.75 1.00 Figure 4.2: Aerial Image of Vaughan Intermodal Terminal

Bolton Commuter Rail Feasibility Report | 19 MMM Group Limited | December 2010 Track gradients on the section of track between mile 14.13 to 23.9 are relatively flat with a maximum grade of 1.12 percent. A list of 4.2.4.3 Rail/Road At-grade Crossings track grades by mile is presented in Table 4.14 below. There are nine at grade crossings between Elder South and Humber Station Road. Table 4.15 provides a description of the grade Table 4.14: % Grade Mile 14.13 to Mile 23.9 Mactier Subdivision crossing characteristics. From MP To MP % Grade From MP To MP % Grade 14.48 14.59 0.04 19.18 19.26 0.25 Table 4.15: At Grade Road Crossings Mile 15.47 to Mile 31.7 Mactier Subdivision 14.69 14.84 0.39 19.26 19.35 0.85 Road Name Mile Protective Devices Whistle Signal Prohibited (Y/NA) 14.84 15.07 0.78 19.35 19.55 0.76 Major Mackenzie Drive 15.47 Lights, bells, gates Y 15.07 15.16 0.94 19.55 19.70 0.79 Nashville Road 16.70 Lights bells, gates Y 15.16 15.28 0.44 19.70 19.79 0.82 Huntington Road 17.28 Lights bells NA 15.28 15.48 0.52 19.79 19.98 0.81 Kirby Road 18.48 Lights bells NA 15.48 15.69 0.75 19.98 20.06 0.85 Cold Creek Road 19.15 Lights bells NA 15.69 15.98 0.81 20.06 20.19 0.77 Albion Vaughan Townline Road 19.71 Lights bells, gates Y 15.98 16.24 0.82 20.19 20.29 0.81 Coleraine Drive 21.85 Lights bells, gates Y 16.24 16.34 0.67 20.29 20.46 0.74 King Street 22.85 Lights, bells, gates NA 16.34 16.43 0.73 20.46 20.57 0.71 Humber Station Road 23.80 Lights, bells NA 16.43 16.48 0.68 20.57 20.74 0.67 16.48 16.58 0.56 20.74 20.84 0.61 4.2.4.4 Structures Conditions 16.58 16.81 0.54 20.84 20.97 0.44 There is one structure located between the north siding switch Elder South and Humber Station Road. 16.81 16.96 0.69 20.97 21.02 0.33 16.96 17.11 0.08 21.02 21.20 0.23 Highway 50 Overhead, Mile 20.48 17.11 17.32 0.02 21.20 21.38 0.17 The multi span overhead structure carries Highway 50 over two 17.56 17.94 0.63 21.38 21.69 0.21 existing CP tracks. There are three main spans, and the main piers 17.94 17.98 0.38 21.84 21.91 -0.40 are parallel to the tracks on more than 45° skew. Pier protections 17.98 18.09 0.50 22.01 22.47 0.40 are constructed for all the main piers. The overhead consists of 18.09 18.17 0.54 22.47 22.87 0.26 two separate structures for the North-Bound and South-Bound- 18.17 18.36 0.68 22.87 23.04 0.10 highway lanes. The superstructures are post-tensioned and 18.36 18.56 0.09 23.36 23.44 -0.08 reinforced concrete for the north bound and south bound lanes, 18.56 18.79 0.92 23.44 24.00 0.10 respectively. The original structure that now carries the north 18.79 18.98 1.01 bound lanes was constructed in 1962 while the structure that 18.98 19.04 0.79 carries the south bound lanes was constructed at a later date. 19.04 19.13 0.33 There is sufficient space for one additional track under the east span.

Bolton Commuter Rail Feasibility Report | 20 MMM Group Limited | December 2010 Table 4.16 below details the structures between Elder and Humber Station Road There are ten culverts between Bolton North and Humber Station Road that will require extensions during the construction phase. Estimated construction cost for the culvert extensions is $0.6M. Table 4.18 below lists the culverts details for this track segment. Table 4.16: Structures Mile 15.47 to Mile 31.7 Mactier Subdivision No. of Table 4.18: List of Culvert Extensions Bolton North to Humber Station Road Provision For Required Additional Superstructure Upgrade Structure Additional Remarks No Mileage Size & Type Tracks Tracks Type Costs Track 1 21.92 1-36/24”CCP/CMX55/16

Subway Overhead Bridge Mile Existing Tracks Required 2 22.18 1-36/24”CCP/CMX60/8 Highway 50 20.48 2 1 E. 2 main, 1 1 PT - multi-span, built 1962 √ siding due to skew two decks 3 22.33 1-30”TCPX60’ are offset 4 22.65 1-16”CIPX24’ 5 22.82 1-4’CAX40’-3” There are no anticipated structural enhancements to structures within this corridor segment. 6 23.15 1-24”CCPX60’ 4.2.4.5 Culvert Conditions 7 23.45 1-24”CMPX35’ 8 23.68 1-30”CMPX24’-0” Between the south siding switch at Elder and Bolton, there are 33 culverts that will require extensions to permit the construction of 9 23.69 1-24”CCPX48’ a new main track. The culvert locations are listed in Table 4.17 below. CP contemplates the construction of a new track on the west 10 23.80 1-30”CMPX60’ side of the right of way between Bolton and Vaughan Intermodal Terminal for their own use. Extensions of the culverts will be required to support new freight service tracks. Opportunity to share in the costs of the culvert extensions should be investigated. Estimated 4.2.5 Humber Station Road to Palgrave construction costs for the culvert extensions to support GO track expansions is $2.1M. The evaluation of the existing operating and infrastructure conditions between Humber Station Road and Spence yard were included in the geographic limits of the RQQ as the investigation of a potential layover facility site, in the proximity of the intersection of Highway 9 Table 4.17: List of Culvert Extensions South Siding Switch Elder to Bolton and the Mactier Subdivision at mileage 32.55, was specified in the scope. No Mileage Size & Type No Mileage Size & Type 1 14.19 1-30"CCPX27'-0" 18 18.52 1-35'-4"CMPX40'-0" During the early stages of the layover facilities assessment however, the potential site at Highway 9 was determined to be excessively 2 14.30 1-26"CMPX 19 18.60 1-24"TCPX22'-0" distant from the preferred proposed sites for the Bolton GO station facility and would involve increased capital expenditures for track 3 14.42 1-3'x3'RCBX24'-0" 20 18.84 1-25'-4"CMPX54'-0" and signal infrastructure enhancements to support non-revenue equipment trains. It is for this reason that the infrastructure assessment 4 14.77 1-5' X 6'SAX30'-0" 21 19.27 1-4' X 4'RCBX18'-0" northern limit has been reduced to the south siding switch at Palgrave. 5 14.96 1-5'CAX35'-0" 22 19.60 1-4'CAX48'-6" The operational impacts of the flow of traffic between Palgrave and the commuter rail corridor, will however be considered in the 6 14.96A 1-36"CMPX44' 23 19.73 1-30"CPX40'-6" feasibility study analysis. During high traffic periods when congestion at Vaughan IT is heightened, staging of southward freight trains 7 15.09 1-24" / 30"CCPX33'-3" 24 19.98 1-36'CMPX28'-0" may also occur at subsequent sidings north of Palgrave. 8 15.25 1-3' X 4'RCBX10'-0" 25 19.99 1-4' X 2'RCBX18'-0" 9 16.16 1-30"CCPX50'-0" 26 20.40 1-36"CMPX28'-0" 10 16.25 1-5'CAX84'-0" 27 20.47 1-4' X 2'RCBX18' 4.2.5.1 Track Configuration and Conditions 11 16.80 1-24"CCPX52'-0" 28 20.57 1-24"CCPX30' The single main track extends from Humber Station Road to Palgrave. A siding extends from the west side of the right of way at Palgrave 12 17.26 1-4' X 2'RCBX33'-0" 29 20.62 1-4'X2/24"RCC/CMPX18/ between mile 30.3 and mile 31.7. A southward facing switch leading to a back track exists midway on the siding. The siding is 7,750 feet 13 17.29 1-4' X 2'RCBX31'-9" 30 20.73 1-24"CCPX30'-6" in length however two roads that cross the siding at grade (Hunsden Sideroad at mile 30.36 and Mount Pleasant Road at mile 31.31) 14 17.53 1-4' X 5'RCBX22'-3" 31 20.82 1-24"CCPX35'-6" inhibit the use of the siding. 15 17.55 1-4' X 4'RCBX19'-0" 32 21.08 1-4'CAX78'-6" 16 18.05 1-35'-4"CMPX40'-0" 33 21.69 1-4'/30"CA/CCPX30/60' The location of at grade crossings within the siding at Palgrave further exacerbate the line capacity when southward freight trains are 17 18.46 1-35'-4"CMPX40'-0" staged for entry to Vaughan IT. Federal Operating Rules that prohibit trains from standing on an at grade crossing for a period longer than five minutes at a time, require that trains left on the siding must be split to permit the passage of vehicular and pedestrian traffic at the grade crossings.

Bolton Commuter Rail Feasibility Report | 21 MMM Group Limited | December 2010 4.2.5.2 Speed, Curve and Grade Conditions 4.2.5.3 Rail/Road At-Grade Crossings Maximum permissible speed between mile 23.9 and Palgrave is 55 MPH for expedited freight and 45 MPH for non-expedited freight. There are six at-grade rail/road crossings between mile 23.9 and 31.7. Table 4.21 provides a description of the grade crossing Maximum degree of curve is 3.98 degrees between mile 26.75 and 26.81 (Table 4.19) while the maximum grade is 1.01 between mile characteristics. 24.63 and mile 24.92 (Table 4.20). Table 4.21: At-Grade Road Crossings Humber Station Road to Palgrave North

Table 4.19: Curve Locations Mile 23.9 to Mile 31.7 Mactier Subdivision Road Name Mile Protective Devices Whistle Signal Prohibited (Y/NA) Castlederg Sideroad 24.75 Lights, bells NA From MP To MP Degree of Curve From MP To MP Degree of Curve Humber Station Road 25.58 Lights, bells NA 24.23 24.72 1.00 28.06 28.20 3.50 Duffy’s Lane 27.30 Lights, bells NA 24.72 25.28 1.50 28.57 28.67 3.00 Mount Hope Road 30.14 Lights, bells NA 25.60 25.93 3.00 29.06 29.67 1.00 Hunsden Road 30.46 Lights, bells, gates NA 26.02 26.24 3.00 29.96 30.21 3.00 Mount Pleasant Road 31.31 Lights, bells, gates NA 26.50 26.68 1.92 30.43 30.65 2.97 26.68 26.75 3.08 30.65 30.70 3.13 26.75 26.81 3.98 30.70 30.78 3.12 26.81 26.90 3.50 30.78 30.88 2.73 4.2.5.4 Structures Conditions 27.02 27.24 1.50 30.88 30.96 3.07 There are three structures between Humber Station Road and Palgrave North. Table 4.22 details the characteristics of the structures. 27.24 27.35 1.45 31.15 31.42 2.67 No expansion of the structures is required to support GO commuter services. 27.35 27.48 1.55 Table 4.22: Structures Between Humber Station Road and Palgrave North 27.48 27.68 1.50 Provision No. of Existing For Required Additional Superstructure Structure Mile Remarks Tracks Additional Tracks Tracks Type Table 4.20: Track Gradient Mile 23.9 to Mile 31.7 Mactier Subdivision Subway Overhead Bridge Track Required From MP To MP % Grade From MP To MP % Grade Old Church √ 27.82 1 1 E 1 0 - 3 span structure 24.00 24.42 -1.12 28.02 28.17 0.16 Road 24.42 24.63 1.00 28.17 28.55 0.30 Humber River √ 28.05 1 E & W 1 0 - culvert Highway 50 √ 28.65 1 1E 1 0 - 1 span ballast deck 24.63 24.92 1.10 28.55 28.67 0.18 24.92 25.21 0.24 28.67 29.04 0.30 25.21 25.57 0.31 29.04 29.67 0.26 4.3 CP North Toronto Subdivision 25.57 26.24 0.19 29.67 29.93 0.28 As previously stated, an in-depth analysis of the existing conditions on the North Toronto Subdivision was not specifically performed. 29.93 30.21 0.19 26.24 26.48 0.30 The infrastructure conditions described in the North Toronto Corridor Feasibility Study Final Report of August 1992 by Cole, Sherman 30.21 30.40 0.32 26.48 26.68 0.22 was used as the basis for much of the analysis performed in this study. 26.68 26.90 0.16 30.40 30.70 0.18 26.90 27.00 0.30 30.70 30.95 -0.17 Track and other infrastructure elements either removed or newly constructed on the subdivision were considered in the assessment. 27.00 27.68 0.24 30.95 31.60 -0.12 27.68 28.02 0.30 31.60 32.30 -0.30 4.3.1 CP North Toronto Subdivision Overview The North Toronto Subdivision extends between Leaside in the east to West Toronto in the west over a distance of 5.9 miles.

The subdivision is a critical segment in CP’s east/west corridor. It connects to the CP Belleville Subdivision at Leaside and to the Galt Subdivision at West Toronto. The Belleville Subdivision extends eastward from Leaside to and the CP Galt Subdivision that extends westward from West Toronto to London. The corridor is situated in an established and highly urbanized section of Toronto which imposes certain operating restrictions including prohibitions for parking idling equipment and restrictive permissible speeds.

Bolton Commuter Rail Feasibility Report | 22 MMM Group Limited | December 2010 A single switch connection to the Mactier Subdivision exists at Osler (mile 5.4) creating a junction between CP’s east/west and north/ A second at grade rail/rail crossing is located at mile 5.26 where the single track GO Newmarket Subdivision crosses the right-of-way west corridors. In addition, two rail/rail crossings of the North Toronto Subdivision exist. The two tracks of the GO Weston Subdivision of the North Toronto Subdivision at Davenport. Grade separation of this rail/rail crossing is the subject of a GO Transit environmental cross the North Toronto Subdivision at West Toronto at mile 5.8 while the single track of the GO Newmarket Subdivision crosses at assessment study. Davenport at mile 5.26. Both rail/rail crossings are controlled by the CP RTC located in Montreal. Service Option 3 requires an evaluation of the conditions and configuration of the CP North Toronto Subdivision to determine the feasibility of implementing a commuter rail service between Bolton and the proposed Summerhill Station located near Yonge Street in Rail/road At-Grade Crossings Toronto. There are two at grade public rail/road crossings on the corridor located at Osler Street (mile 5.72) and Bartlett Avenue (mile 4.62) and one private rail/road crossing at mile 5.19. The use of the train whistle is prohibited at all grade crossings.

4.3.2.1 Track Conditions and Configuration The crossing protection devices at Osler Avenue are integrated into the signal system. At this location, a confirmed The two track corridor is equipped with double crossovers between the main tracks at West Toronto, Osler, Howland and Leaside. indication will not be displayed until activation of the road crossing warning devices is confirmed. The traffic is controlled by a centralized traffic control (CTC) system that is remotely supervised by CP’s rail traffic controller located in Special operating instructions govern the movement of westward trains exceeding 3,000 feet in length approach the crossing at Barlett Montreal, Quebec. Avenue. Table 4.23 details the at-grade rail/road crossing characteristics. The North Toronto subdivision runs north of and parallel to the Toronto Transit Commission (TTC) Bloor Street subway line between Table 4.23: At-Grade Rail/Road Crossing North Toronto Subdivision Dundas Street West and Avenue Road. The rail line veers in a north/easterly direction between Avenue Road and Leslie Street. Whistle Signal Road Name Mile Protective Devices Prohibited (Y/NA) Two terminus points on the TTC subway provide potential passenger transfer stations between the TTC and GO Transit’s Bolton corridor Bartlett Avenue 4.62 Lights, bells, gates Y trains. The TTC University subway line runs perpendicular to the Bloor line and is located in close proximity to the North Toronto Private Crossing 5.19 Lights, bells, gates Y Subdivision at mile 3.09 near the intersection of Dupont Street and Spadina Road. The Summerhill subway station on the TTC Yonge line Osler Street 5.72 Lights, bells, gates Y is located on the north side of the North Toronto Subdivision tracks and east of the rail/road grade separated structure at Yonge Street at mile 2.20. 4.3.2.4 Structures Conditions 4.3.2.2 Speed, Curve and Grade Conditions There are numerous grade separated structures within the North Toronto Subdivision corridor. Table 4.24 provides a list of the grade separated crossings within the corridor. There are two structures that would require enhancements to support additional Maximum permissible speeds between mile 0.0 and 5.2 are 45 MPH for non expedited freight and 50 MPH for expedited freight. track elements should CP's Leaside yard be utilized for midday storage for GO equipment. Total estimated costs for the structure Maximum speeds for all freight traffic is 35 MPH between mile 5.2 and 5.9. enhancements is $16M. In addition, trains carrying special dangerous commodities are restricted to 25 miles per hour between mile 0.0 and 5.9 while trains carrying dangerous commodities are restricted to 35 miles per hour within these limits.

The data provided in the North Toronto Corridor Feasibility Study Final Report of August 1992 prepared by Cole, Sherman describes the curve and gradient conditions on the CP North Toronto Subdivision as follows:

"curvature of 2 degrees with an implied maximum speed of 70 MPH for commuter trains if super-elevated. Realignment of the corridor to produce a maximum speed of 84MPH would have considerable cost and property impacts. Maximum grades is about 1%."

4.3.2.3 At Grade Crossings Rail/rail At-Grade Crossings The western limit of the subdivision abuts the Galt Subdivision at West Toronto where the two tracks of the GO Weston Subdivision currently cross the North Toronto Subdivision at grade. Grade separation of this is underway as a project initiative under the GO Transit Rail Improvement Program (GO TRIP).

Bolton Commuter Rail Feasibility Report | 23 MMM Group Limited | December 2010 Table 4.24: Existing Structures North Toronto Subdivision 4.3.2.5 Culvert Conditions Provision No. of There are no known culvert extension requirements on this track section. For Required Additional Upgrade Structure Remarks Additional Tracks Tracks Costs

Subway Overhead Bridge Mile Existing Tracks Track Required 4.4 CN York and Halton Subdivisions Bayview Avenue 0.62 2 1 N. 3 - √ 4.4.1 CN York and Halton Subdivision Overview Rosedale Park √ 0.90 2 No 3 1 $8M Applies only if equipment The York and Halton Subdivisions create a freight by-pass corridor north of Toronto that permits time sensitive freight traffic to avoid midday stored at Leaside. the heavily commuter and passenger ladened CN Oakville and Kingston Subdivisions, the USRC and Union station. The by-pass corridor MacLennan Ave – 1.46 2 1S. 3 - √ Pedestrian Bridge provides access to the CN yard facilities at MacMillan, Malton and the Brampton Intermodal Terminal. The York and Halton Subdivisions Mount Pleasant 1.75 2 1S. 3 - 2-span , ballast deck are key segments in CN’s east/west corridor extending from Halifax/Montreal to Sarnia/Detroit and Chicago. Figure 4.2 shows CN’s √ Road North American Rail Network. Reservoir Creek √ 1.80 2 1S. 3 1 $8M Multi-span, ballast deck, supported on 7 bents. Applies only if equipment midday stored at Leaside. Yonge Street 2.20 2 S. & N. 4 - 2-span, wide ballast deck, √ capacity for a number of tracks at S. & N. Avenue Road 2.61 2 1 S. & 1 N. 4 - 1-span, ballast deck, √

Davenport Road 2.88 2 1 S. & 1 N. 4 - 2-span, ballast deck, opening in deck between √ existing S. track and additional track at S. Spadina Road 3.09 3 1 S. 4 - 2-span, ballast deck, opening in deck between √ existing S. track and additional track at S. Howland Ave 3.35 3 1 S. 4 - 2-span, ballast deck, opening in deck between √ existing S. track and additional track at S. Bathurst Street √ 3.48 3 1 S. 4 -

Christie Street √ 3.86 3 2 S. 3 -

Shaw Street √ 4.13 3 1 S. 3 - Figure 4.2: CN’s North American Rail Network Ossington Avenue √ 4.23 2 1 S. & 1 N. 3 -

Dovercourt Road √ 4.43 2 1 S. & 1 N. 3 - The CN York Subdivision extends from the junction with CN Kingston Subdivision at Pickering (mile 0.0) to MacMillan Yard (mile 25.0). Dufferin Street √ 4.75 3 1 S. 3 - There is currently no GO service provided on the York Subdivision however the Stouffville (Uxbridge Subdivision), Richmond Hill (Bala Subdivision) and the Barrie (Newmarket Subdivision) GO corridors cross the York Subdivision at Hagerman, Doncaster and Snider Lansdown Avenue √ 5.15 2 1 S. & 2 N. 3 - respectively. Hagerman and Snider diamonds have recently been grade separated under the GO TRIP program, while Doncaster remains Symington Avenue 5.41 2 1 S. & 1 N. 3 - √ at grade.

Bolton Commuter Rail Feasibility Report | 24 MMM Group Limited | December 2010 The segment of the York Subdivision associated with Service Option 4 extends from mile 24.3 where the York Subdivision abuts the Table 4.25: Maximum Permissible Speeds CN Halton and York Subdivisions Halton Subdivision and the south wye switch at Snider (mile 23.92). Permissible Speed Permissible Speed Permissible Speed Permissible Speed Mile Passenger Freight 80T* 100T* The CN Halton Subdivision extends 49.5 miles from the junction with the CN York Subdivision to the junction with the CN Oakville York Sub Main Tracks Subdivision at Burlington West. 23.6 - 25 30 30 30 30 As previously discussed in Section 3.3.4, the GO Georgetown corridor trains operate over the Halton Subdivision between Georgetown York Sub Signalled Lead and Wyes and Halwest, where it connects to the Weston Subdivision. Tracks Southwye Snider 15 15 15 15 The portion of the Halton Subdivision extending between MacMillan Yard (mile 0.0) and a proposed connection to the CP Mactier South Connecting Track Snider 15 15 15 15 Subdivision (approximately mile 4.16) were assessed to determine potential capacity constraints, infrastructure enhancement Halton Sub Main Tracks requirements and proposed service schedules. - 0.0 – 0.7 30 30 30 30 The following subsections will assess the relevant sections of the York and Halton Subdivisions collectively as a single corridor segment 0.7 – 3.9 50 50 50 50 for routing Option 4 and will be referred to as the CN segment. 3.9 – 4.6 45 45 45 45 Halton Sub Signalled Lead and Bypass Tracks 4.4.2 Track Conditions and Configuration Halton Outbound 0.3-0.7 N/A 20 20 20 The CN segment consists of single, double and triple track sections. The triple track section provides additional capacity for trains Halton Outbound 0.7 -1.1 N/A 50 50 50 arriving and departing MacMillan yard from the York Subdivision. Two main tracks of the York Subdivision extend into the yard while one Halton Inbound N/A 20 20 20 main track extends between the York and Halton Subdivisions. By Pass Track 23.9 (York) – 1.2 30 30 30 30 * indicates tons/operative brake. The south wye track at Snider extends between the York Subdivision mile 23.93 and Newmarket Subdivision mile 12.92, a track length of 1,230 feet. 4.4.4 At-Grade Crossings A signaled by-pass track located to the south of the right-of-way extends 7,480 feet between mile 23.9 York Subdivision and mile 1.2 There are no rail/road at-grade crossings within the CN segment. Halton Subdivision. A signaled outbound lead track extends from MacMillan yard to the Halton Subdivision where it continues and is designated as a second main track between mile 1.09 to mile 4.06. 4.4.5 Structures Conditions An equilateral turnout at mile 4.06 permits eastward movements to divert to both main tracks at equal speeds. West of the equilateral The structures conditions on the CN Halton and York Subdivisions were evaluated to determine the available capacity to support switch, a single track segment extends between mile 4.06 and mile 4.52. Within this segment there are three structures: Islington additional tracks. Table 4.26 summarizes the structures characteristics. Expansion costs for structures on this corridor are estimated at Avenue subway (mile 4.11); CP Mactier Subdivision overpass at mile 4.18; and Humber River bridge at mile 4.40. An equilateral turnout $13M including engineering fees, contingency and flagman costs. is located at mile 4.52 connecting to the double track section that extends further west.

4.4.3 Maximum Permissible Speeds Maximum track speeds vary between 30 and 50 miles per hour on main tracks and between 15 to 30 MPH on signaled lead and wye tracks. Maximum speeds are presented in Table 4.25.

Bolton Commuter Rail Feasibility Report | 25 MMM Group Limited | December 2010 Table 4.26: Existing Structures CN Subdivisions Pine Valley Drive Subway- Mile 3.69 Provision No. of

The 1-span structure carries 2 CN tracks over Pine Valley Drive. For Required Additional Superstructure Upgrade Structure Remarks Additional Tracks Tracks Type Costs The structure is made of ballast deck supported on DPGs. It

Subway Overhead Bridge Mile Existing Tracks Track Required was built in 1922 and is perpendicular to the road. There are no Islington Avenue 4.11 1 No 2 1 TPG $3.45M New track at N. requires provisions for additional tracks on this structure. The estimated √ √ subway New track at S. construction cost to accommodate one additional track on the requires overhead structure is approximately $3.45M. Pine Valley Drive 3.69 2 No 3 1 DPG $3.45M 1-span, ballast deck √

Weston Road 2.38 2 No 3 1 Steel Girders $1.5M Ballast deck √

Highway 400 W. 2.00 2 I N. 3 - CPCI Girders 3-span √ Ramp Highway 400 1.95 2 I N. 3 - RC Deck 1-span, widened in 1988 √

Highway 400 E. 1.90 2 I N. 3 - CPCI Girders 3-span Weston Road Overhead- Mile 2.38 √ Ramp This 3-span structure carries Weston Road over 2 existing CN Black Creek √ 1.40 2 No 3 1 Culvert $1.5M Double-Cell culvert tracks. The superstructure is concrete deck supported on steel

Jane Street 1.17 2 No 3 1 Rigid-Frame $3.45 M 1-span girders. The pier protection walls are constructed. An additional √ track could be accommodated under the main span. The new 24.13 4 No 3 - Steel Girders York Sub track could also be extended under the exterior span, however 3-span, pier protection √ it would require changes to the front slope and abutment. The constructed, steel girders, require heavy repair estimated construction cost of the structure modifications to Steeles Avenue 12.92 2 No 2 - Solid Deck Newmarket Sub accommodate one additional track is approximately $1.5M. √ 2-span, ballast deck

CN Halton Subdivision Structures Islington Avenue Subway- Mile 4.11 Highway 400 W. Ramp Overhead- Mile 2.00 The multi-span structure carries the elevated single CN track over This 3-span structure carries the Highway 400 West Ramp over Islington Avenue. The CN track is elevated in this area, in order two existing CN tracks. The deck is supported on CPCI precast to cross over CP track at the west side of Islington Avenue. The girders. There are provisions to accommodate one additional main span over Islington Avenue is TPG, and the other spans are track at the north side of the main span. concrete girders. The structure is on a skew angle to the road. The structure was built in 1962, and does not have provisions for an additional track. The estimated construction cost to widen the stucture is approximately $3.45M.

Bolton Commuter Rail Feasibility Report | 26 MMM Group Limited | December 2010 Highway 400 Overhead- Mile 1.95 Jane Street Subway- Mile 1.17 The 1-span structure (shown in the background on the photo) The 1-span concrete rigid-frame structure carries 2 CN tracks carries Highway 400 North Bound and South Bound lanes over over Jane Street. The estimated construction cost to widen the two existing CN tracks. This structure was widened in 1988. structure to accommodate one additional track is approximately There are provisions for a third track on the north side, however, $3.45M. the distance from the exterior track to the face of the abutment has been considered to be 11’, on the original design. The track spacing for the 3-track arrangement has been considered to be 13’ and 14’.

Highway 400 W. Ramp Overhead- Mile 1.90 CN York Subdivision Structures This 3-span structure carries the Highway 400 East Ramp over 2 existing CN tracks. The deck is supported on CPCI precast Keele Street Overhead- Mile 24.13 girders. There are provisions for one additional track on the The 3-span structure carries Keele Street over 4 existing CN north side of the main span. tracks. The superstructure is concrete deck supported on steel girders. The pier protection walls are constructed. In general, this structure requires heavy repair including the replacement of the railings, deck, asphalt and waterproofing, expansion joint elimination and concrete patching on the substructure. An additional track can be placed under the exterior span.

Black Creek Bridge- Mile 1.40 The Black Creek Bridge structure is actually a culvert that will GO Newmarket Subdivision Structures require widening to support one additional track. Estimated construction cost to widen the structure is approximately $1.5M. Steeles Avenue Subway- Mile 12.92 (No photo) The 2-span structure carries two CN tracks over Steeles Avenue. The concrete superstructure supports a ballast deck. There are no provisions to support additional tracks.

4.4.6 Culvert Conditions There are six existing culverts on the Halton Subdivision. Costs for culvert expansions required on this segment are estimated at $0.9M.

Bolton Commuter Rail Feasibility Report | 27 MMM Group Limited | December 2010 atural eritage Natural Heritage Information Center (NHIC) database (accessed Dec. 18th, 2008). Records more than 60 years old are not listed as it is 5.0 N H likely that the species no longer is present. Table 5.1 identifies species occurring within the area of the rail line corridor.

The Provincial Policy Statement (PPS, 2005) identifies eight types of natural heritage features which are to be accorded protection within the province of Ontario. Proposed work associated with improvements to the Toronto-Bolton GO Transit line must recognize these Table 5.1 : Species at Risk and Provincially Rare Flora and Fauna. features and perform work so as to meet required protection. The corridor was screened for the presence of these features and only Scientific Name Common Name Taxa Status Location (UTM) Date those that are relevant are identified and discussed. These features are identified as: Lampropeltis Milksnake Reptile Special Concern South of 401 in vicinity of Humber River and 1955 triangulum Black Creek. E620000 N4840000. Development and site alteration shall not be permitted in; Emydoidea blandingii Blanding’s Turtle Reptile Threatened West of Hwy 400 and south of Hwy 7 in vicinity 1986 of Humber River. E615000 N4845000. 1. Significant habitat of endangered and threatened species; Myosurus minimus Mousetail Plant Provincially Rare (S1) West of Hwy 400 and south of Hwy 7 in vicinity 1995 of Humber River. E616000 N4844000. 2. Significant wetlands; Clinostomus Redside Dace Fish Threatened East of Hwy 50 in vicinity of Nashville Rd in 1953 Development and site alteration shall not be permitted in; elongatus vicinity of Humber River. E610000 N4854000. Astomum Moss Species Plant Provincially Rare (S2) East of Hwy 50 in vicinity of Nashville Rd and 1985 3. Significant woodlands; muehlenbergianum Humber River. E608000 N4855000. 4. Significant valleylands; Pterospora Giant Pinedrops Plant Provincially Rare (S2) South of Old Church Rd in vicinity of Humber Unknown andromedea River. E596000 N4861000. 5. Significant wildlife habitat; Arigomphus furcifer Lilypad Clubtail Dragonfly Provincially Rare (S3) East of Hwy 50 and south of Hwy 9. E595000 Unknown N4867000. unless it has been demonstrated that there will be no negative impacts on the natural features or their ecological functions.

Development and site alteration shall not be permitted in; 5.2 Significant Wetlands 6. Fish habitat Significant wetlands referred to in the PPS (2005) are those evaluated by the MNR as Provincially Significant Wetlands (PSW). The except in accordance with provincial and federal requirements. presence of PSWs adjacent to the proposed Bolton GO Rail corridor was determined through access to the NHIC website (accessed December 18th, 2008). One provincially significant wetland occurs adjacent to the rail line and is discussed below. As proposed work must be consistent with protection stated in the PPS (2005), the following discussion of natural heritage features present along the GO Transit line is organized to be consistent with the natural heritage features listed in the PPS (2005). The northern Gibson Lake Wetland – The center of this PSW wetland is located east of Palgrave. This wetland is 27.9 ha in area and made up of portion of the proposed Bolton GO Rail corridor will run across the Oak Ridges Moraine and as work conducted must be consistent with six individual wetlands. This wetland is on the Oak Ridges Moraine and composed of three wetland types (3.6% bog, 17.9% swamp, the Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan (ORMCP), relevant policies of the ORMCP are also discussed. As they will be of interest to and 78.5% marsh). Mapping provided by Peel Region (2008) indicates that the existing rail line intersects the wetland and under the the Ministry of Natural Resources (MNR), Conservation Authorities (CA) and Municipalities, Environmentally Sensitive Areas, species of proposal the transit line will run along the same ROW (Figure 5.1). Special Concern and provincially rare species are also discussed. The NHIC and the City of Vaughan also provided information on two wetlands adjacent to the proposed Bolton GO Transit rail line which The GO Bolton transit service is proposed to run within an existing rail ROW. This implies that direct impacts to natural heritage features were evaluated as non-PSWs. Although non-PSWs are not protected under the PPS (2005), these features would be protected if they are through their removal are not anticipated and that any impacts will be indirect ones. However the PPS (2005) states that development found to be Significant Woodlands, Significant Wildlife Habitat or other natural heritage features which are protected through the PPS in lands adjacent to natural heritage features shall not be permitted unless the ecological function of the adjacent lands have been (2005). Therefore they are discussed below and their locations shown. evaluated and it has been demonstrated that there will be no negative impacts on the natural features or on their ecological functions. Vance-Donaldson Area Wetland – This non-PSW is located to the north of Castlederg Sideroad and is in the Oak Ridges Moraine (see Associated structures such as parking lots and commuter stations would extend beyond the rail ROW and their construction and Figure 5.1). It is made up of 10 individual wetlands, composed of two wetland types (62% swamp, 38% marsh) and is 7.14 ha in area. operation may result in direct impacts and these would need to be addressed. This wetland is located within the Town of Caledon’s Environmental Policy Area (See Figure 5.1). Permitted uses within lands zoned as part of the Environmental Policy Area include essential infrastructure. Development of land adjacent to an Environmental Policy Area 5.1 Significant Habitat Of Endangered And Threatened Species may require an environmental impact study and management plan and must satisfy the performance measures outlined in the Town of Caledon Official Plan (Town of Caledon Official Plan, 2004). The PPS (2005) affords protection to provincially endangered and threatened species. However, species designated at the provincial level as “Special Concern” and rare (S1-S3) are also identified in this document as they are expected to be of concern to the MNR, CAs and Tormore Wetland Complex – This non-PSW is located east of Bolton and within the City of Vaughan (Figure 5.1). The proposed Bolton municipalities. Flora and fauna which is provincially endangered, threatened, special concern or rare were identified through use of the GO Rail corridor will run through the wetland both north and south of Kirby Road (City of Vaughan, 2000). This non-PSW complex is made up of six individual wetlands, composed of only one wetland type (100% swamp) and small (5.96 ha). Policies of the City

Bolton Commuter Rail Feasibility Report | 28 MMM Group Limited | December 2010 of Vaughan Official Plan Amendment 600 do not address locally significant wetlands (City of Vaughan, 2000). Much but not all of the wetland adjacent to the rail line is mapped within the TRCA Regulated Area (Conservation Ontario Mapping. 2007). Land use and development requirements in these areas will stem from the TRCA’s Ontario Regulation 166/06 Development, Interference with Wetlands and Alterations to Shorelines and Watercourses.

The Peel Region Natural Heritage Discussion Paper (2008) provides the location of two additional proposed PSW (see Figure 5.1). The 3 first proposed PSW is located east of the rail line and north of King Street. The second proposed PSW is a complex located to the north of Castlederg Sideroad. Based on their identical location; this proposed PSW is likely the Vance-Donaldson Area Wetland which was 2 previously evaluated as a non-PSW. 1

Gibson Lake Figure 5.2: Significant Woodlands 1, 2 and 3.

1. Humber River crossing, east of rail line, north of Hwy 407, east of river, 2. Humber River crossing, west of rail line, north of Hwy 407, west of river 3. Humber River crossing , east of rail line, north of Hwy 407, east of river Vance-Donaldson Area 6

5 Proposed

Tormore Wetland Complex

4

Figure 5.1- Peel Region PSW and proposed PSWs. Figure 5.3: Significant Woodlands 4, 5 and 6. 5.3 Significant Woodlands 4. East of rail line, north of Hwy 7, west of Humber River. The City of Toronto has not yet identified Significant Woodlands within its jurisdiction. The City of Toronto (2006) Natural Heritage 5. West of rail line, north of Langstaff Road, east of Campania Crt. System map indicates that the proposed GO Bolton transit rail line will cross the Natural Heritage System only at Black Creek. Aerial 6. North of the rail line, just east of Hwy 27. imagery indicates that tree cover at this location is limited to a narrow riparian strip with multi-laned roadways and a waste or recycling depot in the immediate vicinity.

York Region has identified 11 Significant Woodlands within its jurisdiction which abut or are in close proximity to the proposed Bolton GO Transit rail line. The locations of these Significant Woodlands can be found using the YorkExplorer interactive maps (http://maps.york.ca/yorkexplorer/default.jsp?GoTo=3, accessed Dec. 17th, 2008). These Significant Woodlands are listed and shown in Figures 5.2 to 5.5.

Bolton Commuter Rail Feasibility Report | 29 MMM Group Limited | December 2010 Peel Region has not yet identified Significant Woodlands within its jurisdiction but is in the process of doing so through the Peel- Caledon Significant Woodlands and Significant Wildlife Habitat Study (Peel Region, 2008). Although Significant Woodlands have not been identified within Peel Region, Core Woodlands have been identified. Core Woodlands are identified as woodlands greater than 30 ha in size and shown in Figure 5.6 with a red outline. Additional woodlands have been proposed for addition to the Core Woodland 8 designation and are shown in Figure 5.6 without the red outline. These proposed woodlands are greater than 16 ha in size.

7

Figure 5.4: Significant Woodlands 7 and 8.

7. Intersects woodland to the south of Nashville Road. 8. South of the rail line to the south of Nashville Road.

Figure 5.6. Core Woodlands and Proposed Core Woodlands in Peel Region 11 10 It is likely that Significant Woodlands which abut the proposed GO Bolton transit rail line will be the existing and proposed Core 9 Woodlands shown in Figure 5.6 plus additional wooded areas. This conclusion is based on the fact that criteria proposed for the identification of Significant Woodlands in the draft Peel-Caledon Significant Woodlands and Significant Wildlife Habitat Study is significantly more inclusive than that currently used or proposed to identify Core Woodlands. While the current criteria is limited to a woodland’s size, the draft Peel-Caledon Significant Woodlands and Significant Wildlife Habitat Study considers woodland age, presence of linkage to other natural features, proximity to other natural features, proximity to watercourses, presence of provincially rare flora and fauna and Species at Risk and presence of various vegetation communities. The study also considers two options for minimum size. Under one option, all woodlands below the Niagara Escarpment would be considered Significant Woodlands if they were greater than 4 Figure 5.5: Significant Woodlands 9, 10 and 11 ha. Under the second option, all woodlands in rural areas would be considered Significant Woodlands if greater than 16 ha (Peel Region, 2008). 9. North of rail line and Kirby Road. 10. North of rail line, Kirby Road and Significant Woodland No. 9 The Oak Ridges Moraine covers that portion of the proposed GO Bolton transit rail line that occurs north of King Street in the Town of 11. Rail line bisects Significant Woodland west of Cold Creek Road. Caldeon (Figure 5.7). On the Oak Ridges Moraine, the natural heritage policies of the PPS (2005) are superseded by the more stringent policies of the ORMCP. Criteria for the identification of Significant Woodlands on the Oak Ridges Moraine are stated in Technical Paper No. 7 of the ORMCP (MNR, 2004). Identification of Significant Woodlands depends in part on the land use designation within which they fall. Much of the proposed GO Bolton transit rail line runs through land designated as Natural Core Areas with small additional portions of the rail line traversing land designated as Natural Linkage Area. Within both such designations, woodlands 0.5 ha or larger are identified as Significant Woodlands. The remainder of the proposed rail line crosses land designated as Countryside Area. Within this designation, woodlands must be 4 ha or larger to be identified as Significant Woodlands. As the minimum size criteria for Significant

Bolton Commuter Rail Feasibility Report | 30 MMM Group Limited | December 2010 Woodlands is smaller on the Oak Ridges Moraine than that used in Peel Region, Significant Woodlands on the Oak Ridges Moraine are Mapping provided by York Region indicates that the only watercourse crossing with significant elevation changes is the Humber River expected to be more numerous than shown in Figure 5.7. crossing just north of Hwy. 407 (York Explorer, accessed Jan. 5, 2009). This elevation change as well as its prominence as a distinctive landform, suggests that land at this crossing will be designated as a Significant Valleyland or treated as such. Significant Woodlands are considered Key Natural Heritage Features. New transportation uses may be permitted to cross a key natural heritage feature if the applicant demonstrates compliance with Section 41 of the ORMCP (Province of Ontario, 2002). Peel Region has not identified Significant Valleylands but has identified Core Valley and Stream Corridors within their jurisdiction and proposed additions to areas designated as Core Valley and Stream Corridors (Figure 5.8). Existing Core Valley and Stream Corridors are outlined in red in Figure 5.8 while proposed additions are highlighted in green. The Transit crossing of the West Humber River north of cedar Mills occurs within a Core Valley and Stream Corridor. A tributary to the West Humber River found southeast of Palgrave is proposed for addition to the Core Valley and Stream Corridor designation. This tributary is to be crossed at two locations by the proposed Bolton GO Transit rail line. A proposed extension to land designated as Core Valley and Stream Corridor will cause the proposed rail line to abut Core Valley and Stream Corridor land in the vicinity of Humber Station Road (Peel Region, 2008).

Figure 5.7:Oak Ridges Moraine Land Use Designations.

5.4 Significant Valleylands Identification of Significant Valleylands along the proposed GO Bolton transit rail line is difficult because throughout , there is currently very little identification or mapping of Significant Valleylands (Province of Ontario, 2007). However the tentative identification of such features appears possible through application of the Significant Valleyland definition provided in the PPS (2005) and technical guidance provided by the MNR (1999). The official identification of Significant Valleylands is the responsibility of planning authorities.

The PPS (2005) defines Valleylands as natural areas that occur in a valley or other landform depression that has water flowing through Figure 5.8: Peel Region existing and proposed Core Valleys. or standing for some period of the year. “Significant” refers to features which are ecologically important in terms of features, functions, representation or amount. That portion of the proposed Bolton rail line north of Bolton (Figure 5.8, stippled area) traverses the Oak Ridges Moraine. Within the Moraine, the more stringent policies of the ORMCP supersede the natural heritage policies of the PPS (2005). Significant Valleylands The MNR (1999) suggests that valleys be identified from the stable top-of-bank to stable top-of-bank or the predicted top-of-bank to on the moraine are defined as all spillways and ravines with the presence of flowing or standing water for a period of no less than two predicted top-of-bank and that “Significance” is evaluated on the basis of prominence as a distinctive landform, degree of naturalness, months in an average year which are greater than 50 meters in length, greater than 25 meters in width and which have a well defined the degree to which ecological functions such as linkage are provided, restoration potential and historical-cultural value. morphology (Province of Ontario, 2007).

The proposed GO Bolton transit rail line within the City of Toronto crosses Black Creek and aerial imagery indicates a lack of naturalness, Significant Valleylands are considered Key Natural Heritage Features. New transportation uses may be permitted to cross a key natural linkage and restoration potential. This suggests that this crossing point is unlikely to be deemed a Significant Valleyland. Other heritage feature if the applicant demonstrates compliance with Section 41 of the ORMCP (Province of Ontario, 2002). watercourses crossed within the City of Toronto are minor tributaries to the Humber River and their designation as Significant Valleyland is not expected.

Bolton Commuter Rail Feasibility Report | 31 MMM Group Limited | December 2010 5.5 Significant Wildlife Habitat Wildlife Habitat is defined in the PPS (2005) as areas where plants, animals and other organisms live and find adequate amounts of food, water, shelter and space needed to sustain their populations. The PPS (2005) defines “Significant” as ecologically important in terms of features, functions, representation or amount, and contributing to the quality and diversity of an identifiable geographic area or natural heritage system. The Natural Heritage Reference Manual (MNR, 1999) which provides guidance in the application of Natural Heritage policies of the PPS describes Significant Wildlife Habitat under the following four sections:

hh Seasonal concentrations of animals; hh Rare vegetation communities or specialized habitats for animals; hh Habitat of species of conservation concern; and hh Wildlife movement corridors.

In southern Ontario, there is currently very little mapping of significant wildlife habitat (Province of Ontario, 2007). Instead, identification and mapping of Significant Wildlife Habitat is accomplished through Environmental Impact Studies, Natural Heritage Evaluation Studies or other work conducted as part of the approval process for proposed developments. Figure 5. 9: City of Toronto Natural Heritage System With regard to the proposed Bolton GO Rail corridor, areas of Significant Wildlife Habitat have not been identified within the City of Toronto or York Region but Significant Wildlife Habitat is likely already contained within other types of natural heritage features such as Significant Habitat of Endangered and Threatened Species, PSWs, Significant Woodlands and Significant Valleylands. These areas have already been identified in prior sections. Significant Wildlife Habitat may also occur within areas identified by municipalities as part of their Natural Heritage System, Environmental Policy Area or other similar designation. Such identified areas are shown in Figure 5.9 (Toronto) and Figure 5.10 (Town of Caledon).

Figure 5.10 shows that the proposed Bolton GO Rail corridor crosses the City of Toronto’s Natural Heritage System at Black Creek and abuts the NHS at two locations north of Finch Ave. Aerial imagery shows an urban environment with multi-laned roadways, existing rail lines, residential and commercial landuse in the vicinity of each of these NHS features. This suggests that these NHS features may not be considered Significant Wildlife Habitat.

The segment of the proposed GO Bolton transit rail line within York Region will be confined to the City of Vaughan. The City of Vaughan Official Plan Amendment 600 (City of Vaughan, 2000) contains maps of Environmentally Significant Areas, Terrestrial Resources, Areas of Natural and Scientific Interest and Wetlands. This mapping does not reveal any areas outside those mapped or discussed for the City in prior sections which suggests that any Significant Wildlife Habitat abutting the proposed GO Bolton transit rail line within York Region will be contained within areas identified under other types of natural heritage features.

Figure 5.10: Environmental Policy Area of the Town of Caledon.

The segment of the proposed GO Bolton transit rail line within Peel Region will be confined to the Town of Caledon. Figure 5.11 shows the rail line within the Town of Caledon and adjacent land use designations (Town of Caledon, 2004). The proposed Bolton GO Rail corridor passes through or by Environmental Policy Areas (in green) and Open Space Policy Areas (in purple). These areas are limited to the portion of the proposed rail line between The Gore Road and Hwy 50. Significant Wildlife Habitat in the Town of Caledon may include all or part the Environmental Policy Areas and Open Space Policy Areas. The portion of the proposed rail line in the vicinity of a

Bolton Commuter Rail Feasibility Report | 32 MMM Group Limited | December 2010 provincially rare organism east of Hwy 50 and south of Hwy 9 (see Section 5.1) will also presumably be considered Significant Wildlife 5.8 Environmentally Significant Areas Habitat as provincially rare species are considered species of conservation concern (MNR, 1999). The Elder Mills Forest east of the rail line between Langstaff Road and Rutherford Roads has been designated as a Biological That portion of the rail line north of Bolton will traverse the Oak Ridges Moraine. Areas of Significant Wildlife Habitat on the Oak Ridges Environmentally Significant Area (ESA) due to high quality forest habitat, a high diversity of plants and birds, and the presence of species Moraine are defined much as they are in other jurisdictions. Section 22 of the ORMCP allows the development of transportation facilities which are rare and/or endangered regionally, provincially or nationally MTRCA, 1982). The location of this site is shown in Figure 5.11. within Significant Wildlife Habitat (Province of Ontario, 2002). Close examination of the photo reveals that the rail line is separated from the feature by a residential road and housing.

5.6 Fish Habitat The majority of the proposed Bolton GO Rail corridor lies within the Humber River watershed. Areas outside of the Humber River watershed are restricted to relatively small portions of the proposed rail line at the southern and northern ends.

Within the Humber River watershed, the proposed Bolton GO Rail corridor will have watercourse crossings of Black Creek, the lower and upper Humber River. Black Creek will be crossed just east of Weston Road within the City of Toronto, the lower Humber will be crossed just north of Hwy 407 and the upper Humber will be crossed west of the hamlet of Cedar Mills on Hwy 50. Numerous smaller tributaries within the main and upper Humber subwatersheds will also be crossed.

At the crossing points, Black Creek is classified as Intermediate Riverine Warmwater, the lower Humber is classified as Large Riverine and the upper Humber is classified as Intermediate Riverine Coldwater (OMNR & TRCA, 2005). These classifications affect the timing of construction activities in watercourses. Construction in Intermediate Riverine Warmwater and Large Riverine watercourses is allowed from July 1st to March 31st while construction in Intermediate Riverine Coldwater systems is allowed from July 1st to September 15th (OMNR & TRCA, 2005). Figure 5.11: Biological ESA Elder Mills Forest .

The TRCA and OMNR have assessed the general health of aquatic ecosystems at various locations within the Humber River watershed. 5.9 Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan (ORMCP) 2002 The method used to make this assessment is the Index of Biotic Integrity (IBI). Sampling conducted in 2001 in Black Creek found poor The proposed Bolton Go Transit rail line crosses the Oak Ridges Moraine from a point south of Castlederg Sideroad northerly to its quality aquatic habitat. Degradation of aquatic habitat within this subwatershed allows only tolerant fish species to be present. Sampling terminus at Hwy. 9 (see Figure 5.7). Proposed development within this area is governed by the ORMCP (Province of Ontario, 2002). conducted in 2001 and 2000 in the lower portion of the Humber River found habitat quality ranging from poor to good with a median There are four land use designations contained within the ORMCP: Natural Core Areas, Natural Linkage Areas, Countryside Areas and quality rating of fair. The upper Humber River was sampled in 2000 and 2001 and habitat quality ranged from fair to good with a Settlement Areas. Within land governed by the ORMCP the longest distance of rail line runs through Natural Core Area. The rail line median quality rating of good. Conditions present within the upper Humber have the potential to support sensitive species and both runs through Countryside Area in the vicinity of Old Church Rd. Portions of the rail line east of Hwy 50 run through the Palgrave Estates American brook lamprey and brown trout have been sampled near the proposed Coldwater crossing (OMNR & MNR, 2005). Residential Community which is a component of the Countryside Area. The crossing of the upper Humber River is designated as a The rail line’s southern portion (south of St. Clair Ave. West) runs through a highly urbanized landscape and surface water does not Natural Linkage Area and portions of the southern side of the rail line abut Natural Linkage Area to the north of Hunsden Sideroad. contribute to an identified watershed (TRCA website, accessed Jan. 06/2009). Natural Core Areas protect the most sensitive natural heritage features and provide the most restrictions on new land use activities in The rail line’s northern portion falls within the Beeton Creek watershed which flows into Innisfill Creek which in turn flows into the the area. Natural Linkage Areas provide critical connections between Natural Core Areas and open space areas and along the rivers Nottawasaga River (Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority, undated). The portion of the Beeton Creek watershed crossed by the and streams. Countryside Areas provide a rural transition and buffer between the Natural Core and Linkage Areas and the urbanized proposed Bolton GO rail line is within the Oak Ridges Moraine where groundwater seepage create good water quality and trout habitat Settlement Areas. In all designations, development of transit lines is permitted if the applicant demonstrates compliance with Section 41 (NVCA, 2007). of the ORMCP (Province of Ontario, 2002).

The ORMCP also contains detailed policies on key natural heritage features (KNHFs) and hydrologically sensitive features (HSFs). Key 5.7 Sand Barrens, Savannahs and Tallgrass Prairies natural heritage features include all wetlands, significant valleylands, significant woodlands, significant wildlife habitat, fish habitat, life science areas of natural and scientific interest (ANSIs), habitat of endangered, rare and threatened species and sand barrens, The ORMCP identifies sand barrens, savannahs and tall grass prairies as key natural heritage features. The development of savannahs and tallgrass prairies. Hydrologically sensitive features include streams, kettle lakes, wetlands, seepage area and springs. transportation facilities within such habitats is permitted under Section 22 of the ORMCP (Province of Ontario, 2002). The identification The development of infrastructure within these areas is permitted (Province of Ontario, 2002) if the need for the project has been of such habitats is as stated in the Ecological Land Classification (Lee et al. 1998). demonstrated and there is no reasonable alternative.

Bolton Commuter Rail Feasibility Report | 33 MMM Group Limited | December 2010 ervice equirements evelopment Shuttle service departures were designed to connect with existing Georgetown service schedules at a proposed new station 6.0 S R D (Mount Dennis) located in the vicinity of Eglinton Avenue.

6.1 Service Requirements Development - Overview The four operating scenarios were analyzed to determine the potential ridership demand for each service option, proposed service The Metrolinx “Big Move” report identified Bolton as one of the communities on the periphery of the GTA that will benefit from the schedules, rolling stock specifications and the required plant infrastructure improvements to support the specific service alternative. extension of the GO Transit’s commuter rail network within the first fifteen years of the plan implementation. In the evaluation, common operating conditions were applied to each operating scenario as follows:

The GO2020 Plan defines the Bolton corridor requirements as a thirty minute frequency peak period service. Off peak rail service is not hh To reduce the distance travelled in non-revenue service and to minimize the impact on the plant infrastructure capacity included as a service requirement in the GO 2020 plan. requirements, the layover/maintenance facility was assumed to be located at an optimum site identified in Section 6.3 (Site #L5). The service plans developed for this feasibility study identified three target service implementation stages. The service inauguration year hh The location of the Vaughan Intermodal Terminal adjacent to the west side of the right of way, imposed east side right of was specified as 2015 with two subsequent service enhancement stages planned in 2021 (designed to meet the requirements of the way plant access for GO passenger facilities. GO2020 Plan) and year 2031 developed as an anticipatory plan for future service requirements. hh Where station sites could not be located on the east side of the right of way, the construction of station tunnels to provide The peak period service schedules for years 2015 and 2021 provide sample schedules for three and five peak service trains in each access to the station platforms on the east side of the right way was assumed. respective phase for each of the four operational scenarios. hh Where passenger speed were not defined, current track speeds for expedited freight on applicable subdivisions were used to develop service schedules. GO Transit requested that an hourly all day service plan be developed as a potential service requirement in addition to the five peak hh Station dwell times were specified for each station and applied consistently between operating scenarios. period trains for year 2031. hh Train departures for each implementation year were kept constant between scenarios except where dependent Up to five equipment sets were utilized for each of the direct service alternatives. connections to other services existed (e.g. connection to Georgetown Corridor train under the Shuttle service alternative). hh Service would be provided to all stations between Bolton and Emery for operating scenarios Options 1- 3 and between Bolton and Woodbridge for Option 4 on the Mactier Subdivision. 6.2 Operational Scenario Development hh Service would be provided at Mount Dennis and/or Weston for Options 1 & 2 and at Mount Dennis only for Option 3. Service schedules were developed for four operational scenarios: hh Adequate capacity would be provided on all corridor segments. Two minutes of variance was included in the service schedules for each Option. 1. Direct Service between Bolton and Union Station – (Weston) hh CP Mactier Subdivision to Mount Dennis Station; GO Weston Subdivision to Bathurst Street; USRC to Union Draft service schedules for all operational scenarios for years 2015, 2021 and 2031 can be found in Appendix G. Station. 2. Shuttle Service between Bolton and Mount Dennis with passenger connection to Georgetown Corridor GO 6.3 Service Requirements Development Background trains at Mount Dennis Georgetown Corridor EA hh CP Mactier Subdivision to Weston/Mount Dennis. Preliminary designs of the track profiles on the Weston Subdivision indicated that the Georgetown rail corridor would be established 3. Direct Service between Bolton and Summerhill within a depressed trench between Weston Road and John Street. The Weston Subdivision would be expanded to include four parallel hh CP Mactier Subdivision to Osler; CP North Toronto Subdivision to Summerhill. main tracks south of Weston Road. The remaining rail corridor property within the collective CP/GO railway boundaries would permit a 4. Direct Service between Bolton and Union Station – (CN Subdivisions) maximum of two track alignment at grade on the CP Mactier Subdivision between Weston Road mile 8.04 and Osler mile 0.0. hh CP Mactier Subdivision to mile 10.1; CN Halton Subdivision mile 4.16 to mile 0.0; CN York Subdivision mile 24.3 As the CP Mactier Subdivision was designed to remain at its present grade, the elevation differential between the corridors would to mile 23.8; GO Newmarket Subdivision Snider to Parkdale; GO Weston Subdivision Parkdale to Bathurst Street; require that a new connection be constructed near mile 4.5 on the Mactier Subdivision approximately one mile north of the present USRC to Union Station. connecting track. Development of a new connection would permit the shared use of infrastructure facilities at the GO Weston station Service frequencies for the three Direct service alternatives under the base case infrastructure plan were determined to be scheduled at a between the Bolton and Georgetown corridor trains. However, due to the differences in elevation between the two railways, the use of minimum of thirty minute intervals with a.m. departures from Bolton at 06:30, 07:00, 07:30 and p.m. departures from Union Station or the existing connection north of Weston Station was deemed to be infeasible. Summerhill at 16:30, 17:00, 18:00.

Bolton Commuter Rail Feasibility Report | 34 MMM Group Limited | December 2010 During the initial assessment of infrastructure and service requirements for the stations located south of Finch Avenue, access to the Table 6.1 provides a comparison between transit times on established GO rail corridors and the proposed transit times for the service Weston and Mount Dennis stations was assumed to be available from the Weston Subdivision. options examined for the Bolton corridor service.

The Environmental Assessment initiative for the expanded south Georgetown corridor progressed concurrently with this feasibility study Table 6.1 : Comparison of Transit Times by Corridor investigation. Communication with the Georgetown corridor consultant responsible for track design revealed that the construction of a No. of Stations Served Distance (miles) Transit Time (minutes) Average Speed (MPH) new Weston station was proposed at a location south of Lawrence Avenue. The development of a new connecting track between the Stouffville Corridor 10 30.8 68 27.2 Mactier and Weston Subdivision rights of way was therefore being considered at a location north of Black Creek Drive on a segment of Barrie Corridor 10 59.5 92 38.8 the Weston Subdivision that would remain at grade with the CP Mactier Subdivision. Richmond Hill Corridor 5 22.2 40 33.3 A corridor drawing of the Weston Subdivision between Church Street and Ray Avenue can be found in Appendix D. Georgetown Corridor 11 29.37 60 29.37 Milton Corridor 9 31.2 57 32.8 Subsequently, the revised location of the connecting track would require Bolton corridor trains to access the Weston GO station from Lakeshore West 12 (Aldershot) 34.6 59 35.2 the Mactier Subdivision instead of the Weston Subdivision. The connecting switch location would also provided access to the proposed Corridor 13 (Hamilton) 39.9 64* 40 Mount Dennis station for the Shuttle and Summerhill service options from the Mactier Subdivision. Lakeshore East Corridor 10 31.5 60 31.5 Bolton to Union (Weston) 7 28.69 56 30.7 Development of Operating Scenarios Bolton to Union (Shuttle) 7 28.69 58 29.68 Ridership demand was used to determine the equipment requirements for each of the implementation horizon stages in years 2015, Bolton to Summerhill 8 27.2 50 32.64 2021 and 2031. The service frequencies described in the Metrolinx RTP and GO2020 Plans were used to develop the service schedules Bolton to Union (CN Subs) 7 31.65 56 39. 56 for each option. * Express trains operated between Oakville and Union

The development of the service schedules assumed that adequate infrastructure existed to ensure GO train trips could occur unimpeded Dwell Times were established with respect to the relative ridership demand. Higher demand stations were attributed a 60 second dwell by infrastructure constraints or obstructions from freight or other passenger services. while a 30 second dwell was assigned to lower passenger yield stations as indicated in Table 6.2. Additionally, Shuttle services were assigned a 300 second dwell at the passenger transfer location. Current track speeds were used to develop station to station intervals and the maximum acceleration/deceleration rate for the MP40 locomotives of 1.8 MPH/second as specified by GO Transit was applied. A two minute variance allowance was applied to each option. Table 6.2: Line Station Dwell Allowance The current maximum permissible track speeds on the Mactier Subdivision range between 20 to 75 MPH for expedited freight services. Option 1 Option 2 Option 3 Option 4 Option 5 Station Direct Bolton to Shuttle Bolton to Shuttle Bolton to Direct Bolton to Bolton to Union via Transit times for GO trains operating under service Options 1 – 3 are as follows: Union Weston Mount Dennis Summerhill CN Option 1 Bolton to Union via Weston Subdivision 56 minutes Kleinburg 60 60 60 60 60 Vaughan 30 30 30 30 30 Option 2 Bolton to Mount Dennis Shuttle 58 minutes (includes 6 minute passenger transfer at Mount Dennis) Woodbridge 60 60 60 60 60 York University NA NA NA NA 60 Option 3 Bolton to Summerhill 50 minutes Downsview NA NA NA NA 30 The current maximum permissible track speeds on the CN subdivisions for service Option 4 range between 15 and 75 MPH. It should Emery 30 30 30 30 NA be noted however that current maximum speeds on the southwest connecting track to the CN York Subdivision is 15 MPH. The Weston 60 300 60 NA NA development of Option 4 service schedules assumed that speeds on the connecting tracks to the CN Halton and York Subdivisions were Mount Dennis 60* NA 300 NA NA increased to 30 MPH and speeds of 50 MPH could be achieved on the Halton Subdivision. These parameters had not been verified by Spadina/Dupont NA NA NA 30 NA CN. Given these speed requirements, Option 4 total transit time is estimated at 48 minutes. For the inauguration of the Bolton service, The existing Georgetown and Barrie corridor service schedules were used to develop the service schedules for the relevant routing these transit times are considered within an acceptable range when compared with transit times on other established GO options operating on the Weston and Newmarket Subdivisions. corridors.

Bolton Commuter Rail Feasibility Report | 35 MMM Group Limited | December 2010 6.4 Overview of Service Option Evaluation As observed in the ridership demand forecasted for off peak service in 2015, passenger volumes in 2,021 are also considered insufficient to support all day off peak service as only 1,606 off peak riders and a total daily demand of 7,554 daily riders is indicated. Each of the four service options was assessed to determine the most appropriate alternative for the Bolton corridor. This assessment considered the following key criteria: Required infrastructure to support the 2015, 2021 and 2031 service schedules are described in Section 10.0 of this report.

hh ridership demand In year 2031, peak ridership demand increases from 2,974 in year 2021 to 4,526 riders. Unless future actual demand becomes hh end to end trip time excessively higher than forecasted demand, it is not recommended that additional peak service is provided in 2031. Off peak demand hh capital costs in 2031 forecasts indicate 2,444 riders while total all day demand is 11,495 riders. Although off peak service demand is not considered hh operating costs adequate to warrant off peak train service, the introduction of all day hourly off peak service in 2031 would serve as a stimulus to attract new ridership to the rail corridor and provide impetus for the development of future adjacent corridors. hh connectivity to other services Ridership forecasts indicate that a Bolton corridor service operated directly between Bolton and Union Station would generate more 6.4.1 Direct Bolton to Union Station Operating Scenario Option 1 demand than Option 3 (Summerhill) and sliglhtly more demand than Option 4 (CN Subdivisions). A direct rail service between Bolton and Union Station under Option 1 would include the use of the CP Mactier, GO Weston Subdivision Option 1 direct Bolton to Union Station service alternative will have less impact on infrastructure capacity on the CP Mactier Subdivision rights of way and the USRC. A suitable location for midday equipment storage would be required at a site remote to the Bolton corridor. than Option 2 (A) and Option 3. Potential use of current storage yards such as Bathurst Street, Don and Willowbrook must be further investigated.

The service would include six or seven scheduled station stops on the CP Mactier subdivision. 6.4.2 Shuttle Service Bolton to Weston Operating Scenario Option 2 The Shuttle service operating scenario Option 2 assessment initially included the implementation of a service between Bolton and the Due to the Weston Subdivision capacity concerns, the Direct Bolton to Union Station service schedules were initially developed excluding GO Weston Station. service stops at the Mount Dennis and Bloor stations on the Weston Subdivision and provided a passenger transfer stop at Weston for Bolton corridor passengers requiring connection to the Georgetown corridor stations. The level of service provided by Georgetown The service concept required a transference of all passengers between the Bolton and Georgetown corridor trains at the GO Weston corridor trains at Mount Dennis and Bloor stations was considered adequate to meet the projected demand. Station. It was anticipated that the exchange of passengers between the two corridors could be facilitated at adjacent platforms accessed from the west track on the CP Mactier Subdivision or alternatively via a pedestrian tunnel network located off the east track As the design of the enhanced Weston Subdivision track alignments evolved, it became apparent that both Weston and Mount Dennis that would traverse under both tracks of the Mactier Subdivision and connect to the Weston station platforms. stations could be served from the Mactier Subdivision. Although ridership for the shuttle service option was not specifically modeled, demand is expected to be slightly higher than the demand Transit times between Bloor and Union Station for Georgetown corridor trains published in public timetables were used to develop anticipated for service Option 3. Headway frequencies for the shuttle service will be dependent on service schedules developed for running times on the Weston Subdivision (ten to twelve minute transit times for eastward trains and nine minutes for westward trains). the enhanced Georgetown corridor service which may impact future ridership. Draft shuttle service schedules were developed using In year 2015 service inauguration phase, ridership demand will support the operation of 17 bi-level coaches. When the service frequency available connecting trains on the current Georgetown corridor service schedule. As the Georgetown corridor does not currently offer defined by the GO2020 plan is considered, the distribution of coach equipment may include the operation of three trains with a hourly off peak service, the Bolton off peak schedules did not identify a specific Georgetown train connection. minimum of five bi-level coaches. As GO's minimum standard consist is 10 bi-level coaches per set, the ridership demand in 2015 falls The transference of Bolton passengers to Georgetown corridor trains would create seating capacity concerns on the Georgetown trains. well below the available seating capacity on a standard train set. The operation of smaller equipment consists will impact the handling The average seating capacity on a standard GO bi-level coach accommodates 154 passengers. Georgetown trains currently operate and distribution of trains sets from the main maintenance facility. with a maximum of ten coaches per train. Currently a GO train equipped with one MP40 locomotive is capable of hauling a maximum Ridership forecasts for service Option 1 in 2015 indicates approximately 1,340 off peak and a total of 6,300 daily riders will utilize the of twelve coaches. Such an equipment configuration would be required on Georgetown corridor trains designated to connect with the Bolton corridor service. Given the low demand, off peak train service is not considered feasible in 2015. Bolton corridor trains.

Service requirements anticipated in year 2021, include an increase in peak period service of up to five uni-directional trains operating at Sufficient trains on the Georgetown corridor must be scheduled to provide adequate connections to the regularly scheduled thirty minute headways with no demand to support counter-peak service. The capacity constraints on the Georgetown corridor will likely Bolton corridor trains. During service interruptions on either line, sufficient capacity must be provided on the Georgetown trains to eliminate opportunities to cycle equipment sets in order to optimize equipment use and reduce train equipment fleet size. Due to the accommodate an influx of Bolton corridor passengers. Operational issues with respect to equipment spotting at the connecting station capacity constraints on the Weston Subdivision, it is anticipated that the 2021 Direct Bolton to Union Station service plan will require up platform must be considered. to five dedicated train sets. The shuttle service alternative must also outline the requirements for midday equipment storage to determine both the infrastructure and rolling stock requirements.

Bolton Commuter Rail Feasibility Report | 36 MMM Group Limited | December 2010 Two service schedule scenarios were developed with possible midday storage sites as follows: Service frequencies were designed to correspond with the arrival of connecting Georgetown corridor trains at the GO Weston station. The requirement to schedule the arrival of the shuttle train at Weston to correspond with the Georgetown corridor train arrivals produces A. Bolton layover facility; and a varied service frequency ranging from fifteen minutes to one hour service. B. a site in the Ray Avenue vicinity. As the Mount Dennis station does not currently exist, transit times between Weston and Mount Dennis on the GO Weston Subdivision In scenario 2(A), the use of the Bolton layover facility for midday storage, doubles main track GO train usage. This would necessitate a were estimated at four minutes. Draft service schedules are provided in Appendix G. counter-flow movement of equipment from Mount Dennis to Bolton during the a.m. peak period and another counter-flow movement from Bolton to Mount Dennis preceding and during the p.m. schedule. To avoid impacts with freight operation, the preferred placement of the Mount Dennis platform would be on the east side of the Mactier Subdivision right of way. Service schedules identified as Option 6.4.3 Direct Bolton to Summerhill Service Operating Scenario Option 3 2(A) have been developed for implementation years 2015, 2021 and 2031 and are provided in Appendix G. The assessment of the service options discussed above in Section 6.4.1 and 6.4.2 highlighted concerns regarding available capacity on The establishment of a midday storage facility in the vicinity of Ray Avenue would significantly reduce the distance between the station the Weston Subdivision, USRC and Union Station. In addition, the Shuttle service highlighted passenger transference concerns including at Mount Dennis and the layover facility. Property adjacent to the east track previously occupied by Kodak could provide a suitable site available seating, excessive station dwell and scheduled connections issues with Georgetown corridor trains. for the development of a midday storage facility. Further investigation to determine site availability is required. Alternate solutions to Options 1 & 2 direct and shuttle services are limited by the priority expansion projects on the GO Weston Service schedules identified as Option 2(B) have been developed for implementation years 2015, 2021 and 2031 and are provided in Subdivision and the limited connectivity of the CP Mactier Subdivision to other existing rail corridors. Appendix G. Two viable service alternatives were examined. One involved a direct service from Bolton to Summerhill via the CP North Toronto Two service schedules were developed: Subdivision. The second alternative involved the development of a new connection between the CP Mactier and the CN Halton Subdivisions in the vicinity of highway 407( see Section 6.4.4). 1. included a passenger transfer to the Georgetown corridor at Weston with a terminating station at Mount Dennis. The North Toronto Summerhill station, located on the east side of Yonge Street was a key passenger facility in Toronto until Union 2. no station stop at Weston and a passenger transfer to the Georgetown trains at Mount Dennis. Station was opened in 1927. Constructed in 1916 by CP, the North Toronto Station was open to passenger service until 1930. The station building still exists and has received recent and extensive renovations to accommodate the retail businesses that now occupy the site. A passenger connection at Mount Dennis Station that would enable a transit transfer between the proposed Eglinton Light Rail Transit (LRT) service and the Bolton corridor GO trains is also possible under both Shuttle service options. In the 1980’s, a new service on a midtown corridor was considered by GO Transit. The service included connections between on the Milton corridor in the west and Agincourt in the east. Planned improvements to Union Station and an economic down To avoid impacts with freight operations, the Mount Dennis platform would be constructed on the east side of the Mactier Subdivision turn in the 1990’s placed the midtown corridor plan on the back burner. right of way. Platform connections and passageways must be equipped to provide accessible mobility service to Bolton passengers and station platforms specifications must accommodate the volume of riders transferring between the corridor services. Connections The Midtown corridor service concept has been revived and is included in both the Metrolinx and GO 2020 Plans for future transit between the Bolton and Georgetown corridor trains must minimize both passenger and train dwell intervals at the transfer stations. development consideration. Development of commuter facilities on the North Toronto Subdivision would provide a new east/west GO commuter rail corridor alternative connecting to existing TTC subway station facilities and future LRT stations. Commuter facilities on End to end trip times for the shuttle service are estimated at approximately 60 minutes. This includes 39 minutes of travel on the Mactier the North Toronto Subdivision would afford the opportunity to provide a future extension of the corridor including potential service Subdivision when Weston is served and 36 minutes when Weston is excluded and approximately 21 minutes between Weston and extensions to Agincourt, Markham (Locust Hill) and Seaton in the east and to Kipling in the west. Union Station. Station dwell times to permit passenger transference between the Bolton and Georgetown corridor trains were allotted as follows: A Summerhill service option provides two viable station location sites and transfer nodes to the TTC subway lines at the Spadina/Dupont and Summerhill stations. hh Weston Station: Eastward Trains 4 minutes. hh Weston Station: Westward Trains 3 minutes Challenges unique to this routing option exist however. As discussed in Section 4.3, the North Toronto Subdivision is a highly utilized hh Mount Dennis Station: Eastward Trains 5 minutes freight corridor that connects Toronto to Western Canada and Chicago. It is inevitable that the present two main track corridor would hh Mount Dennis Station: Westward Trains 4 minutes require a capacity expansion to include at least one new track between Osler and Summerhill and possibly include new track elements as far east as Leaside (a track distance of 4.8 miles). Infrastructure requirements are discussed in Section 10 of this report. As discussed in Section 7.4 ridership forecasts for Option 1 in year 2031 projects 4,524 total peak period boardings on trains operating between Bolton and Union Station. In order to anticipate the maximum number of passengers that may transfer between the Bolton The Summerhill option will also require the establishment of a midday layover facility within or in close proximity to the corridor. Due and Georgetown corridor trains, peak ridership demand recorded between Bolton and Weston in Option 1 was analyzed. In 2031, to the surrounding urban development, vertical right of way space on this corridor is finite. The current corridor typically has sufficient approximately 2,050 riders would transfer between the two corridors. This equates to the transference of approximately 410 riders per space to develop two additional tracks to accommodate expanded capacity requirements. Wider sections within the right of way train if ridership is evenly distributed between five Bolton corridor trains. allowance may provide adequate space for tangent storage of GO equipment during the midday however the urban demands on adjacent properties may preclude midday equipment storage on the corridor.

Bolton Commuter Rail Feasibility Report | 37 MMM Group Limited | December 2010 Ridership forecasts for a Summerhill service indicate approximately 50% less demand than Option 1. Year 2031 peak demand indicates 6.4.5 Summary of Service Provisions only 2,300 total boardings. Service Options 1 and 4 attract similar numbers of riders to the corridor. Option 3 attracts 50% less riders to the line than options 1 and The service schedules for the Summerhill option were also developed as a three staged implementation plan as follows: 4 while Option 2 attracts slightly higher riders than Option 3.

hh year 2015 – 3 peak period trains Service Option 1 permits the shared use of GO owned infrastructure however has the greatest impact on the line capacity on the hh year 2021 – 5 peak period trains Georgetown corridor.

hh year 2031 – 5 peak period trains plus hourly off peak service Option 2 ridership and trip duration are impacted by the passenger transfer between the Bolton and Georgetown corridors. The Service schedules included stations stops at Bolton, Kleinburg, Vaughan, Woodbridge, Emery, Mount Dennis, Spadina/Bloor and passenger transfer may also present operational concerns including extended station dwells at Weston and/or Mount Dennis and seating Summerhill. A station stop at Weston was not initially included as the Mount Dennis station could provide access to both the capacity on connecting Georgetown trains. Georgetown corridor GO trains (connecting trains to be identified) and the future Eglinton LRT. In addition, access to Union Station for While Option 3 provides for a future extension of the Midtown corridor, the ridership data indicates that the preponderance of the total Bolton corridor passengers could also be attained by transferring to the TTC subway at Spadina/Bloor or Summerhill. However, when riders would utilize the service to connect to the Georgetown corridor to get to downtown Toronto, instead of travelling to Summerhill. ridership demand was forecasted omitting the Weston station stop, ridership plummeted from 2,300 to 803 peak riders in year 2031. The reduced ridership demand for this option indicates that the predominate passenger destination is Union Station and the Central This reduction in ridership indicates that the predominate passenger destination is Union Station and the Central Business District and Business District and not Yonge Street and the Midtown area. not Yonge Street and the Midtown area. End to end transit time is estimated at 50 minutes. Service Option 4 also utilizes a portion of the Weston Subdivision although only impacts the section from Parkdale to Bathurst Street 6.4.4 Bolton to Union via CN Halton/York/Newmarket Subdivisions Service (1.4 miles). Option 4 also permits the use of shared infrastructure with other GO corridor services including the Newmarket Subdivision. Option 4 The additional rail service on the Newmarket Subdivision will accelerate the requirement for a rail/rail grade separation at Davenport. The capital cost of the construction of the grade separation would benefit both the Barrie and Bolton corridor services. A direct service between Bolton and Union Station under service option 4 would include the use of the CP Mactier Subdivision to a point north of Islington Avenue where a new connecting track would be constructed. The connecting track would be situated in the vicinity of the Woodbridge station and would extend to and connect with the Halton Subdivision on the north side of the right of way. The route would extend over the CN Halton and York Subdivisions to Snider where an upgraded connecting track would divert the commuter trains to the GO Newmarket Subdivision. The route would extend to Parkdale where the junction of the Weston Subdivision occurs and then extend to the USRC and terminate at Union Station.

Service option 4 would include station stops at Bolton, Kleinburg, Vaughan, Woodbridge, York University, Downsview and Union Station.

End to end trip duration is anticipated at 56 minutes.

Ridership demand for service option 4 is similar to that observed in service option 1 therefore similar service provisions have been developed.

Bolton corridor trains operating under service option 4 would be required to share the Newmarket Subdivision right of way with Barrie corridor GO trains. The draft service option 4 schedules are presented in Appendix G. Further examination of the Bolton and Barrie corridor trains must occur to ensure scheduling conflicts do not occur.

Midday storage of Bolton corridor equipment must occur off corridor.

Bolton Commuter Rail Feasibility Report | 38 MMM Group Limited | December 2010 7.0 Ridership Demand Forecasts 7.1.5 Travel Modes As noted earlier, the YRTP model includes five motorized and one non-motorized modes. These are defined as follows :

7.1 Methodology 1. Auto Driver / Auto Passenger – only auto driver mode trips are assigned to the road network. Combined driver and passenger trips are converted to driver trips through the application of auto occupancy factors. 7.1.1 Overview 2. Public Transit with Walk Access – includes all modes of public transit (bus, streetcar/LRT, and subway), excluding This section of the report provides an overview of the future ridership and transit volumes estimated for GO Transit service along commuter rail. No explicit differentiation is made between the various transit modes. The model relies on EMME/2’s the Bolton rail corridor. The York Region Transit Plan (YRTP) model was used to perform ridership forecasting. The YRTP model is a transit assignment procedures to assign the transit trips to the appropriate modes. conventional four stage urban travel demand forecasting model that simulates travel patterns in the Greater Toronto and Hamilton Area 3. Public Transit with Auto Access – relates to Park/Kiss'n'Ride at subway stations. Trips accessing subway stations using during the a.m. peak 3 hour period. The YRTP model was calibrated using the 2001 Transportation Tomorrow Survey (TTS) data and the commuter parking lots are limited to locations with such facilities. 2001 GTA integrated road and transit network as provided by Data Management Group (DMG). The model estimates a.m. peak three 4. GO Rail with walk or public transit access. hour trips by four transit sub-modes; Transit All-way, Transit car access (Park/Kiss'n'Ride Subway); GO Rail with walk/local transit access; 5. GO Rail with Auto Access – represents Park/Kiss'n'Ride at GO Rail stations. Other than Union Station, all the GO stations and GO Rail car access (Park/Kiss'n'Ride GO Rail). The model has the capability to report total transit trips on any line or segment. The are assumed to have a Park'n'Ride facility. model also includes the expected long term configuration of Highway 427 and GTA West Corridor. The model configuration included 6. Non-motorized – walk/cycle trips. Highway 427 connected to Highway 9 in the north; and the GTA West corridor is connected between Highway 400 and Highway 50. 7.1.6 Calibration and Validation of the Model 7.1.2 Model Development The YRTP model was calibrated using the 2001 Transportation Tomorrow Survey (TTS) data. However, to ensure that the model A travel demand model is a collection of computer programs that implement transportation theories using advanced algorithms to accurately reflects the base year travel patterns, it was validated against the 2006 TTS data. reflect forecasted travel behavior. Like any other forecasting model, YRTP has certain limitations. Despite these limitations, the YRTP is The total trips predicted by the model for all modes combined are within 1% of the observed trips as reported by the 2006 TTS. an invaluable tool in transportation planning, especially when the limitations are understood and accounted for in the decision-making process. There exists some variation at the Regional level. This variation is considered acceptable given the strategic nature of the YRTP.

For the GO Transit service, the model was largely used to evaluate the ridership at the potential GO station locations, and to a lesser extent, the traffic impacts on areas surrounding station sites. 7.2 Ridership Demand Model - Forecasts by Service Option The demand model inputs for the GO service plan included two-way service with 20 minutes headways. This modeling exercise provided 7.1.3 Model Structure a ridership demand forecast that could be contrasted to other analysis performed by similar samples on GO Transit core service areas. The ridership demand analysis provided estimates of projected rider usage at a number of station sites located along the Bolton corridor. The YRTP model is a standard four stage travel demand model. The four stages of the model are trip generation, trip distribution, modal Significant demand proportionate to other line station locations were indicated at locations that were subsequently eliminated from the split, and trip assignment. The model simulates travel by four purpose categories including work; secondary school; post- secondary samples due to land use issues. The results of samples deemed infeasible can be found in Appendix I. One sample was performed to school; and other. The work trips are further categorized into three occupational categories of office; manufacturing; and professional. allow the impact of 30 minute headways (as specified for the Bolton corridor in the GO2020 Plan) on the projected corridor ridership. The “other” trip category accounts for a number of discretionary trip purposes including, but not limited to, shopping and “facilitate” This sample was identified as Alternative 4-1A and assessed the same station locations as Option 1. The station access modes that were (passenger drop-off and pick-up) trips. defined in the model were specified as: walk, drive (by car), by other transit (shuttle bus) and transfers from other rail service.

The model explicitly stimulates five motorized and one non-motorized travel mode for work and post-secondary school trips. Of note The ridership demand analysis was performed on representative station locations on each of the four service options. is the separation of the “Public Transit / GO Rail with walk access” mode and that of “Public Transit / GO Rail with auto access” in the model. This is an important differentiation, which allows the user to model Park'n'Ride lots for transit services.

7.1.4 Traffic Zone System The model has been developed (calibrated and validated) using the 2001 GTA zone system built by the DMG. In addition, refinements have been carried out in York Region, mainly along the Yonge and Highway 7 corridors to better reflect Walk Access to transit stops in these areas.

Bolton Commuter Rail Feasibility Report | 39 MMM Group Limited | December 2010 7.2.1 Option 1 Table 7.2: Passenger Demand AM Peak Period 2015 - Option 1 2015 - Option 1 Option 1 assessed nine locations: five in the City of Toronto, three in the City of Vaughan, and one in the Town of Caledon. Table 7.1 Station Location Jurisdiction Boardings Alightings presents the list of all locations included in this option. The alignment for Option 1 is shown in Figure 7.1 while Table 7.2 presents the NB %NB SB %SB NB %NB SB %SB year 2015 ridership demand results. Union Station Toronto 95 46% 1,923 84% Bloor Station Toronto 46 23% 190 8% 34 17% 178 8% Table 7.1 Option 1 Station Locations Eglinton Avenue West Toronto 13 6% 290 13% 25 12% 26 1% S. No Station Location Jurisdiction GO Weston Toronto 46 22% 552 24% 20 10% 33 1% 1 Union Station Toronto Finch Avenue West Toronto 2 1% 244 11% 77 37% 35 2% 2 Bloor Station Toronto Highway 407 Vaughan- York Region 3 1% 340 15% 26 13% 80 3% 3 Eglinton Avenue West Toronto Rutherford Road Vaughan- York Region 0 0% 188 8% 0 0% 2 0% 4 GO Weston Toronto Major Mackenzie Drive Vaughan- York Region 0 0% 269 12% 22 11% 6 0% 5 Finch Avenue West Toronto Bolton Station Caledon- Peel Region 0 0% 208 9% 1 1% 0 0% 6 Highway 407 Vaughan- York Region 205 100% 2,282 100% 205 100% 2,282 100% 7 Rutherford Road Vaughan- York Region Total 2,487 2,488 8 Major Mackenzie Drive Vaughan- York Region 9 Bolton Station Caledon- Peel Region In order to assess the impact of passenger transfers between the Bolton and Georgetown corridors, the Weston and Bloor station were removed from the Bolton GO line in Option 1-1. Table 7.3 indicates that removing Weston and Bloor from the service decreases the ridership demand of the Bolton route by 117 passengers and that a significant number of riders would utilize the Eglinton Avenue West

location.

Bolton Due to anticipated capacity constraints on the Georgetown corridor it was assumed that service would not be provided at Bloor station. Bolton corridor passengers that would require access to Bloor station would have the option of transferring to the Georgetown corridor Kleinburg or potentially to another connecting transit service at Weston and/or Mount Dennis . It was therefore considered that passengers Langstaff Road requiring access to Bloor station would continue to patron the Bolton corridor service and that the Bloor station ridership demand Woodbridge indicated in sample Option 1 would shift to Weston and Mount Dennis stations.

Emery

Weston Table 7.3: Passenger Demand AM Peak Period 2015- Weston and Bloor Excluded Jurisdiction 2015- Option 1-1 Excluding Weston and Bloor Mount Dennis

Bloor Union Station Location Jurisdiction Boardings Alightings NB %NB SB %SB NB %NB SB %SB Union Station Toronto 112 77% 2,052 92% Eglinton Avenue West Toronto 28 19% 601 27% 45 31% 391 2% Figure 7.1: Station Site for Option 1. Finch Avenue West Toronto 2 2% 417 19% 60 42% 38 2% Highway 407 Vaughan- York Region 3 417% 399 18% 23 16% 90 4% Rutherford Road Vaughan- York Region 0 0% 187 8% 15 11% 2 0% Major Mackenzie Drive Vaughan- York Region 0 0% 341 15% 0 0% 6 0% Bolton Station Caledon- Peel Region 0 0% 280 13% 2 1% - 0% 144 100% 2,226 100% 145 100% 2,226 100% TOTAL 2,370 2,371

Bolton Commuter Rail Feasibility Report | 40 MMM Group Limited | December 2010 7.2.2 Option 3 Table 7.6: AM Peak Period Ridership Projections – Option 3-1 Excluding Weston Station

Option 3 included an assessment of potential ridership at Bolton, Major Mackenzie Drive, Rutherford Road, Highway 407, Finch Avenue Jurisdiction 2015 - Option 3-1 Excluding Weston West, Weston, Eglinton Avenue West, Spadina/Dupont and Summerhill. This option included eight station stops; five in the City of Station Location Jurisdiction Boardings Alightings Toronto, three in the City of Vaughan, and one in the Town of Caledon. Table 7.4 lists the locations included in this option. NB %NB SB %SB NB %NB SB %SB Summerhill Toronto 15 17% 105 30% Table 7.4: Option 3 Station Locations Dupont Toronto 33 39% 35 10% 7 8% 88 25% S. No Station Location Jurisdiction Eglinton Avenue West Toronto 28 33% 38 11% 19 22% 47 13% 1 Summerhill Station Toronto Finch Avenue West Toronto 5 6% 562 16% 32 37% 34 10% 2 Spadina/Dupont Station Toronto Highway 407 Vaughan- York Region 5 6% 49 14% 16 18% 70 20% 3 Eglinton Avenue West Toronto Rutherford Road Vaughan- York Region 0 0% 30 9% 0 0% 3 1% 4 GO Weston Toronto Major Mackenzie Vaughan- York Region 0 0% 88 25% 12 14% 5 1% 5 Finch Avenue West Toronto Bolton Station Caledon- Peel Region 0 0% 56 16% 0 0% 0 0% 6 Highway 407 Vaughan- York Region 86 100% 352 100% 86 100% 352 100% 7 Rutherford Road Vaughan- York Region TOTAL 438 438 8 Major Mackenzie Dr. Vaughan- York Region 9 Bolton Station Caledon- Peel Region 7.2.3 Option 4 In order to assess the potential ridership demand for Service Option 4 (CN Subdivisions), four stations within Toronto included in Table 7.5 documents the projected ridership for the Summerhill option for year 2015. The assessment evaluated a service operating at Option 1 were excluded from the sample. Station stops at York University, Downsview and Toronto Union were substituted. Table 7.7 20 minute headways. Option 3 indicated a significantly lower ridership demand than noted in Option 1 and included a total boardings indicates that major boarding is projected to occur at Highway 407 (712) and York University (578) stations in Option 4. of 1,253 riders. Option 3-1 excluded Weston station from the location list so that an assessment of riders utilizing the Georgetown corridor to access Union Station could be observed. When the station at Weston was eliminated from the analysis, the ridership demand Table 7.7: AM Peak Period Ridership Projects 2015-Option 4 plummeted to 438 riders. Table 7.6 illustrates the projected ridership on the Summerhill line, excluding Weston Station. Option 4 - 2015 Table 7.5: AM Peak Period Ridership Projects 2015-Option 3 Station Location Jurisdiction Boardings Alightings NB %NB SB %SB NB %NB SB %SB Option 3 - 2015 Union Station Toronto 179 90% 2,017 92% Station Location Jurisdiction Boardings Alightings Downsview Toronto 1 1% 21 1% 5 2% 1 0% NB %NB SB %SB NB %NB SB %SB York University Toronto 16 8% 562 26% 106 53% 60 3% Summerhill Toronto 14 11% 106 9% Highway 407 Toronto 4 2% 708 32% 75 38% 107 5% Dupont Toronto 31 23% 33 3% 8 6% 96 9% Rutherford Road Toronto 0 0% 230 10% 0 0% 2 0% Eglinton Avenue West Toronto 21 16% 30 3% 10 7% 38 3% Major Mackenzie Vaughan- York Region 0 0% 411 19% 11 6% 4 0% GO Weston Toronto 58 44% 47 4% 16 12% 775 69% Bolton Station Vaughan- York Region 0 0% 259 12% 2 1% 0 0% Finch Avenue West Toronto 4 3% 278 25% 56 42% 32 3% 199 100% 2,192 100% 199 100% 2,192 100% Highway 407 Vaughan- York Region 5 4% 243 22% 22 17% 66 6% TOTAL 2,391 2,391 Rutherford Road Vaughan- York Region 0 0% 111 10% 0 0% 3 0% Major Mackenzie Vaughan- York Region 0 0% 221 20% 20 15% 5 0% Bolton Station Caledon- Peel Region 0 0% 158 14% 0 0% 0 0% 132 100% 1,121 100% 132 100% 1,121 100% TOTAL 1,253 1,253

Bolton Commuter Rail Feasibility Report | 41 MMM Group Limited | December 2010 7.2.4 Option 2 7.4.1 Peak Period Forecasts - Option 1 Option 2 ridership demand was derived from Option 1 results. As a shuttle service would not include a direct connection to Union A summary of total passenger peak period demand for Option 1 for the years 2015, 2021 and 2031 is shown in Table 7.9 while Figure Station, it was assumed that all south bound passengers boarding at Weston and Mount Dennis and all boardings at Bloor indicated in 7.2 illustrates the peak period demand over the four service implementation horizons. The details of projected ridership and at each Option 1 would utilize the Georgetown corridor. station for the years 2021 and 2031 are presented in Table 7.10.

Table 7.8 indicates the project ridership demand for Service Option 2. Table 7.9: Summary Passenger Demand AM Peak Period – Option 1 Table 7.8: Passenger Demand AM Peak Period 2015 - Option 2 Option 1 AM Peak Period Year Boardings Alightings 2015 - Option 2 NB SB Total NB SB Total Station Location Jurisdiction Boardings Alightings 2015 205 2,282 2,487 205 2,282 2,487 NB %NB SB %SB NB %NB SB %SB 2021 247 2,752 2,999 247 2,752 2,999 Eglinton Avenue West Toronto 13 21% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 2031 376 4,188 4,564 376 4,188 4,564 GO Weston Toronto 46 72% 0 0% 0 0% 1,127 90% Finch Avenue West Toronto 2 3% 244 20% 13 20% 35 3%

Highway 407 Vaughan- York Region 3 4% 340 27% 17 26% 80 6% BOLTON RAIL CORRIDOR Rutherford Road Vaughan- York Region 0 0% 188 15% 9 15% 2 0% AM PEAK PERIOD RIDERSHIP 5000 Major Mackenzie Dr Vaughan- York Region 0 0% 269 22% 14 22% 6 0% 4564 4500 Bolton Station Caledon- Peel Region 0 0% 208 17% 11 17% 0 0% 4188 4000 64 100% 1,250 100% 64 100% 1,250 100% 3500 2999

1,313 1,313 se ng ers 3000 2752 Pas 2487 of 2500 2282 7.3 Growth Factor Assessment 2000 Number Number The results of passenger service demand and ridership for the year 2031 were interpolated for the years 2011, 2015 and 2021 using 1500 an estimated growth factor. In order to establish the growth patterns, historical data from the Transportation Tomorrow Survey (TTS) 1000 376 500 databank was used. The GO rail occupancy data was extracted both for the AM peak period and AM peak hour, for the years 1995, 205 247 1998, 2001, 2004 and 2006 for the following five locations: 0 2015 2021 2031 1. 920 Georgetown GO, West of Indian Line, Georgetown (Border of Peel). NB SB Total 2. 930 Richmond Hill GO, North of Steeles Avenue, Richmond Hill (Border of York). Figure 7.2: AM Peak Period Projected Ridership- Option 1 3. 940 Milton GO, at (Border of Peel). Figure 7.2 4. 945 Bradford GO, North of Steeles Avenue, Bradford (Border of York). 5. 950 Stouffville GO, North of Steeles Avenue, Stouffville (Border of York).

The 1995 and 1998 data was considered outdated and unrepresentative of the current conditions. Similarly the data pertaining to peak hour was not appropriate as compared to peak period. The growth factor was calculated using the data for the period from 2001 to 2006 corresponding to peak period. Amongst the five different GO rail services, Milton GO service was selected to establish the growth factor. The analyses have indicated that the rail occupancy for Milton GO (940) was increased at a linear growth of 5.22% per annum from 2001 to 2006. This value was used as the growth factor to determine the ridership for the years 2015 and 2021.

7.4 Peak Period Forecasts for 2021 and 2031 Ridership demand forecasts for years 2021 and 2031 were derived for Options 1, 3 and 4.

Bolton Commuter Rail Feasibility Report | 42 MMM Group Limited | December 2010 Table 7.10: Passenger Demand AM Peak Period 2021 and 2031 - Option 1 BOLTON RIDERSHIP 2021 - Option 1 AM PEAK PERIOD DEMAND Station Location Jurisdiction Boardings Alightings 2500 2300 NB %NB SB %SB NB %NB SB %SB 2057 Union Station Toronto 114 46% 2,319 84% 2000 rs

Bloor Station Toronto 56 23% 229 8% 41 17% 215 8% ge 1511 sen Eglinton Avenue West Toronto 16 6% 350 13% 31 12% 31 1% s 1500 1352

Pa 1253 of GO Weston Toronto 55 22% 666 24% 24 10% 39 1% 1121 er 1000 Finch Avenue West Toronto 3 1% 294 11% 92 37% 42 2% mb Nu Highway 407 Vaughan- York Region 3 1% 410 15% 32 13% 96 3% Rutherford Road Vaughan- York Region 0 0% 227 8% 0 0% 3 0% 500 243 Major Mackenzie Drive Vaughan- York Region 0 0% 325 12% 26 11% 7 0% 132 160 Bolton Station Caledon- Peel Region 0 0% 251 9% 2 1% 0 0% 0 2015 2021 2031 247 100% 2,752 100% 247 100% 2,752 100% NB SB Total Total 2,999 3,000 Figure 7.3: AM Peak Period Projected Ridership- Option 3 Table 7.12: AM Peak Period Ridership Projections 2021 and 2031 – Option 3 2031- Option 1 Figure 7.3 2021 - Option 3 Station Location Jurisdiction Boardings Alightings Station Location Jurisdiction Boardings Alightings NB %NB SB %SB NB %NB SB %SB NB %NB SB %SB NB %NB SB %SB Union Station Toronto 174 46% 3,529 84% Summerhill Toronto 17 11% 127 9% Bloor Station Toronto 85 23% 349 8% 62 17% 327 8% Dupont Toronto 37 23% 39 3% 10 6% 116 9% Eglinton Avenue West Toronto 24 6% 533 13% 47 12% 47 1% Eglinton Avenue West Toronto 25 16% 36 3% 12 7% 45 3% GO Weston Toronto 84 22% 1,013 24% 36 10% 60 1% GO Weston Toronto 70 44% 57 4% 19 12% 934 69% Finch Avenue West Toronto 4 1% 448 11% 141 37% 64 2% Finch Avenue West Toronto 5 3% 336 25% 68 42% 39 3% Highway 407 Vaughan- York Region 5 1% 624 15% 48 13% 146 3% Highway 407 Vaughan- York Region 6 4% 293 22% 27 17% 80 6% Rutherford Road Vaughan- York Region 0 0% 345 8% 0 0% 4 0% Rutherford Road Vaughan- York Region 0 0% 133 10% 0 0% 4 0% Major Mackenzie Drive Vaughan- York Region 0 0% 494 12% 40 11% 11 0% Major Mackenzie Vaughan- York Region 0 0% 266 20% 24 15% 6 0% Bolton Station Caledon- Peel Region 0 0% 382 9% 3 1% 0 0% Bolton Station Caledon- Peel Region 0 0% 191 14% 1 0% 0 0% 376 100% 4,188 100% 376 100% 4,188 100% 160 100% 1,352 100% 160 100% 1,352 100% Total 4,564 4,565 TOTAL 1,511 1,511 7.4.2 Peak Period Forecasts- Option 3 As was noted in year 2015 forecasts, Option 3 attracts the least number of riders to the Bolton corridor in years 2021 and 2031. Table 7.11 and Figure 7.3 provide a summary of projected ridership for Option 3 for years 2021 and 2031 while Table 7.12 presents the demand by station location for years 2021 and 2031.

Table 7.11: Summary Passenger Demand AM Peak Period – Option 3 Option 3 AM Peak Period Year Boardings Alightings NB SB Total NB SB Total 2015 132 1,121 1,253 132 1,121 1,253 2021 160 1,352 1,511 160 1,352 1,511 2031 243 2,057 2,300 243 2,057 2,300

Bolton Commuter Rail Feasibility Report | 43 MMM Group Limited | December 2010 Passenger demand forecasts at each station for years 2015, 2021 and 2031 are presented in Table 7.14. 2031- Option 3 Station Location Jurisdiction Boardings Alightings Table 7.14: Passenger Demand AM Peak Period 2021 and 2031 - Option 4 NB %NB SB %SB NB %NB SB %SB 2021 - Option 4 Summerhill Toronto 26 11% 194 9% Station Location Jurisdiction Boardings Alightings Spadina/Dupont Toronto 56 23% 60 3% 15 6% 176 9% NB %NB SB %SB NB %NB SB %SB Eglinton Avenue West Toronto 38 16% 55 3% 18 7% 69 3% Union Station Toronto 216 90% 2,432 92% GO Weston Toronto 106 44% 87 4% 29 12% 1,422 69% Finch Avenue West Toronto 8 3% 511 25% 103 42% 59 3% Downsview Toronto 1 1% 26 1% 6 2% 1 0% Highway 407 Vaughan- York Region 9 4% 446 22% 41 17% 122 6% York University Toronto 19 8% 678 26% 128 53% 73 3% Rutherford Road Vaughan- York Region 0 0% 203 10% 0 0% 6 0% Highway 407 Toronto 5 2% 854 32% 91 38% 129 5% Major Mackenzie Vaughan- York Region 0 0% 405 20% 37 15% 9 0% Rutherford Road Toronto 0 0% 277 10% 0 0% 3 0% Bolton Station Caledon- Peel Region 0 0% 290 14% 0 0% 0 0% Major Mackenzie Vaughan- York Region 0 0% 495 19% 14 6% 5 0% 243 100% 2,057 100% 243 100% 2,057 100% Bolton Station Vaughan- York Region 0 0% 313 12% 2 1% 0 0% TOTAL 2,300 2,300 241 100% 2,643 100% 241 100% 2,643 100% Total 2,884 2,884 7.4.3 Peak Period Forecasts - Option 4 2031 - Option 4 The peak period forecasts for Option 4 are expected to be similar to the demand assessed in Option 1. Projected AM peak period Station Location Jurisdiction Boardings Alightings forecasts for years 2015, 2021 and 2031 are provided in Table 7.13 and illustrated in Figure 7.4. NB %NB SB %SB NB %NB SB %SB Union Station Toronto 328 90% 3,701 92% Table 7.13: Projected AM Peak Period Forecasts – Option 4 Downsview Toronto 2 1% 39 1% 9 1% 1 0% Option 4 AM Peak Period York University Vaughan- York Region 29 8% 1,032 26% 195 2% 111 3% Year Boardings Alightings Highway 407 Vaughan- York Region 7 2% 1,299 32% 138 38% 197 5% NB SB Total NB SB Total Rutherford Road Vaughan- York Region 0 0% 422 10% 0 0% 4 0% 2015 199 2,192 2,391 199 2,192 2,391 Major Mackenzie Vaughan- York Region 0 0% 754 19% 21 6% 8 0% 2021 241 2,643 2,884 241 2,643 2,884 Bolton Station Caledon- Peel Region 0 0% 476 12% 3 1% 0 0% 2031 366 4,022 4,388 366 4,022 4,388 366 100% 4,022 100% 366 100% 4,022 100% Total 4,388 4,388 BOLTON RAIL CORRIDOR AM PEAK PERIOD RIDERSHIP 5,000 4,388 4,500 4,022 4,000

3,500 rs

ge 2,884 3,000

sen 2,643 2,391 2,500 Pas 2,192 of 2,000

1,500 Number Number 1,000 366 500 199 241 0 2015 2021 2031

NB SB Total

Figure 7.4: AM Peak Period Projected Ridership - Option 4 Figure 7.4

Bolton Commuter Rail Feasibility Report | 44 MMM Group Limited | December 2010 7.4.4 Peak Period Forecasts - Option 2 Table 7.16: Passenger Demand AM Peak Period 2021 and 2031 - Option 2 2021 - Option 2 The peak period forecasts for Option 2 are expected to be similar to the demand assessed in Option 3. A summary of the projected AM Station Location Jurisdiction Boardings Alightings peak period forecasts for years 2015, 2021 and 2031 is provided in Table 7.15 and illustrated in Figure 7.5. NB %NB SB %SB NB %NB SB %SB Eglinton Avenue West Toronto 16 21% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% Table 7.15: Summary Passenger Demand AM Peak Period – Option 2 GO Weston Toronto 55 72% 0 0% 0 0% 1,359 90% Option 2 – AM Peak Period Finch Avenue West Toronto 3 3% 294 20% 15 20% 42 3% Year Boardings Alightings Highway 407 Vaughan- York Region 3 4% 410 27% 20 26% 96 6% NB SB Total NB SB Total Rutherford Road Vaughan- York Region 0 0% 227 15% 11 15% 3 0% 2015 64 1,250 1,313 64 1,250 1,313 Major Mackenzie Dr Vaughan- York Region 0 0% 325 22% 17 22% 7 0% 2021 77 1,507 1,584 77 1,507 1,584 Bolton Station Caledon- Peel Region 0 0% 251 17% 13 17% 0 0% 2031 117 2,293 2,410 117 2,293 2,410 77 100% 1,507 100% 77 100% 1,507 100% 1,584 1,584 BOLTON RAIL CORRIDOR AM PEAK PERIOD RIDERSHIP 2031 - Option 2 3000 Station Location Jurisdiction Boardings Alightings 2410 2500 NB %NB SB %SB NB %NB SB %SB 2293 Eglinton Avenue West Toronto 24 21% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 2000 GO Weston Toronto 84 72% 0 0% 0 0% 2,068 90% 1584 P asse ng ers 1507 Finch Avenue West Toronto 4 3% 448 20% 23 20% 64 3% of 1500 1313 1250 Highway 407 Vaughan- York Region 5 4% 624 27% 31 26% 146 6%

Number Number 1000 Rutherford Road Vaughan- York Region 0 0% 345 15% 17 15% 4 0% Major Mackenzie Dr Vaughan- York Region 0 0% 494 22% 26 22% 11 0% 500 Bolton Station Caledon- Peel Region 0 0% 382 17% 20 17% 0 0% 64 77 117 0 117 100% 2,293 100% 117 100% 2,293 100% 2015 2021 2031 2,410 24,10 NB SB Total

Figure 7.5: AM Peak Period Projected Ridership – Option 2 7.5 Projections for Off Peak and Full Day Services Figure 7.5 Passenger demand forecasts at each station for years 2015, 2021 and 2031 are presented in Table 7.16. The off peak service demand was estimated based on historical patterns observed on other corridors. The Lakeshore West corridor was selected as the representative corridor and the results of the cordon counts conducted by GO Transit in 2007 were used to determine the proportion of full day and off peak period ridership with respect to the AM peak period. The projected off peak period ridership was estimated as 54% of the morning peak period ridership.

Bolton Commuter Rail Feasibility Report | 45 MMM Group Limited | December 2010 7.5.1 Option 1 - Off Peak and Full Day Services BOLTON RAIL CORRIDOR FULL DAY SERVICE DEMAND The estimated off peak period ridership for Option 1 is presented in Table 7.17 and illustrated in Figure 7.6. The expected off 14000 peak service demand is approximately 1,350 for the both directions of travel in the year 2015. It is expected that this will increase to 11593 approximately 1,600 and 2,500 in the year 2021 and 2031 respectively. 12000 rs

ge 10000

ssen 7618

Table 7.17: Summary Passenger Demand Off Peak Period – Option 1 Pa 8000 of 6318 6047 er Option-1 Off Peak Period 6000 5545 mb

Year Boardings Alightings Nu 3644 3974 4000 NB SB Total NB SB Total 3022 3296 2015 535 808 1,343 535 808 1,343 2000 2021 645 975 1,620 645 975 1,620 0 2031 981 1,483 2,465 981 1,483 2,465 2015 2021 2031 NB: 54% of AM Peak Period NB SB Total Figure 7.7: Full Day Service Demand - Option 1

BOLTON RAIL CORRIDOR 7.5.2 FigureOption 7.7 3 - Off Peak and Full Day Services OFF PEAK PERIOD RIDERSHIP Predictably the off peak and full day service ridership forecasts for Option 3 are significantly less than the forecasts generated for 3000 Option 1 and Option 4. Off peak forecasts for Option 3 are presented in Table 7.19 and Figure 7.8 and full day service forecasts are 2465 2500 presented in Table 7.20 and Figure 7.9. rs 2000 Table 7.19: Summary Passenger Demand Off Peak Period – Option 3 sse nge 1620

Pa 1483

of Option 3 Off Peak Period 1500 1343 er Year Boardings Alightings mb 975 981

Nu 1000 808 NB SB Total NB SB Total 645 535 2015 270 407 677 270 407 677 500 2021 325 491 816 325 491 816

0 2031 495 748 1,242 495 748 1,242 201520212031 NB: 54% of AM Peak Period NB SB Total Figure 7.6: Off Peak Period Ridership - Option 1 Figure 7.6 The estimated passenger demand for full day service is shown in Table 7.18 and illustrated in Figure 7.7. Total ridership demand for the target year 2015, when the service is planned to commence is approximately 6,300 passengers per day.

Table 7.18: Summary Full Day Service Demand – Option 1 Option-1 Total Full Day Year Boardings Alightings NB SB Total NB SB Total 2015 3,022 3,296 6,318 3,022 3,296 6,318 2021 3,644 3,974 7,618 3,644 3,974 7,618 2031 5,545 6,047 11,593 5,545 6,047 11,593 NB: Twice of Peak Period + Off Peak Period

Bolton Commuter Rail Feasibility Report | 46 MMM Group Limited | December 2010 7.5.3 Option 4 - Off Peak and Full Day Services BOLTON RAIL CORRIDOR OFF PEAK PERIOD RIDERSHIP Off peak service forecasts for Option 4 estimate 1,291, 1,557 and 2,370 riders in years, 2015, 2021 and 2031 respectively as indicated in 1400 1242 Table 7.21 and Figure 7.10 below. Full day service forecasts for Option 4 are displayed in Table 7.22 and Figure 7.11. 1200 Table 7.21 - Summary Projected Off Peak Forecasts – Option 4 rs 1000 Option 4 Off Peak Period

asse nge 816 Year Boardings Alightings P 800 748 of

677

er NB SB Total NB SB Total

mb 600 491 495 2015 514 777 1,291 514 777 1,291 Nu 407 400 2021 620 937 1,557 620 937 1,557 270 325 2031 943 1,426 2,370 943 1,426 2,370 200 NB: 54% of AM Peak Period 0 2015 2021 2031 NB SB Total BOLTON RAIL CORRIDOR OFF PEAK PERIOD RIDERSHIP Figure 7.8: Off Peak Period Ridership - Option 3 2,500 2,370 Table 7.20: SummaryFigure Full7.8 Day Service Demand – Option 3 2,000 rs Option 3 Total Full Day 1,557

Year Boardings Alightings asse nge 1,500 1,426 P 1,291 of

NB SB Total NB SB Total er

mb 937 943 1,000 2015 1,523 1,661 3,184 1,523 1,661 3,184 Nu 777 620 2021 1,836 2,003 3,839 1,836 2,003 3,839 514 500 2031 2,795 3,048 5,842 2,795 3,048 5,842 NB: Twice of Peak Period + Off Peak Period 0 20152021 2031

BOLTON RAIL CORRIDOR NB SB Total FULL DAY SERVICE DEMAND Figure 7.10: Off Peak Projected Ridership – Option 4 7000 Figure 7.10 5842 6000 Table 7.22: Summary Full Day Service Demand – Option 4

rs Option 4 Total Full Day 5000 Year Boardings Alightings asse nge 3839 P 4000

of NB SB Total NB SB Total 3184 er 3048 2795 2015 2,906 3,169 6,074 2,906 3,169 6,074

mb 3000

Nu 2021 3,504 3,821 7,324 3,504 3,821 7,324 1836 2003 2000 1523 1661 2031 5,331 5,814 11,146 5,331 5,814 11,146

1000 NB: Twice of Peak Period + Off Peak Period

0 201520212031 NB SB Total

Figure 7.9: Full Day Service Demand - Option 3 Figure 7.9

Bolton Commuter Rail Feasibility Report | 47 MMM Group Limited | December 2010 BOLTON RAIL CORRIDOR Table 7.24: Summary Total Full Day Service Demand - Option 2 FULL DAY SERVICE DEMAND Option 2 Total Full Day 12,000 11,146 Year Boardings Alightings

10,000 NB SB Total NB SB Total

rs 2015 1,596 1,740 3,336 1,596 1,740 3,336 8,000 7,324

asse nge 2021 1,924 2,098 4,023 1,924 2,098 4,023 P 6,074 5,814 of 6,000 2031 2,928 3,193 6,121 2,928 3,193 6,121 er 5,331

mb 3,821 NB: Twice of Peak Period + Off Peak Period Nu 4,000 3,169 3,504 2,906

2,000 BOLTON RAIL CORRIDOR 0 FULL DAY SERVICE DEMAND 2015 2021 2031 7000 NB SB Total 6121 6000 Figure 7.11: Full Day Service Demand - Option 4 Figure 7.11 5000 rs 7.5.4 Option 2 – Off Peak and Full Day Services 4023 4000

asse nge 3336 3193 The off peak and full day service ridership forecasts for Option 2 are similar to Option 3. Off peak forecasts for Option 2 are presented in P 2928 of

3000

Table 7.23 and Figure 7.12 and full day service forecasts are presented in Table 7.24 and Figure 7.13. er 2098 mb 1740 1924 2000 Nu 1596 Table 7.23: Summary Off Peak Service Demand - Option 2 1000 Option 2 Off Peak Period Year Boardings Alightings 0 2015 2021 2031 NB SB Total NB SB Total NB SB Total 2015 282 427 709 282 427 709 Figure 7.13: Full Day Service Demand – Option 2 2021 341 515 855 341 515 855 Figure 7.13 2031 518 783 1,301 518 783 1,301 NB: 54% of AM Peak Period 7.6 Ridership Forecast Summary The ridership forecasts for all options indicate limited demand to support a rail service on the Bolton corridor. Options 1 and Option 4 indicate the highest ridership while a significant drop in demand is exhibited in Options 2 and 3.

BOLTON RAIL CORRIDOR OFF PEAK PERIOD RIDERSHIP The Option 2 ridership forecast indicates a significant reduction demand that can be attributed to the passenger transfer to the

1400 Georgetown corridor. Ridership demand for Option 3 indicates that the terminus location at Summerhill, has a significant impact on 1301 ridership forecasts for the Bolton corridor. 1200 rs 1000 Table 7.25 provides a comparison of AM and PM Peak, Off Peak and Full Day service for Options 1, 2, 3 and 4 for year 2015. 855 sse nge 783 Pa 800

of Table 7.25: Ridership Comparison 2015 709 er

mb 600 515 518 Option Peak 2031 (am &pm) Off Peak 2031 Full Day 2015 Nu 427 400 1 4,974 1,343 6,318 282 341 2 2,626 709 3,336 200 3 2,506 677 3,184 0 2015 2021 2031 4 4,782 1,291 6,074

NB SB Total Figure 7.12: Full Day Service Demand – Option 2 Figure 7.12

Bolton Commuter Rail Feasibility Report | 48 MMM Group Limited | December 2010 8.0 Corridor Capacity Assessment Table 8.2: Projected Total Daily Train Movements Mile 4.3 - North Toronto Subdivision Daily Total 2011 2015 2021 2031 Average 50 57 65 79 8.1 CP Mactier Subdivison - Capacity Assessment Maximum 70 80 92 112 The capacity analysis for the CP subdivisions were initially performed using data retrieved from trackside automatic equipment Minimum 16 18 21 25 identification(AEI) devices collected and provided by CP. Future freight volumes were projected by applying a 3% per annum growth Median 52 59 68 83 rate to the 2008 data provided. However, during the course of this feasibility study, due to certain economic conditions, CP announced that changes to its freight train service plan would require further review of the infrastructure requirements to support a GO commuter Based on the 2008 recorded traffic sample, the forecasted freight volumes excluding the traffic diverted from the northwest route, the rail service on the Bolton corridor. Features of CP's freight service plan changes that will directly impact capacity on the CP subdivisions average daily operation of freight trains is estimated at 79 trains while the maximum daily number trains is estimated at 112 . included: 8.2.1 CP North Toronto Subdivisions - Future Initiatives 1. The operation of bi-directional 10,000 foot freight trains; and The GO2020 Plan proposed the development of a midtown regional rail service between Kipling and Agincourt that would extend GO’s 2. The diversion of freight traffic from the Montreal - Sudbury corridor between Smiths Falls and Sudbury via Toronto. service to the communities of Locust Hill and Seaton. The proposed expansion route would occupy the CP, North Toronto and Belleville Subdivisions for the Seaton Service and the CP Havelock Subdivision to Locust Hill. CP provided a base case infrastructure plan that specified the improvements required to support four trains at 40 minute headways or three trains at 30 minute headways. This plan considered the requirements on the Mactier Subdivision and only specified those The introduction of a Bolton rail corridor service extending to Summerhill creates a natural progression in the development of future requirements specific to the Summerhill Option 3 service on the track segment between Osler and Eglinton Avenue on the Mactier proposed services along the midtown corridor. However, the mid-town corridor project will be the subject of further study by GO Transit. Subdivision. The capacity impacts at the Davenport interlocking where the North Toronto Subdivision meets the Newmarket Subdivision at grade CP also developed an Additional Service/Counter-flow infrastructure plan. Specific capacity improvements are discussed in Section 10.0 (mile 5.26 North Toronto Subdivision) to the Barrie corridor service must be assessed further. The grade separation of the two corridors of this report. The CP proposed Capacity Expansion Plan Schematics can be found in Appendix F. is the subject of a future Metrolinx /GO initiative.

8.2 CP North Toronto Subdivision - Capacity Assessment 8.3 GO Weston Subdivision - Capacity Assessment The North Toronto Subdivision consists of two parallel main tracks connecting to the Belleville Subdivision at Leaside in the east, the Determination of capacity/infrastructure improvements between Bathurst Street and GO’s Weston station on the Weston Subdivision did Mactier Subdivision at Osler and the Galt Subdivision at West Toronto in the west. not form a part of this Study except for the infrastructure improvements required to provide an interconnection between the CP Mactier Subdivision and the GO Weston Subdivision. CP indicated that rail traffic has increased on the North Toronto Subdivision as a result of the closure of the northwest route extending between Smiths Falls and Sudbury and the diversion of traffic via Toronto. The freight volumes on the CP North Toronto Subdivision The capacity constraints on the GO Georgetown corridor will however, impact the opportunity to provide a direct train service between based on a sample of freight movements recorded between June 1, and July 2, 2008 by the AEI reader located at mile 4.3 North Toronto Bolton and Union Station for Service Option 1 and to a lesser extent, Service Option 4. Potential impacts of the Georgetown corridor Subdivision indicated a daily average of 47 train movements. Table 8.1 provides samples of the daily train volumes recorded by the AEI expansion on the feasibility of a future Bolton corridor service are discussed below. reader. 8.3.1 GO Weston Subdivision – Future Initiatives Table 8.1: AEI Train Counts Mile 4.3 North Toronto Subdivision June 1, 2008 – July 2, 2008 The GO Georgetown corridor trains operate over the rights of way of GO Transit’s USRC and Weston Subdivision and CN’s Halton Daily East West Total Subdivision. Currently GO Transit trains share access to the corridor with CN freight movements and VIA Rail passenger trains. Average 23 24 47 Maximum 32 34 66 The Georgetown corridor provides GO service to the Regions of Halton and Peel and the suburban communities of Malton, Bramalea, Minimum 9 6 15 Brampton, Mount Pleasant and Georgetown. Additionally, service is provided to three intermediate stations located in the City of Median 24 25 49 Toronto (Bloor, Weston and Etobicoke North).

To project future freight volumes on the North Toronto Subdivision, a growth factor of 3% per annum was applied to the recorded freight totals illustrated in Table 8.2.

Bolton Commuter Rail Feasibility Report | 49 MMM Group Limited | December 2010 8.3.1.1 Georgetown Corridor Service Expansion Weston Subdivision, the Airport Rail Link service will require access to two tracks. Appendix D provides the proposed layout for the Georgetown corridor in this vicinity. The service expansion of the current peak and limited off peak service on the Georgetown Corridor will include frequent, 15 minute headway peak service from Brampton and selected trips serving Georgetown and Guelph; 30 minute counter-peak service; and twice hourly all day service between Union Station and Mount Pleasant (as outlined in the GO 2020 plan). Currently GO bus service is 8.4 CN Halton & York/GO Newmarket Subdivisions - Capacity Assessment provided between Bolton and the Malton and Etobicoke North GO train stations. 8.4.1 Barrie Corridor Service Expansion The introduction of direct rail service between Bolton and Union Station will be dependent on available infrastructure capacity on The GO2020 Plan identifies required service expansion for the Barrie corridor as: peak period service every 15-20 minutes with 30 the GO Weston Subdivision south of the GO Weston station, within the USRC and on the CN Oakville Subdivision between Bathurst minute counter peak trains; and all day twice hourly service between Union Station and Bradford. Street and Mimico East for non-revenue movements to Willowbrook. Capacity analyses for the Weston Subdivision must also consider the service requirements of the expanded Barrie Corridor between Parkdale and Strachan Avenue. All future GO services including The proposed increases in the level of service on the Barrie corridor could potentially impact three of the Bolton Corridor service options. bi-directional peak and off peak trains must be accommodated on two main tracks on the Weston Subdivision as the Airport Rail Link Firstly, the Barrie corridor expanded service would further frustrate capacity available to the Bolton corridor trains under the Direct service requirements discussed below, will have access to the remaining two tracks. Bolton to Union Station service option between Parkdale and Bathurst Street on the GO Weston Subdivision, within the USRC, at Union The shuttle service option 2 will be depended on available seating capacity on connecting Georgetown trains. The Georgetown service Station and on the CN Oakville Subdivision. currently operates a maximum of ten coaches per train. Use of MP40 locomotives could allow the operation of twelve coaches per train. Secondly, the at grade crossing of the GO Newmarket Subdivision with the CP North Toronto Subdivision at Davenport (as discussed in Ridership forecasts for the Bolton corridor service in year 2015 indicate that a maximum of 375 passengers (if evenly distributed between Section 8.2.1) will create increased capacity constraints for Bolton corridor trains operating under the Direct Bolton to Summerhill Service trains) would transfer between the Georgetown and Bolton corridors at the connecting Station. Option 3 particularly within the peak service periods. Operational plans for the Georgetown corridor trains must include provisions to accommodate the passenger transfer to and from the Thirdly, increases in the Barrie corridor service plan will impact the capacity available to support the implementation of Service Option 4 Bolton corridor under this scenario. on the Newmarket Subdivision. To minimize additional infrastructure requirements, the coordination of the Barrie and Bolton service plans must consider potential capacity implications to avoid GO train meets on the Halton and York Subdivisions. The expansion of the Georgetown corridor service that will provide frequent peak service trains to Brampton and extended service provisions to Georgetown and Guelph will significantly impact the traffic flow and capacity on the CN Halton Subdivision. The capacity The current infrastructure configuration on the Newmarket Subdivision consists of a single main track with no designated sidings. The assessment to determine infrastructure to support service option 4 (CN Subs) should consider the freight traffic flow into and out of the placement of new track elements must consider not only the service requirements of the expanded Barrie corridor but must included the corridor segments on the Halton Subdivision impacting both the Bolton and Georgetown corridors. phased service plans for the Bolton corridor Option 4.

8.3.1.2 Pearson Airport Rail Link 8.5 USRC - Capacity Assessment Currently, a rail connection between Lester B. Pearson International Airport and Toronto Union Station and the Toronto Business District The existing capacity within the USRC is constrained by the level of service provided today. Expansion of the rail plant and station does not exist. The airport is located in Peel Region and is situated in close proximity to the GO Georgetown corridor. platform facilities is required in order to accommodate the influx of trains from the expanded connecting corridors.

The Metrolinx regional plan places priority on the development of a rail shuttle service between Union Station and Pearson Airport that Capacity analyses within the USRC were excluded from the scope of this feasibility study. Operational scenario assessment for the Bolton provides multi-directional transit access links along the corridor. The level of service (15 minute frequency all day) and the equipment corridor service was conducted presuming sufficient capacity existed within the USRC and at the platform tracks at Union Station. and infrastructure specifications for the Airport Rail Link will significantly intensify usage of the corridor and will require the expansion of The availability of capacity to accommodate the Bolton corridor trains directly impacts the feasibility of a direct service between Bolton the GO Weston rail infrastructure. The anticipated service levels for the Airport Rail Link include bi-directional trains operating at fifteen and Union Station under Service Options 1 and 4. For the purposes of this study, it was assumed that capacity improvements within the minute headways for up to twenty hours each day. Capacity analyses have indicated a requirement for up to two tracks dedicated to the USRC would accommodate the implementation phases of the new Bolton rail service. Airport Rail Link service. To validate the feasibility of a Direct Bolton to Union Station service, capacity analysis for the USRC must also be conducted. The right of way lands available between Weston Road (mile 9.51) and Old Weston Road (mile 4.99) have limited capacity to support track expansions as the CP Mactier Subdivision runs parallel to the GO Weston Subdivision between these limits. In order to maximize the use of the available rail corridor property, the alignments of both railways must be considered. 8.6 CN Oakville Subdivision – Capacity Assessment

Conceptual designs of the expanded rights of way include a four track alignment for the GO Weston Subdivision extending from the A capacity analysis of the CN Oakville Subdivision was not included in this feasibility study, however it should be noted that such an vicinity of the Airport to Bathurst Street and a two track allotment for the CP Mactier Subdivision. Of the four tracks proposed on the evaluation must be conducted if the Bolton corridor equipment is to be stored at Willowbrook between the peak service periods.

Bolton Commuter Rail Feasibility Report | 50 MMM Group Limited | December 2010 8.6.1 CN Oakville Subdivision - Lakeshore West Corridor Service Expansion 8.7 Other Initiatives Impacting Bolton Corridor Capacity Impacts of the service expansion on GO’s Lakeshore West corridor on the Direct Bolton to Union Station service options for the Bolton 8.7.1 West Toronto Diamond Grade Separation corridor should also be assessed. Impacts on the Bolton corridor trains may include the following: The West Toronto diamond grade separation initiative will have positive outcomes for all services that currently cross the rail/rail at grade hh Restricted platform access at Union Station; crossing of the CP North Toronto and GO Weston Subdivisions. Viewed as an essential improvement to further service enhancements on hh Restricted capacity within the USRC Bathurst to Union Station; the Georgetown corridor, the grade separation structure will provide sufficient capacity to double the current right of way on the Weston hh Limited capacity Bathurst Street and/or Don Yards for mid-day storage; Subdivision from two to four tracks. hh Limited capacity Willowbrook Yard for midday storage; and hh Restricted capacity on CN Oakville Subdivision for equipment moves to and from Willowbrook Yard. 8.7.2 Davenport Diamond Grade Separation 8.6.2 Willowbrook Yard Expansion The two tracks of the North Toronto (mile 5.26) Subdivision and single track of the Newmarket (mile 4.6) Subdivision cross at grade at Davenport diamond located north of Dupont Street in the City of Toronto. The potential grade separation of Davenport will be studied by The expansion of the Willowbrook Yard facility at Mimico must consider the potential requirement to maintain and mid-day store the GO Transit at a future date. Bolton Corridor trains if:

1. The direct service between Bolton and Union Station Options 1 or 4 is implemented. 8.7.3 Milton Corridor Service Expansion 2. The Bolton corridor equipment cycle plan identifies Willowbrook Yard as the designed midday storage site. The Milton corridor service expansion project proposes the operation of bi-directional peak and hourly off peak service trains as defined 3. A remote mechanical facility is not established at Bolton capable of performing regular maintenance on the assigned in the GO2020 plan. Potential impacts of the expanded Milton corridor service will principally affect the Bolton corridor trains within the corridor equipment. USRC including access to the platform tracks at Union Station; the CN Oakville Subdivision and Willowbrook yard. Additionally, provision to handle required heavy maintenance of the Bolton corridor equipment at Willowbrook must be included in the The operation of the expanded GO service on the Milton and Bolton corridors will create freight traffic flow shifts between the CP Galt Willowbrook Yard expansion plans. and North Toronto Subdivisions that may impact available capacity for the Bolton corridor trains operating under service options 1 or 3. Possible midday storage of Bolton corridor equipment at CP's Lambton yard must be considered in conjunction with track improvements proposed under the Milton corridor expansion.

Bolton Commuter Rail Feasibility Report | 51 MMM Group Limited | December 2010 9.0 Station Facility Location Assessment 9.2 Identification of Potential Station Sites - Mactier Subdivision The selections of the stations were based on a number of criteria including:

9.1 Overview hh Straight, essentially flat section of track (grade of 1 percent or less); This section briefly discusses the type of facilities proposed at each new station. The naming convention of the station is associated with hh Approximately 225 metres of track for platform (at least 280 metres is desired for 10-car trains, but service may be the adjacent community / town, as proposed by GO Transit: introduced with shorter trains); hh Sufficient space for station building, Kiss ‘n’ Ride and parking provision (approximately 2.5 to 4.0 hectares, or 25,000 to 1. Eglinton Avenue Mount Dennis GO Station 40,000 sq.m); 2. Finch Avenue Emery GO Station hh Adequate access to the arterial road network; and 3. Highway 407/Islington Ave. Woodbridge GO Station hh Complementary adjacent land uses, or uses which would not conflict with station use. 4. Rutherford Road Vaughan (Elder Mills) GO Station 5. Major Mackenzie Drive Kleinburg GO Station Nine sites were short listed as potential locations for the Bolton rail service stations. Site selection was based on detailed investigation of the aerial photo and subsequent site visits to relevant portions of the rail corridor located in the City of Toronto, City of Vaughan and 6. Bolton Bolton GO Station Town of Caledon. After reviewing the land availability along the corridor, some initial potential station locations including a site situated All of the above locations are directly accessible from major arterials. Three locations (Mount Dennis, Emery and Woodbridge) are close near Langstaff Road and a site located northwest of Major Mackenzie Drive, were removed from the list for further consideration due to future transitway lines. The facilities that would be available at each station location will include the following: to the proposed urban development constraints. The final feasible sites are listed in Table 9.1 (km's listed indicates distance between adjacent stations) and depicted in Figure 9.1 (“S” refers to candidate stations). hh Parking (reserved, handicapped); h h Taxi stand; Table 9.1: Alternative Station Locations hh Kiss ‘n’ Ride facilities; Station Site ID Location of Site Side of the Rail Corridor Municipality hh Pedestrian facilities such as elevators, tunnels and pathways; S1-1 Bolton Corridor – South of Eglinton Ave West East Toronto Mount Dennis hh Bus Loop (except Mount Dennis and Emery); S1-2 Bolton Corridor – North of Eglinton Ave West East Toronto hh Overhead canopy to shield passengers from weather; Emery S2-1 Bolton Corridor – South of Finch Ave West Bolton East or West - Platform West - Toronto Corridor - South of Finch Avenue West Parking hh Bicycle Storage; Woodbridge S3 Bolton Corridor – South of Highway 407 East Vaughan hh Station Building; S4-1 Bolton Corridor – South of Rutherford Road West Vaughan Vaughan (Elder Mills) hh Ticket Vending Machine; S4-2 Bolton Corridor – North of Rutherford Road East Vaughan hh Public Washrooms; Kleinburg S5 Bolton Corridor – North of Major Mackenzie Drive East Vaughan S6-1 Bolton Corridor – West of Coleraine Drive West Caledon hh Station to Platform Accessibility Provisions; and Bolton S6-2 Bolton Corridor – North of King Street West Caledon hh Accessibility Platforms.

Bolton Commuter Rail Feasibility Report | 52 MMM Group Limited | December 2010 The site characteristics of the nine potential station locations are listed in Table 9.2. 9.2.1 Eglinton Avenue Two alternative sites were identified in the Eglinton Avenue vicinity. These sites included the Nofrills grocery store property south of Table 9.2: Site Characteristics Eglinton Avenue and parcels of land north of Eglinton Avenue as shown in Figure 9.2: Straight Track Available Area Sq.M Estimated Parking Site ID Grade (%) Access to Arterial Adjacent Land Use Frontage (m) (Sq.Ft.) Space * hh Site #S1-1: This site is currently a Nofrills store property that provides access via two right-in-right-out accesses to S1-1 390 < 1 16,000 300 Eglinton Ave / Residential Eglinton Avenue West and Black Creek Drive and provides access to Photography Drive. A detailed site visit and review (180,000) Black Creek Dr of the Nofrills site plan indicated that it is possible to locate the GO station on the property. The Nofrills supermarket S1-2 650 < 1 130,000 2,600 Eglinton Ave / Residential occupies 25 percent of the property space for the store building. Available vacant land identified for a future GO station (1,400,000) Black Creek Dr is approximate 16,000 square metres (1,410,000 square feet) in area. Currently, the Nofrills supermarket provides over S2 500 1 45,000 900 Finch Ave / Residential/Commercial 350 parking spaces. In addition, the vacant land on the south side can provide about 300 extra shared parking spaces for (480,000) Weston Road GO commuters and the Nofrills shoppers. The vacant land on the northwest side has sufficient space to accommodate S3 200 < 1 25,000 500 Highway 407 / Residential /Commercial the station building, and a Kiss ‘n’ Ride facility. The platform can be built on the west side of Keelesdale Road with road (273,000) Islington Ave crossings established to connect the station to the platform. S4-1 290 < 1 96,000 1,900 Rutherford Road / Residential (1,033,000) Highway 427 (Future) hh Site #S1-2: These parcels of land provide sufficient space for the future GO station facilities. The property has been S4-2 250 1 117,000 3900 Rutherford Road / Residential identified as a potential TTC train yard facility in the future; Use of the site would require land acquisition or an agreement (1,260,000) Highway 427 (Future with TTC. S5 300 < 1 58,000 1,150 Highway 427 (future) / Residential (620,000) Hunting Road (future) / Site S1-2 has been identified as the location that provides the most area and flexibility for the development of the Mount Dennis GO Major Mackenzie Dr Station. However, the characteristics of either site are considered adequate for the establishment of a station facility. S6-1 480 < 1 51,000 1,000 Coleraine Dr Residential (570,000) S6-2 300 < 1 60,000 1,200 Humber Station Road Agricultural / Industrial (610,000) * Numbers of parking spaces were estimated based on a Bolton GO Station Needs and Feasibility Study by MMM in 2001; the numbers showing in this table assuming that 60% of the available space can be used as the parking facility and on average, each parking space occupies 30 square metres.

Figure 9.2: Eglinton Sites

Figure 9.1: Potential Station Locations

Bolton Commuter Rail Feasibility Report | 53 MMM Group Limited | December 2010 9.2.2 Finch Avenue (Emery) One potential site was identified in the Finch Avenue area (shown in Figure 9.3-1).

Site S2-1 is located to the southeast of the intersection of Finch Avenue West and Weston Road, in the Emery Village Secondary Plan area. The proposed location for the station will be within the boundaries of the parcel of land designated as the Utility Corridor in the Emery Village Secondary Plan. The available area for this station is approximately 20,000 sq. m, which is adequate to accommodate up to 610 standard auto parking spaces and the Kiss‘n’Ride facility. The proposed station location is in the immediate vicinity of the proposed LRT on Finch Avenue; hence, a bus loop at this station is not required.

Site #S2 is a former Canadian Tire store property. Access to the site is possible via Finch Avenue and Weston Road. The Canadian Tire store was demolished in 2006 as a part of the Emery Village development, a mixed-use development project in the area conducted by the City of Toronto to encourage transit, pedestrian use, cycling and create improvements to the area’s streetscape and open space system. In the secondary plan issued by the City in June 2006, the parcel was designated as a possible commuter transit station. The Structure Plan indicates a potential extension of Rivalda Road to the north to provide service to a future commuter/transit station. The Structure Plan also includes provisions for transit shelter stops and facilities with direct connections to the pedestrian network designed to encourage the use of public transit.

Through the duration of this feasibility study, the City Plan indicated a re-designation of the use of Site #S2. An alternative site located immediately south of Site #S2 was identified for potential use for the Emery GO Station (Figure 9.3-2, Site S2-1).

Figure 9.3-2 illustrates the location of Site S2-1.

Figure 9.3-1: Finch Avenue (Emery) Proposed Station Site Figure 9.3-2: Finch Avenue (Emery Station) Proposed Site

Bolton Commuter Rail Feasibility Report | 54 MMM Group Limited | December 2010 9.2.3 Highway 407/Islington (Woodbridge) The assessment of potential station locations to provide rail service to the Woodbridge community included a review of available sites along Kipling Avenue north of Highway 7. Potential station site locations assessed included the Woodbridge Fairgounds, Woodbridge Foam facility and the junction of the rail line and Highway 7. Each site was considered inappropriate for the development of a GO station facility.

The Fairgrounds site was considered too remote from the rail line. Additionally the difference in elevation between the site and the rail line would make access to station platforms problematic. The Woodbridge Foam facility was considered inadequate as the size of the property would not accommodate the required GO facilities. In addition, access restrictions and issues of compatibility with the future Kipling Avenue Corridor Study completed for the City of Vaughan in 2009, were noted.

The intersection of the rail line and Highway 7 was not geometrically feasible due to the vertical separation between the road and rail line.

An alternate site was identified in the area located just south of Highway 407 and bounded between the rail corridor and Islington Avenue as shown in Figure 9.4. The site provides only 200 metres of straight track frontage, slightly shorter than GO Transit’s stated criteria (225m). A detailed site visit and investigation of the site showed that a platform could be extended southward under the existing bridge however it would include a small curved track segment. A realignment of the existing track would provide sufficient spacing under the bridge to accommodate two parallel tracks and the platform for all service options excluding Option 4.

The triangular parcel of land just south of the site is proposed by City of Vaughan as a residential area. The development will consist of 1,062 resident units contained within six buildings ranging in height from six to 12 stories, with a small commercial component. This zoning plan will promote future ridership on the commuter rail line.

The Highway 407 site selected to support service options 1-3 was not optimal for service option 4 (CN Subdivisions). Due to the requirement to connect to the Halton Subdivision, a connecting track would be established on a curved alignment. This would require the placement of the platform on the curve. As the platform would be established on the inside of the curve and visibility would not be adversely impacted, the site was considered feasible. The parcel of land on the east side of Islington Avenue was investigated for availability and suitability. This site was is also considered feasible however, the location of the station platform would be located on a slight east to west downgrade.

Figure 9.4: Highway 407 Proposed Station Site

Bolton Commuter Rail Feasibility Report | 55 MMM Group Limited | December 2010 9.2.4 Rutherford Road (Vaughan - Elder Mills) Two alternative sites were identified in the vicinity of Rutherford Road. These sites included the land parcels southwest (Site #S4-1) and northeast (Site #S4-2) of the railway crossing at Rutherford Road (shown in Figure 9.5). Both land parcels can be directly accessed from Rutherford via adjacent major roadways including Regional Road 50, Regional Road 27 and Huntington Road connect to the sites via Rutherford Road. The two rectangular parcels shown in Figure 9.5 meet all of GO Transit’s station criteria. It was confirmed by the City of Vaughan area development planner that there are no development application for the subject lands at the time of writing. These sites will therefore be incorporated in the West Vaughan Employment Area Secondary Study as part of the proposed City’s Official Plan Review.

Site #S4-2 was considered the preferred site due to its location relative to the east side of the right of way.

Figure 9.5: Rutherford Road Proposed Station Sites

Bolton Commuter Rail Feasibility Report | 56 MMM Group Limited | December 2010 9.2.5 Major Mackenzie Drive (Kleinburg) One potential site was identified in the area as shown in Figure 9.6 that meets all of GO Transit’s station criteria. This site is located just southeast of the railway crossing at Major Mackenzie Drive. Access to the land would be via Major Mackenzie Drive which will offer direct access from the extension of Highway 427. The planning information obtained from the City of Vaughan shows that the land is vacant and does not have any development applications at the time of writing this report.

One other land parcel located in the northwest quadrant of Major Mackenzie Drive and the rail line was identified as a possible station facility site. On further investigation, however it is determined that although the site met all of GO Transit’s station criteria, the land parcel was no longer available.

Figure 9.6: Major Mackenzie Drive Station Site

Bolton Commuter Rail Feasibility Report | 57 MMM Group Limited | December 2010 9.2.6 Bolton Station Multiple locations with track frontage between Regional Road 50 and Humber Station Road were examined for suitability for the development of a station facility. Two potential sites were identified in the area and included the parcels of land just west of Coleraine Drive and northeast of King Street at Humber Station Road, as shown in Figure 9.7:

hh Site #S6-1: This is the recommended Bolton GO Station location from a feasibility study update completed by MMM Group in 2007. It lies three kilometres northwest of Regional Road 50 (just west of Coleraine Drive) and meets all current GO Transit’s station criteria. The parcel is large enough to accommodate 1,000 parking spaces, a terminus building, bus loop and bus bay parking for boarding and alighting passengers, and is situated adjacent to a straight rail section capable of accommodating 10 to 12 GO rail cars. This site still remains as a feasible location for a GO Transit station within Bolton. The site is in close proximity to existing industrial and commercial development sites within Bolton. One disadvantage of the site is that it is currently landlocked and has no existing road access from either Coleraine Drive or Humber Station Road; although Manchester Court could potentially be extended west to service the station from Coleraine Drive. The close proximity of this site to the existing residential development located on the east side of the rail line makes this site less desirable than Site #S6-2 described below.

hh Site #S6-2: This site is located just 300 metres west of King Street and can be accessed from Humber Station Road. The property meets all of GO Transit’s station criteria. According to the Town of Caledon’s Bolton Land Use Plan in 2004, the site was categorized as dry industrial area. It was confirmed by the Town’s development planner that the land is vacant with no current development plan identified. The advantage of this site is its relative location to two potential layover sites being considered (refer to Section 9.3.7 for layover facility locations).

Figure 9.7: Bolton Potential Station Sites

Bolton Commuter Rail Feasibility Report | 58 MMM Group Limited | December 2010 9.2.7 Overnight Layover/Maintenance Facility Site Assessment Selection of Feasible Layover/Maintenance Site The selection of the overnight layover site was based on a number of criteria including:

hh Straight, essentially flat section of track (grade of 1 percent or less); hh Sufficient space for layover facility building (a footprint of approximately 50 X 600 metres, based on the specifications from Bathurst North Yard); hh Adequate access to adjacent road network; hh Feasible accommodation of layover tracks that are perpendicular or parallel to the main track, the preference being a parallel track orientation; hh Feasible Accommodation of maintenance shops, capable of performing progressive maintenance, fueling, consist wash, consist deicing, and other components; and hh Complementary adjacent land uses, or uses which would not conflict with layover facility functions.

Description of Feasible Alternative Layover Sites Based on the above stated selection criteria, a total of nine sites that provided the necessary general site characteristics were identified as potential sites for the Bolton GO layover/maintenance facility. These sites are listed in Table 9.3 and depicted in Figure 9.8. “L” refers to candidate layover sites.

Table 9.3: Layover / Maintenance Facility Sites Side / Orientation to the Rail Site Number Site Location Town / Municipality Corridor L1 West of Coleraine Drive West / Perpendicular Caledon L2 South of King Street West / Parallel Caledon L3 South of King Street West / Perpendicular Caledon L4 East of Humber Station Road East / Perpendicular Caledon L5 East of Humber Station Road East / Parallel Caledon L6 West of Humber Station Road West / Parallel Caledon L7 Southwest of Highway 50 West / Parallel Caledon L8 South of Highway 9 West / Perpendicular Caledon L9 North of Highway 9 West / Parallel New Tecumseth

Figure 9.8: Potential Layover Site Locations

Bolton Commuter Rail Feasibility Report | 59 MMM Group Limited | December 2010 First Level Sites Screening

Sites Eliminated Due to Distance from End-of-Line The end-of-line station will either be located near the railway crossing at Coleraine Drive (S6-1) or Humber Station Road (S6-2). From an operational perspective, the distance from the future layover/maintenance facility to the end-of-line station was considered in the sites screening process with the minimal distance between the facilities preferred. Accordingly, the following two sites were eliminated from further investigation:

hh Site #L8 – 16 kilometres (10.6 miles) from S6-1 and 14 kilometres (9.55 miles) from S6-2 (west side) – too far from the proposed end-of- line Bolton station

hh Site #L9 - 17 kilometres (10.75 miles) from S6-1 and 15 kilometres (9.7 miles) from S6-2 (west side) – too far from the proposed end-of- line Bolton station and outside of the geographic scope of the feasibility study.

Sites Eliminated Due to Track Control/Land Use Impact hh Site # L1: The site provides sufficient space for the station alone but insufficient space exists for both the station and layover/maintenance facilities. To accommodate the maintenance facilities land from the adjacent property in the southwest side would be required to ensure sufficient length of straight tracks. Additionally, the property is in close proximity to residential areas that may present potential noise and environmental impacts in the future.

hh Site # L2: Use of this site would require acquisition of small pieces of land across different properties. As with Site # L1, it would have potential environmental impacts on adjacent residential areas.

hh Site # L3: The site is not located adjacent to the corridor. Use of the site would require operating agreement with the adjacent industrial area.

hh Site #L4: The site is not located adjacent to the corridor.

Second Level Sites Screening hh Based on the first level screening, six sites were eliminated from further consideration. The three remaining sites (L5, L6 & L7) were carried forward into the second level screening:

hh Site #L5 and Site #L6: As shown in Figure 9.9, the two sites located along the rail corridor have access from Humber Station Road and provide sufficient space for the layover/maintenance facilities. They are located adjacent to the two potential station locations (next to S6-2 and two kilometres from S6-1). It was confirmed by Town’s development planner that the lands are vacant and currently there is no development plan.

Figure 9.9: Potential Layover Sites – Site #L5 and Site #L6

Bolton Commuter Rail Feasibility Report | 60 MMM Group Limited | December 2010 hh Site #L7: As shown in Figure 9.10, the site is located along the rail corridor and has access from Highway 50. The site Results of the second level screening indicated that all three sites do not have major impacts on the urban residential areas; however, provides sufficient space for the layover/maintenance facilities. The distance to the end-of-line station will be the major they would create environmental impacts, either in the form of potential natural impacts on the existing agriculture areas or would disadvantage of the site; it is 10 kilometres from S6-1 and eight kilometre from S6-2. However, this location is within the require substantial property acquisitions on the open space policy area. The consideration of those potential issues is out of the scope of study area scope and is considered a feasible alternative. this feasibility study and will require further investigated in a subsequent environmental assessment study.

9.3 identification of Potential Station Sites - mactier Subdivision

9.3.1 mount Dennis Station

The Mount Dennis station can be located either north or south of Eglinton Avenue. The Station will be close to the Light Rail Transit (LRT) line that has been proposed under the Toronto Transit City project.

Two alternatives sites, north and south of Eglinton Avenue were identified. The first site is located in the north-west quadrant of the intersection of Eglinton Avenue at Black Creek Drive. All structures within the boundaries of the identified area have been demolished except one building which is in deteriorated condition. This site has a land area of approximately 131,000 sq.m and is easily accessible from Weston Road via Ray Avenue which is grade separated; Black Creek Drive via Photography Drive / Keelesdale Drive, Eglinton Ave via Weston Road / Ray Avenue. A Kiss ’n’ Ride facility with limited number of parking spaces is advisable for this location.

In a joint meeting with the TTC and City of Toronto, it was noted that a development application had been filed for the Kodak lands north of Eglinton Avenue. This is also the site for a proposed TTC yard which Toronto City council approved in December 2009. The auto traffic can access the station from Eglinton Avenue, Black Creek Drive and Photography Drive. In view of the proposed LRT, there may not be a need for substantial parking provisions, however, coordination with TTC for optimal connections is recommended. A conceptual site layout based on GO standard requirements is shown in Figure 9.10, for the site located north-west of Eglinton Avenue. This station concept is subject to further review to ensure compatibility with the facilities planned by TTC.

Figure 9.10: Potential Layover Site – Site #L7

Bolton Commuter Rail Feasibility Report | 61 MMM Group Limited | December 2010 The presence of a new Mount Dennis GO station will influence the local travel pattern for autos and buses and is expected to impact the 9.3.2 Emery Station (Finch Avenue) traffic operation, particularly at the intersection of Eglinton Avenue West at Black Creek Drive and few minor intersections in the vicinity. The initial station facility site proposed for the Emery Station was located south of Finch Avenue West and East of Weston Road in the It is recommended that a separate Traffic Impact Study is undertaken as part of the EA to assess the degree of impact and to suggested Emery Village Secondary Plan area. However, the site was subsequently redesignated for other uses by the City. The new site is located remedial measures requirements. in the same vicinity but situated south of Finch Avenue.

During a joint meeting with the City of Toronto and TTC, it was noted that the Finch LRT project and associated improvements are among the priority Transit City projects. The City indicated an interest in widening the bridge span over Finch Avenue, to expand the road cross-section. Pedestrian bridges are being considered in the area to improve connectivity across Finch. A development proposal for 1,500 residential units in the southwest quadrant of the rail / road crossing was also noted.

The City is also interested in the development of a GO station with established pedestrian walkways between the station and Finch Avenue. Station access roads can be established from Weston Road. The station facilities can be placed adjacent to the rail corridor.

The LRT alignment is expected to be in the centre of the Finch Avenue and there will be stops at the adjacent signalized intersections immediately east and west of the rail corridor.

The station will be located in the northeast corner of the subject site, which will minimize the length of the connecting pedestrian pathways to the LRT stations. The station platform will be located on the west side of the railway corridor for service option 1 and will be situated immediately south of the bridge structure over Finch Avenue. The optimal location for the station platform under service options 2 and 3 would be located on the east side of the rail corridor. A conceptual layout plan of proposed parking, Kiss ‘n’ Ride facility and proposed road network improvements is shown in Figure 9.12.

The Emery Village Transportation Master Plan, currently being prepared by iTrans, recommends significant road network improvements in this area. Based on the recommended road network plan, dated May 2009, the subject site will have very good accessibility. The Emery station would be bound by new roads to the south and west, allowing for a good driveway layout (up to three driveways could be provided) and accessibility to the arterial road network. The new proposed road 2C2 that will run along the south boundary of the Emery station will provide a signalized access to Weston Road and Arrow Road. In order to enable extension of the proposed road 2C2 to Arrow Road, located east from the railway, a new underpass structure is proposed located immediately south of the Emery station. The station will have also access to two additional signalized intersections on Weston Road. No direct access to Finch Avenue will be provided. However, Finch Avenue could be easily accessed via Weston Road and Arrow Road. Figure 9.11: Conceptual Layout – Mount Dennis Station (Alternative 1)

Bolton Commuter Rail Feasibility Report | 62 MMM Group Limited | December 2010 hh A grade separated rail/rail crossing is located at the southwest corner of the identified area. The possibility to extend the platform under the rail bridge was explored, due to the fact that the track curves at the north end of the site. The available space from the edge of the bridge pier to the track tie is approximately 6.0 metres. Detailed investigations are required at the design stage to accommodate the platform in view of the service demand. Service option 4 requires additional conceptual layouts of the Woodbridge station. These layouts are described in Section 9.6.1.

Figure 9.12: Conceptual Layout – Emery Station

9.3.3 Woodbridge Station (Highway 407/Islington Avenue) The site is located in the south-west quadrant of the crossing of Highway 407 and Islington Avenue in the City of Vaughan. This location Figure 9.13: Conceptual Layout – Woodbridge Station is the closest available site to the community of Woodbridge. The land area available at this location is approximately 25,000 sq.m. The 9.3.4 Vaughan (Elder Mills) Station - (Rutherford Road) future Highway 407 Transitway will provide a good intermodal opportunity at this location. The next station north of Highway 407 was Langstaff Road. During the course of study, a development application was approved for There is a possibility to provide two accesses from Islington Avenue. It is proposed that a separate study will be required to assess the the site identified at Langstaff Road. Consequently this location was dropped from further analysis and instead two alternative sites in impact and to propose the intersection configuration at these two access points. The north access would serve auto traffic and the south the vicinity of Rutherford Road were included. These sites were located on either side of the corridor, the preferred site situated north of access would serve GO buses. A projected parking demand of 500 spaces could be accommodated comfortably. Rutherford Road and the secondary site located south of Rutherford Road.

The facilities available at this station would be Kiss ‘n’ Ride, bus loop with four bus bays and parking. A conceptual site layout based on The preferred station site is located in the south-west quadrant of the intersection of Rutherford Road and Highway 27. This site is GO Transit’s requirement is shown in Figure 9.13 situated on the western side of the rail corridor. The identified land area is approximately 44,000 sq.m and can accommodate 500 parking spaces in addition to other facilities. This site is also directly accessible from Rutherford Road. Two separate accesses for buses MMM staff conducted a site visit and observed the following: and autos, as shown in Figure 9.14 are recommended. The eastern access would be used for buses and western access would be used hh A sign showing information regarding an application for proposed zoning change and site plan approval for a residential for autos and the Kiss ‘n’ Ride facility. Four bus bays are recommended to facilitate the pick up and drop off of passengers. development, consisting of 1,062 residential units which substantiates the requirement for a GO station at this location. That development may limit the parking capacity.

Bolton Commuter Rail Feasibility Report | 63 MMM Group Limited | December 2010 Rutherford Road has also been identified as one of the transit priority corridors in the York Region Transit plan. The placement of a GO 9.3.5 Kleinburg Station (Major Mackenzie Drive) station on Rutherford Road will improve accessibility for York Region Transit riders. The potential Kleinburg station site is located approximately 1.25 km west of Highway 27 in the southeast quadrant of the intersection The presence of the GO station north of Rutherford Road will impact the operation of the intersection of Rutherford Road at Highway 27. of Major Mackenzie Drive at the rail corridor, in the City of Vaughan. The land area available for the station facility is approximately Evaluating the impact of GO station on the adjacent road network during the subsequent EA is recommended. 58,000 sq.m and is owned by CP. A total of 1,000 parking spaces can be accommodated. Based on the assumption made for the parking requirement, the total area required for parking is 18,400 sq.m.

This site is directly accessible from Major Mackenzie Drive and expected to be a potential intermodal point due to the proximity of the Highway 427 terminus. The presence of the GO Station will also improve accessibility for York Region Transit riders. Two separate access points should be provided to serve auto and bus traffic. In anticipation of future demand four to six bus bays are recommended. A conceptual site layout is shown in Figure 9.15.

After Highway 427 is in place, the additional traffic attracted to the GO station may impact area intersections. A traffic impact study should be undertaken to address these issues as part of the EA study.

Figure 9.14: Conceptual Layout – Vaughan (Elder Mills) Station (Alternative 1)

Figure 9.15: Conceptual Layout – Kleinburg Station

Bolton Commuter Rail Feasibility Report | 64 MMM Group Limited | December 2010 9.3.6 Bolton Station 9.4 Identification of Potential Station Sites - North Toronto Subdivision Bolton is the most populated community in the Town of Caledon. Bolton Station will be the terminus station on Bolton corridor. In the Service Option 3 provides for two station facilities located at Spadina/Dupont and Summerhill. These stations will be adjacent to the past, multiple sites were identified and examined to determine the most appropriate location for the Bolton Station. existing TTC subway stations and will provide the following facilities:

During the course of this study two alternative sites were identified. The first is located 430 m west of the intersection of Coleraine Drive hh Taxi stand; at Old Ellwood Drive West. The available land area is approximately 51,000 sq.m and can accommodate 500 parking spaces. This site is hh Pedestrian facilities such as elevators, tunnels and pathways; accessible from Coleraine Drive. hh Overhead canopy to shield passengers from weather;

The second site is located in the northeast quadrant of the intersection of King Street and Humber Station Road. The available land area hh Bicycle Storage; is 60,000 sq.m and adjacent land use is agricultural / industrial. This site can also accommodate 500 parking spaces in addition to the hh Station Building (Summerhill only); bus loop and Kiss ‘n’ Ride facilities and is easily accessible from Humber Station Road. During various meetings with GO Transit, it was hh Ticket Vending Machine; concluded that the second site is preferable due to availability of extra land in the vicinity for layover facility and accessibility from the hh Public Washrooms; and residential areas. hh Station to Platform Accessibility Provisions; Based on the assumption made for the parking requirement at the GO stations, the total area required for parking at this location is 9,200 sq.m. The frontage on Humber Station Road can be developed for commercial use. A conceptual site layout is shown in Figure 9.4.1 Spadina/Dupont Station 9.16. If the service operates via the North Toronto Subdivision, a station could be developed near the intersection of Spadina Road and Dupont Street. This location offers a direct connection to the TTC Dupont Subway Station on the University/Spadina line. Given this The GO station at this location may impact the operation of the intersection of King Street and Humber Station Road. A traffic impact interconnection opportunity and the urban form of development in the area, there would be no need for a bus loop or parking. The study is expected to be required to assess the impact at this intersection. conceptual layout for this station, shown in Figure 9.17, includes only a platform, station access connections and a kiss’n’ride facility.

Lighting Substation

Kiss n’ Ride

Ticket Vending Machine

Exisiting Parking

Spadina Rd.

Platform Dupont St.

Figure 9.17: Conceptual Layout - Spadina/Dupont Station

Figure 9.16: Conceptual Layout – Bolton Station

Bolton Commuter Rail Feasibility Report | 65 MMM Group Limited | December 2010 9.4.2 Summerhill Station 9.5 Overview Station Facilities – CN Subdivisions If the service operates via the North Toronto Subdivision, a station could be developed west of Yonge Street. The proposed site is in close There are three proposed stations that will provide service from the CN Subdivisions. There are two proposed station sites for the proximity to the TTC Summerhill Station on the Yonge Subway line. The proposed location of the Summerhill station building is situated Woodbridge station located adjacent to the CN Halton Subdivision. In addition, there are two proposed stations located adjacent to the in the southwest quadrant of the Yonge Street/Birch Avenue intersection. A hydro facility is currently located on the site; however, there Newmarket Subdivision in the vicinity of York University and Downsview is sufficient space to accommodate the station building and bicycle storage within a 170 sq. m. footprint. Insufficient space exists to provide a Kiss'n'Ride facility. 9.5.1 Woodbridge Station (Highway 407/Islington Avenue)

GO Transit passengers will be able to access the TTC Summerhill subway station (the station has a single entrance located at The proposed Woodbridge station facility developed for service options 1, 2 and 3 was reassessed to ensure that the station concept 18 Shaftesbury Ave.), by utilizing the sidewalk on the west side of Yonge Street and crossing Yonge Street at the signalized intersection was feasible for service option 4. with Shaftesbury Ave. The walking distance between the GO station and the TTC subway station is approximately 150 meters. Two alternate station concepts were developed. The first concept presented the station facilities on the same parcel of land that was Given this interconnection opportunity and the urban form of development in the area, there would be no need for a bus loop or proposed for service options 1, 2 and 3. Due to the alignment of the connecting track however, it would be necessary to locate the parking. The conceptual layout for this station, is shown in Figure 9.18. connecting track switch north of the bridge structure at Highway 407. This would require an expansion of the structure to accommodate the connecting track alignment station platform on the east side of the right of way adjacent to the connecting track and situated along an inside track curve. Although not considered an ideal alignment, it was observed that visibility along the connecting track would not be adversely impacted (Figure 9.19).

The proposed alignment of the connecting track that would join the Mactier and Halton Subdivisions, would however, bisect the proposed parking facilities and reduce available parking capacity. In order to replace parking capacity consumed by the alignment of the connecting track, it was proposed that additional parking space could be available on the property situated on the east side of Islington Avenue, north of the Halton Subdivision. Figure 9.20 illustrates the conceptual layout of Woodbridge station Alternative 1.

Figure 9.18: Conceptual Layout – Summerhill Station

Figure 9.19: Conceptual Layout – Woodbridge Station (Alternative 1)

Bolton Commuter Rail Feasibility Report | 66 MMM Group Limited | December 2010 In order to provide a tangent alignment for the station platform, the site located east side of Islington Avenue and north of the Halton Subdivision was assessed as an alternate potential station location.

The land area available at this location is approximately 121,500 sq.m. The future Highway 407 Transitway will provide a good intermodal opportunity at this location.

It is possible to provide two accesses on Islington Avenue. The south access could serve auto traffic and the north access could serve GO buses. A separate study would be required to assess the impact and to propose the intersection configuration at these two access points.

The property extends eastward to Pine Valley Drive where access to an additional driveway connection is possible. The Pine Valley Drive driveway would provide improved site accessibility and relieve the pressure from auto traffic accessing Islington Avenue. The projected parking demand of 500 spaces can be accommodated comfortably.

The facilities available at this station would include Kiss ‘n’ Ride, bus loop with four bus bays and parking. A conceptual site layout based on GO Transit’s requirement is shown in Figure 9.20.

During a site visit conducted by the consultant, the following conditions were observed: Figure 9.20: Conceptual Layout – Woodbridge Station (Alternative 2) hh Information regarding an application for proposed zoning change and site plan approval for a residential development, consisting of 1,062 residential units. This potential development would substantiate the requirement for a GO station at this location however available parking capacity could be limited. 9.5.2 York University and Downsview Stations hh Grade separated rail / road crossing located at the southwest corner of the identified area may limit the extension of the Service Option 4 provides for two station facilities located at York University and in the Downsview Airport Vicinity. The assessment of platform under the rail bridge. Detailed investigations are required at the design stage to accommodate the platform in these facilities was limited to a conceptual evaluation of the location of the station platforms relative to the track structure and did not view of the service demand. include the evaluation of suitable station sites and associated facilities. No additional infrastructure is required to accommodate the At the time of writing, limited information was available from CN to evaluate the platform grade at this proposed site. Upon receipt of Bolton corridor trains beyond that which is specified for the Barrie corridor trains. CN corridor information, further investigation must be conducted to confirm the feasibility of this station location alternative.

Bolton Commuter Rail Feasibility Report | 67 MMM Group Limited | December 2010 hh 0.66 miles of new main track between Black Creek Drive (mile 1.66) and Osler (mile 0.0) (Option 3 only); and 10.0 Rail Infrastructure Requirements hh Construction of a new connecting track between the CP Mactier and CN Halton Subdivisions in the vicinity of the Woodbridge station (Option 4 only). 10.1 Infrastructure Requirements Overview Costs associated with base case track improvements are estimated as follows: The Mactier Subdivision is comprised mainly of a single track and includes some two track segments. CP evaluated the capacity requirements and made specific recommendations for infrastructure improvements required to accommodate uni-directional (base case) Option 1&2B $30.1M and additional service or counter-flow GO Transit trains. Option 3 $31.4M Option 4 $25.8M CP also specified the infrastructure requirements to support additional or counter-flow service. Both the base case and the Additional Service/Counter-flow plans supported service requirements on the Mactier Subdivision only and did not specify infrastructure Signal Requirements improvements on the North Toronto Subdivision to support the Summerhill Service Option 3. The assessment of the infrastructure The signal improvements proposed by CP include an extension of the Centralized Traffic Control System (CTC) from the north siding requirements on the North Toronto Subdivision is discussed in Section 10.6. CP Capacity Expansion Plan schematics can be found in switch at Bolton to the south siding switch at Palgrave, a distance of approximately 8.5 miles. This would include the installation of Appendix F. power switches at Palgrave south and at the end of two tracks in the Humber Station Road vicinity; the installation or relocation of absolute and intermediate signals and the installation of crossover switches to connect the new track segments to the existing main The CP Infrastructure plans did not define the requirements to construct a new connecting track to the CN Halton Subdivision to support track. New signal components associated with new track construction would also be required. service Option 4 (CN Subdivisions). Costs associated with base case signal improvements are estimated as follows: Infrastructure improvements on the Halton and York Subdivisions required to support Option 4 were developed by the consultant. CN representatives were advised of the proposed service option. These requirements are discussed in Section 10.7 of this report. Options 1 &2B $5.9M Option 3 $6.4M 10.2 Infrastructure Requirements – CP Mactier Subdivision Option 4 $4.9M

10.2.1 Base Case Requirements Rail Traffic Control The base case requirements provide sufficient capacity to support a maximum of 4 uni-directional trains operating at forty minute Rail Traffic Control systems would require modifications to accommodate track and signal changes to support the base case plan for frequencies. The GO2020 plan specified a service requirement for peak service frequencies of 30 minute intervals. CP indicated that the both CTC and OCS territories. CP was asked to provide a cost estimate to upgrade rail traffic control systems however resources were base case infrastructure plan could however support three trains operating at 30 minute intervals. not available to perform the assessment. CP provided a plan that could support unidirectional peak service on the Mactier Subdivision under Options 1, 2 and 3. Infrastructure Communication Systems improvements on the Mactier Subdivision to provide a connecting track to the Halton Subdivision in the vicinity of Islington Avenue for Option 4 will require further study. No installations or modification to the existing radio communication system is anticipated. Existing radio towers located at Osler, Vaughan and Palgrave provide sufficient coverage within the area. Current on board and portable GO radios are capable of accessing CP Total base case infrastructure costs for the Mactier Subdivision for Service Option 1 and 2B are estimated at $181.6M and $189.6M radio frequencies without modifications. respectively. Base Case infrastructure costs on the Mactier Subdivision for Options 3 and 4 are estimated at $19.8M and $126.5M respectively. Construction cost estimates are found in Appendix H. Track Side Devices Track side devices such as hot box detectors, wheel impact load detectors, switch heaters and at grade crossing protection must be Track Improvements evaluated to ensure placement enhances the safety and operations of both the commuter and freight rail services. Track improvements on the Mactier Subdivision included: There are two hot box detectors and one wheel impact detector on the subject area of the Mactier Subdivision. One hot box and hh Approximately 12 miles of new main track extending between Humber Station Road north of Bolton (mile 23.8) to Kipling one wheel impact detectors are located at mile 25.5 (approximately 4 miles north of Bolton). There are no anticipated impacts to the Avenue Woodbridge (mile 11.77); placement of these devices. The location of the hot box detector at mile 7.8 relative to the proposed Emery station must be further hh Approximately .75 miles of new main track extending between Islington Avenue and Emery; evaluated to ensure optimum operational impact. hh Restoration of approximately 2 miles of the former east main track between Lawrence Avenue (mile 3.63) and Eglinton Avenue Structures hh 0.37 miles of new main track extending between Eglinton Avenue (mile 2.03) and Black Creek Drive (mile 1.66); Expansion of existing structures is discussed in Section 4.2 of this report. The total costs for base case structures and culvert hh Construction of a new connecting track between the Mactier and GO Weston Subdivisions in the vicinity of Ray Avenue improvements on the Mactier Subdivision for Options 1 & 2B are projected at $71.8M; $81.3M for Option 3 and $50.2M for Option 4. (Option 1 only);

Bolton Commuter Rail Feasibility Report | 68 MMM Group Limited | December 2010 The proposed new structures are presented in three major categories including new grade separations, new GO station facilities and 10.2.2 Additional Service Counter-flow Requirements required pedestrian tunnels (GO station facilities and pedestrian tunnel are described in Section 10.3). The Additional Service/Counter-flow requirements essentially specified a dedicated track for GO train service and the placement of There are several new grade separations required to support the base case infrastructure plan. The at grade crossing analysis of each passenger service passing tracks. Total costs for the Additional Service/Counterflow plan on the Mactier Subdivision are as follows: rail/road intersection is discussed in Section 11.0 of this report. The geometry and type of the structure at each location will be Option 1 $105.2M determined in the detailed design phase. Option 2A* $284.5M New Grade Separations Option 2B& 3 $108.6M Option 4 $49.7M At grade crossings on the Mactier Subdivision were evaluated to determine if future conditions would warrant the construction of grade separations. The current and future exposure index (EI) for each crossing was assessed. Recommendations for grade separations were Track Improvements based on the EI, existing and operational functionality, safety and cost (see Section 11.0 for individual crossing assessments). In addition to the base case requirements, track improvements included the following: The data suggests that grade separations at Old Weston and Denison Roads will be warranted in 2011. The design of these structures hh Approximately 1.8 miles of new track between Kipling Avenue and Islington Avenue; will be included in the Georgetown corridor expansion EA and the costs will be apportioned to that project. John, King and Church hh Approximately 5.5 miles of new track between Emery and Lawrence Avenue; and Streets will be grade separated on the depressed corridor of the Weston Subdivision only. The grade difference between the Weston and Mactier Subdivisions will complicate the grade separation on the Mactier Subdivision. The cost associated with these grade separations hh Construction of GO passenger sidings to facilitate counter-flow train meets. will be accrued to the Georgetown corridor expansion project. Costs associated with Additional Service/Counter-flow track improvements are estimated as follows:

The analysis indicates that grade separations are also warranted at Oak Street, Islington Avenue, Rutherford Road, Major Mackenzie Option 1, 2B &3 $16M Drive, Nashville Road, Albion-Vaughan Townline Road, Coleraine Drive and King Streets. Total grade separation construction costs Option 2A* $46.1M apportioned to the Bolton corridor expansion is estimated at $60.95M for service options 1, 2B and 3 on the Mactier Subdivision. Option 4 $5.7M

The grade separation at Major Mackenzie Drive will be constructed and the costs assigned as part of York Region's Plan. Signal and Rail Traffic Control Requirements

Table 10.1 provides the rough magnitude of construction costs for each structure. In addition to the signal improvements to support the base case infrastructure plan the installation or relocation of intermediate signals and the installation of crossover switches to connect the new track segments to the existing main track would be required. Consequently Table 10.1: Estimated Grade Separation Costs Associated with Bolton Corridor the rail traffic control systems would require enhancements to reflect new installations of track and signals to support the Additional Grade Separation Estimated Cost Service/Counter-flow plan. Jurisdiction Mileage* Classification No. of Lanes Location $M Old Weston Road City of Toronto 0.23 Included in Georgetown Project Costs associated with Additional Service/Counter-flow plan signal improvements are estimated as follows: Denison Road East City of Toronto 3.17 Included in Georgetown Project Options 1, 2B & 3 $3.4M John Street City of Toronto 3.84 Not Feasible for Mactier Sub Option 2A* $11.9M King Street City of Toronto 3.95 Not Feasible for Mactier Sub Option 4 $2.0M Church Street City of Toronto 4.15 Not Feasible for Mactier Sub Oak Street City of Toronto 4.64 Collector 4 $10.8 Structures Requirements Islington Avenue Region of York 9.95 Arterial 4 $10.8 The Additional Service/Counter-flow infrastructure plan includes the construction of a new main track extending between Kipling and Rutherford Road Region of York 14.13 Arterial 4 $7.35 Islington Avenues. There are six structures within this segment that will require expansion. Total cost for structure and culvert expansions Major Mackenzie Drive Region of York 15.47 May or may not be included with the Hwy 427 Transportation Corridor Project (MTO and on the Mactier Subdivision is as follows: York Region) Options 1 & 2B & 3 $70.7M Nashville Road Region of York 16.70 Arterial 4 $8.65 Albion Vaughan Caledon/Vaughan 19.71 Rural 2 $7.35 Option 2A* $139.1M Townline Road Option 4 $26.9M Coleraine Drive Town of Caledon 21.85 Rural 2 $8.65 There are no new anticipated grade separations warranted beyond those identified for the base case plan. King Street Region of Peel 22.85 Arterial 2 $7.35 * includes applicable infrastructure costs associated with the base case plan. Total Costs $60.95M *All mileage references reflect the Mactier Subdivision mileage

Bolton Commuter Rail Feasibility Report | 69 MMM Group Limited | December 2010 10.3 GO Station Facilities – Mactier Subdivision 10.3.4 Vaughan (Elder Mills) Station Pedestrian Tunnel Requirements This section outlines the station facilities requirements at each station including the Bolton Layover/Maintenance facility on the Mactier The preferred site for the Vaughan (Elder Mills) Station would be located on the east side of the right of way, north of Rutherford Road. Subdivision. This site would support CP’s requirement of east side access for commuter trains and would eliminate the requirement for pedestrian tunnels for the base case plant only. As discussed above in Section 10.3.4, the construction of a new siding track in the Additional GO station facilities include: station building, platform, parking facilities, and landscaping. Table 10.2 indicates the estimated costs for Service/Counter-flow plan, would extend to a point north of the proposed grade separation at Rutherford Road. Pedestrian tunnels to all station facilities at each station on the Mactier Subdivision. Where applicable, costs have been provided for the implementation of providing access to Vaughan (Elder Mills) station platform would be required. Costs for the tunnels are estimated at $4.1M. specific service options and the Base Case and Additional Service/Counter-flow infrastructure plans. 10.3.5 Woodbridge Station Pedestrian Tunnel Requirements 10.3.1 Station Tunnel Requirements – Mactier Subdivision The recommended site for the Woodbridge Station would be located south of Highway 407 on the east side the right of way. As the The new track alignments will require the construction of new pedestrian access tunnels under the track. Woodbridge station would be located on the single track segment under the base case plan, placement of the platform must consider The access tunnels will include: the future two track requirements of the Additional Service/Counter-flow plan. Pedestrian tunnels are not envisioned for this station under Service Options 1, 2 and 3. hh Typical GO Transit pedestrian tunnel concrete section under the track; hh Staircases at each end of the tunnel; An alternate location of the Woodbridge station for service option 4 is described in Section 10.10.1. hh Elevators at each end of the tunnel; 10.3.6 Emery Station Pedestrian Tunnel Requirements hh Building enclosures for the staircases and the elevators; The preferred station site for the Emery GO Station would be situated on the west side of the right of way and south of Finch Avenue. hh Lighting and sump pump; and hh Electrical and mechanical equipment. The location of the station platform under the base case plan is dependent on the service option implemented. CP has indicated that if In addition, during the excavation and construction of the tunnels, shoring of the live track adjacent to the platform will be required. The the service terminates at Union Station (Option 1), then the platform should be situated on west side of the right of way. If the service total construction cost for base case pedestrian access tunnels will be approximately $11.9M for Option 1, $20.3M for Options 2B and 3 terminates at Mount Dennis (Option 2) or at Summerhill (Option 3), then the platform must be located on the east side of the right of and $4.75M for Option 4. An additional $8.2M will apply under the Additional Service/Counter-flow plan for Options 1, 2B, 3 and 4. The way. total pedestrian tunnel charges for Option 2A is estimated at $25.5M. Service Option 1 would not require pedestrian tunnels for either the base case or Additional Service/Counter-flow plans as a side platform would be located adjacent to the west track. For Options 2 and 3 however, pedestrian tunnels would be required to extend 10.3.2 Bolton Station Pedestrian Tunnel Requirements under two tracks for both stages of the infrastructure plans. The base case plan would support a side platform adjacent to the east track The station platform at Bolton must be located to facilitate meets at the station between opposing GO trains for the additional service/ while the Additional Service/Counter-flow plan would support an situated between the two eastern most tracks. Tunnel counter-flow scenario. Due to the proposed locations of the layover/maintenance facility and the station building as well as CP’s stated costs are estimated at $4.75M for Options 2A, 2B and 3. preference for east side right of way operation for GO trains, the recommended site for the platform would be located on the east side of the right of way. The island platform will be situated between the new east main track and the layover lead track. The preferred site for 10.3.7 Weston Station Pedestrian Tunnel Requirements the station building would be on the west side of the right of way. A pedestrian tunnel connecting the station building to the platform The Weston GO station would be situated adjacent to the Georgetown corridor. Pedestrian tunnels would be required to connect extending under two main tracks would be required. Tunnel costs for all service options are estimated at $4.75M for Bolton station. to station platforms for all Bolton corridor service options. The final tunnel configuration will be determined by the Georgetown EA, however it is assumed that tunnels connecting to the Mactier Subdivision would be located under a minimum of four Weston Subdivision 10.3.3 Kleinburg Station Pedestrian Tunnel Requirements tracks. Service Option 1 will not require tunnel lengths to be extended under the CP tracks. Service Options 2 & 3 however will The recommended site for the Kleinburg station would be located on the east side of the right of way, south of Major Mackenzie Drive. require the extension of pedestrian tunnels under two tracks of the Mactier Subdivision. As described above for the Emery station, the For the base case, the platform would be located to the east side of the new east main track and would not require pedestrian tunnels. Additional Service/Counter-flow plan would require an island platform between the two most easterly tracks. Costs associated with the construction of pedestrian tunnels at Weston station are assumed to be shared with the Georgetown corridor project and are estimated A passing siding to facilitate passenger train meets to support the Additional Service/Counter-flow plan has been recommended. This at $2.4M for Option 1 and $3M for Options 2A, 2B and 3. siding would extend from south of the new grade separation at Major Mackenzie Drive to the north side of the new grade separation at Rutherford Road. The placement of this siding would require the construction of a pedestrian tunnel under the new siding track at 10.3.8 Mount Dennis Station Pedestrian Tunnel Requirements Kleinburg Station. Tunnel costs for all service options under the Additional Service/Counter-flow plan are estimated at $4.1M. The preferred location for the Mount Dennis station would be on the east side of the right of way, north of Eglinton Avenue. Not unlike Service schedules approved during subsequent design phases must verify the optimal location of all passenger sidings. the platform requirements for both Emery and Weston stations, CP has stated that service termination at Mount Dennis station would

Bolton Commuter Rail Feasibility Report | 70 MMM Group Limited | December 2010 require an east side platform, while trains continuing to Union Station (via the new connecting track to the Weston Subdivision) would 10.4 Equipment Layover /Maintenance Facility Requirements – Mactier require a west side platform. The requirements of the Additional Service/Counter-flow plan does not support the extension of the third Subdivision main track south of Lawrence Avenue. A pedestrian tunnel would therefore only be required if service Option 1 is implemented. Costs GO Transit is required to provide regular equipment servicing on a scheduled bi-daily basis. Regular maintenance is currently conducted associated with a tunnel to support Service Options 1, 2 and 3 have been 100% attributed to the Bolton corridor and are estimated at only at the Willowbrook facility and is typically performed between the peak service periods. If regular maintenance of the Bolton $4.75M. corridor equipment is to be conducted at Willowbrook, a service cycling schedule would be required to ensure adherence to maintenance It should be noted that the station site on the south side of Eglinton Avenue may still require consideration, as the north site is part of standards. Access to Willowbrook yard for equipment servicing will be problematic due to capacity constraints on the various connected lands currently being reviewed by the City of Toronto and the TTC for a combination of urban development and/or a storage facility for corridor segments. the proposed Eglinton LRT. In order to avoid the congested Weston Subdivision and USRC, a satellite maintenance facility could be built on the Bolton line. The 10.3.9 Parking Lot Requirements facility would be required to be sufficiently equipped to ensure minor repairs/maintenance, coach cleaning and refueling activities could be performed and that sufficient overnight equipment storage facilities were provided. Parking lot area requirements were based on the projected ridership at each station location. Cost estimates included traffic signals and signs, Kiss’n’Ride facilities, bus loops, bus parking, illumination, drainage, pavement markings and patron parking. Table 10.2 displays The layover/maintenance facility minimum requirements would include: the estimated parking costs at the station facilities located adjacent to the Mactier Subdivision. The pavement structure is assumed to hh Five parallel tracks equipped with wayside power, related utilities and sufficient capacity to hold one locomotive and ten consist of 100mm hot asphalt, 150mm granular A, 450 mm granular B. Conceptual station layouts provided in Section 9.0 presents the standard bi-level coaches (600 meters) for overnight storage; proposed location of parking facilities. Total parking lot costs for the Mactier Subdivision are estimated at $31.9M. hh Fuel facility; 10.3.10 Station Facilities hh Coach cleaning facility; hh Parts storage facility; Station Facility Costs comprise of the station building, including the mechanical and electrical components, landscaping, outside hh Operating crew booking in facility; and furniture and station platforms. hh Maintenance and operating staff parking. Station platform costs include platform, mini-platform, shelters, snow melting equipment, CCTV camera, accesses, and surface marking. Costs associated with the provision of a Bolton layover/maintenance facility are estimated as follows: Station facility costs for Mount Dennis and Weston Stations are assumed to be shared equally between the Bolton and Georgetown corridor expansion projects. Track $7.3M Structures $3.5M The passenger facilities include the station facilities, parking lots and pedestrian tunnels. Parking $0.5M Passenger facility costs for stations located on the Mactier Subdivision are indicated in Table 10.2. These cost can be summarized as In addition, the cost for a progressive maintenance (PM) bay over one track, designed to accommodate 10 coaches and one locomotive follows: is estimated at $12.4M. Note, costs for track, structures and parking for the Bolton layover/maintenance facility are included in the total Base Case Additional Service costs for the corresponding cost components discussed in the applicable preceding subsections in this Section 10 of the report.

Option 1 $30.1M $6.9M Option 2A - $30.2M Option 2B &3 $29.6M $10.4M Option 4 $18.4M $6.9M

Bolton Commuter Rail Feasibility Report | 71 MMM Group Limited | December 2010 Table 10.2: Passenger Facility Costs Service Options 1, 2A, 2B and 3 construction of the Additional Service/Counter-flow infrastructure plan. The use of the Bolton facility for midday layover in Stages 2 and 3 is not viewed as feasible as the re-distribution of equipment to Union Station for peak service operation would require additional non- Pedestrian Tunnels $M Parking Station Facilities $M revenue movements which would impact access fees and operating costs.. Area Infrastructure Plan Base Case Additional Service $M Base Case Additional Service (sq.m) 10.5.2 Off Corridor Midday Storage 1, 2A,2B, 1, 2A,2B, Service Option 1, 2B, 3 1, 2B, 3 2A 1, 2B, 3 1, 2B, 3 2A Midday storage requirements are dependent on the service option to be implemented. Due to capacity constraints on the Weston 3 3 Subdivision and USRC and increased infrastructure requirements on the Mactier Subdivision, storage for Bolton equipment during the Bolton Layover/ Maintenance - - - 2,000 0.336 - - - midday period for service Options 1 and 4 must be established within the USRC and/or Willowbrook. Regularly scheduled equipment Facility maintenance for conventional rolling stock could be performed at the maintenance facility at Willowbrook. Bolton Station 4.75 - 4.75 21,837 4.3 4.75 - 4.75 Kleinburg Station - 4.1 4.1 41,639 7.94 4.43 3.45 4.75 Other potential off site facilities for midday storage of Bolton corridor equipment include GO Transit's facilities at Bathurst Street and Don Vaughan Station - 4.1 4.1 24,027 4.88 4.43 3.45 4.75 Yard however the investigation of the use of these facilities is outside the scope of this study. Woodbridge Station - - - 23,071 4.74 4.75 - 4.75 Currently GO equipment is serviced at Willowbrook on a bi-daily basis to ensure regulatory equipment maintenance standards are Pedestrian Tunnels $M Parking Station Facilities $M fulfilled. If such servicing does not occur at the Bolton layover facility and Willowbrook is identified as the designated maintenance site, the equipment cycle plan must include a schedule to ensure the Bolton corridor equipment is cycled from the midday layover to Additional Area Station Location Base Case $M Base Case Additional Service Service (sq.m) Willowbrook for servicing.

1 2B Alternative midday storage sites adjacent to the Mactier Subdivision were considered for Service Options 2B and 3. Service Option 1 2B & 3 2A 1, 2A,2B, 3 1 2B &3 1 2B&3 2A & 3 CP’s Lambton yard facility located at West Toronto is located in close proximity to the Mactier and North Toronto Subdivisions. Possible Emery Station - 4.75 - 4.75 26,926 5.21 4.43 4.43 - 3.45 4.75 use of this facility for midday storage should be investigated further. Infrastructure and operating impacts to Lambton Yard resulting Weston Station 2.38* 3.03* - 3.03* - - 3.45* 3.45* -- 3.45* Mount Dennis Station 4.75 4.75 - 4.75 22,592 4.26 4.75 4.43 -- 4.43 from the expansion of the Milton corridor service and the grade separation of the West Toronto diamond must be considered in such investigations. Pedestrian Tunnels Parking Station Facilities Total Costs The regular use of Lambton yard for midday storage and the avoidance of the capacity constraints on the Weston Subdivision and USRC, Additional Base Case Base Case Base Case Additional Service is dependent on the establishment of a maintenance facility capable of performing light equipment maintenance at Bolton. Service Service Option 1 $11.88M $8.2M $31.69M $31M $6.9M 10.6 Infrastructure Requirements – North Toronto Subdivision Service Options 2B &3 $17.28M $8.2M $31.69M $30.6M $10.35M Service Option 2A - $25.48M $31.69M - $31.6M The infrastructure improvements on the North Toronto Subdivision to support the Summerhill service Option 3 were not specified by CP. * costs shared with Georgetown Corridor expansion project. Given the significance of the North Toronto Subdivision to CP’s Eastern Region and the volume of freight activity, it is anticipated that base case infrastructure requirements would include the construction of a main track dedicated for GO commuter service. Total base 10.5 Midday Storage Facility – Mactier Subdivision case infrastructure costs for the North Toronto Subdivision for Service Option 3 are $27.79M and $19.2M for the Additional Service/ Counter-flow plan. A break downs of total infrastructure costs are provided in Appendix H. 10.5.1 On Corridor Midday Storage Facility To determine possible corridor midday storage facilities, an assessment of available storage tracks adjacent to the Mactier Subdivision in 10.6.1 Base Case Requirements the vicinity of Mount Dennis station was conducted. Track Improvements The former Kodak facility located in the Ray Avenue vicinity was considered as a viable site for the shuttle service Option 2B equipment Track improvements on the North Toronto Subdivision to support three unidirectional peak period trains operating at 30 minute layover however this site is not owned by CP and further investigation to determine the availability of the location for a future midday headways would minimally consist of the following: storage site must be conducted. hh Construction of a new connecting track between the Mactier and North Toronto Subdivisions situated to the east side of The Bolton layover/maintenance facility was also considered as a possible midday storage site for the Shuttle service Option 2A. The use the existing connecting switch; of the Bolton facility would eliminate the duplication of layover infrastructure but would significantly increase main track infrastructure hh Approximately 1.5 miles of new track construction extending from Osler (mile 5.7) to Ossington Avenue (mile 4.23); for the Stage 1 service plan as the counter-flow movement of non-revenue equipment to the Bolton facility would necessitate the

Bolton Commuter Rail Feasibility Report | 72 MMM Group Limited | December 2010 hh Upgrade of the existing storage track P660 to main track standards between Ossington and Davenport Road (mile 2.88) Service/Counter-flow plan. Total incremental signal costs to support the Additional Service/Counter-flow service plan are estimated at including realignment to ensure adequate side clearance if required; $0.39M. hh 4.5 miles new main track construction Davenport Road to Yonge Street (mile 2.2); and Structures hh Construction of passenger siding situated north of track P660 and extending from Howland Avenue to Yonge Street. There are no new structures required for the North Toronto Subdivision to support an Additional Service/Counter-flow plan. However, Further track construction would be required if the midday equipment layover facility is established east of Yonge Street. Total track should Leaside yard be utilized for midday storage for the Bolton corridor equipment, the bridges at Rosedale Park mile 0.9 and Reservoir improvement costs for Service option 3 on the North Toronto Subdivision for the base case plan is estimated at $7.5M. Creek mile 1.80 would require structural expansion to accommodate an additional track. The cost estimate to expand these bridges is Signal Requirements estimated at $16M. Signal improvements to support the new and upgraded track elements as described above include the installation or relocation of 10.7 GO Station Facilities – North Toronto Subdivision absolute and intermediate signals, the installation of crossover switches to connect the new track segments to the existing main track and the interconnection between signal controls and at grade crossing protection devices. Signal costs for the base case plan on the 10.7.1 Spadina/Dupont Station Platform and Pedestrian Tunnel Requirements North Toronto Subdivision are estimated at $2.6M. The proposed location of the Spadina/Dupont station platform is situated on the north side of the corridor between the new passenger Rail Traffic Control siding and northmost track. The platform requirements will be the same for both the base case and the Additional Service/Counter-flow infrastructure plans. Estimated platform and pedestrian tunnel costs for Spadina/Dupont station are presented in Rail Traffic Control systems would require modifications to accommodate the track and signal changes identified. Further discussion with Table 10.3. CP must be conducted to attain modification costs.

Communication Systems 10.7.2 Summerhill Station Platform and Pedestrian Tunnel Requirements No special installations or modification to the existing radio communication system is anticipated. Radio towers exist at West Toronto The proposed location of the station platform for Summerhill station is to the north side of the right of way, east of Yonge Street. and Agincourt that provide ample coverage within the area. Current on board and portable GO radios are capable of accessing CP radio Estimated platform and pedestrian tunnel costs for Summerhill station are presented in Table 10.3. frequencies without modifications. 10.7.3 Parking Lot Requirements – North Toronto Subdivision Track Side Devices There will be no parking facilities or bus loops provided at Spadina/Dupont and Summerhill stations. Spadina/Dupont will however There are no hot box detectors on the North Toronto Subdivision. In order to enhance winter corridor train performance, the installation include a Kiss’n’Ride facility. of switch heaters at all powered switches, should be considered as essential devices. Table 10.3: North Toronto Subdivision Facility Costs Structures Spadina/Dupont and Summerhill Stations Cost $M There is no requirement to construct new structures on the North Toronto Subdivision to support the base case plan. Expansion of Station Facilities* 9.5 existing structures is discussed in Section 4.3 of this report. Pedestrian Tunnel 8.2 Spadina/Dupont and Summerhill Stations $17.7M 10.6.2 Additional Service/Counter-flow Requirements Facility Costs * includes substation and ticket vending machine costs Track Improvements The operation of more than 3 uni-directional peak period trains to the Summerhill station will require the establishment of two dedicated 10.8 Midday Storage Facilities – North Toronto Subdivision GO tracks. Beyond the base case requirements, this would include the extension of the passenger siding from Howland Avenue to Osler Street. In addition, a grade separation of the rail/rail crossing at Davenport would require further evaluation. Total incremental track 10.8.1 On Corridor Midday Storage Facilities improvement costs on the North Toronto Subdivision to support the Additional Service/Counter-flow plan are estimated at $2.82M. Several potential on corridor midday storage sites were assessed to determine a suitable location for the Bolton corridor rolling stock.

Signal & Rail Traffic Control Improvements These sites included storage tracks or yards formerly located adjacent to the North Toronto Subdivision right of way. Possible tangent In addition to the signal improvements to support the base case infrastructure plan, the installation or relocation of intermediate signals storage could be provided north of the former P660 storage track located between Ossington Street and Davenport Road. In addition, and the installation of crossover switches to connect the new track segments to the existing main track would be required. Consequently the right of way in the Yonge Street vicinity widens where station tracks once existed at the former North Toronto station located at the rail traffic control systems would require enhancements to reflect new installations of track and signals to support the Additional

Bolton Commuter Rail Feasibility Report | 73 MMM Group Limited | December 2010 Summerhill. The development of either site would support the base case infrastructure plan only, as the entire right of way property traffic fluidity on the subdivision. Estimated total costs for infrastructure improvements to support service option 4 over the CN/GO would be consumed for the construction of new tracks to support the Additional Service/Counter-flow plan. portion of the route are estimated at $33.9M for the base case plan. Costs for the Additional Service/Counter-flow plan were not developed over this segment of the route. CP was asked to comment on the viability of developing these sites into possible midday storage facilities under the base case plan. CP indicated that the use of any available right of way space adjacent to corridor would be preserved for future main track capacity The following assessment of infrastructure requirements focuses on the capacity improvements needed on the Halton and York expansion and not as equipment storage facilities. Subdivisions only.

10.8.2 Off Corridor Midday Storage Facilities The Newmarket Subdivision assessment was limited to an evaluation of station facility and pedestrian tunnel costs. As the use of these facilities would be shared between the Barrie and Bolton corridor trains, the cost estimates represent 50% accruement to the Bolton CP’s Leaside yard is located on the north side of the right of way between the east end of the North Toronto Subdivision at mile 0.2 and project. For this evaluation, it was assumed that the Newmarket Subdivision would consist of two main tracks from Snider to Parkdale the adjoining Belleville Subdivision at mile 205.5. The yard is on the opposite side of the right of way from the connecting switch to the controlled by a CTC signal system. “Don Branch” of the Belleville Subdivision which provides access to the USRC at Cherry Street.

The yard consists of nine parallel tracks, five through tracks and four stub end tracks. Track lengths vary between 1,060 to 5,043 feet. A 10.9.1 Infrastructure Requirements connection to the CN Leaside Spur extends from the north side of the yard. The infrastructure requirements on the CN Halton and York Subdivisions were assessed and two alternative alignments for the connecting track between the Mactier and Halton Subdivisions were developed. Use of Leaside yard as a midday storage facility would intensify capacity constraints on the North Toronto and adjoining Subdivisions and require additional infrastructure between Summerhill and Leaside to support the movement of non-revenue commuter equipment. Connecting Track Between Mactier and Halton Subdivisions

Additionally, current residential noise concerns have imposed "no parking" zones for locomotives in the Leaside yard vicinity. The midday Alternative 1 utilized the existing grade separation between the two railways to divert the GO trains to the south side of the Halton storage of equipment at Leaside yard seems infeasible given the current operating restrictions and additional infrastructure requirements. Subdivision. The proposed connecting track would diverge from the CP main track north of the CN overhead structure and run parallel to the CP main track under the structure. It was envisioned that the connecting track alignment would diverge to the east and track parallel Other Possible Off Corridor Midday Storage Sites to the Halton Subdivision. Two significant impediments were noted. The single track of the Belleville Subdivision extends south/westerly from the south side of the south main track at Leaside, over the Firstly, the distance between the CN structure and Islington Avenue coupled with the elevation difference between the Mactier and Don Branch where it connects with the USRC at Cherry Street, just east of Union Station. The Don Branch could provide an alternate Halton Subdivisions right-of-ways required the construction of a subway structure to grade separate the rail line from Islington Avenue. access route to Union Station, and GO Transit’s Don, Bathurst Street and Willowbrook yards for midday storage. This is not considered a viable option however as Bolton corridor trains would be required to operate through the busy USRC, Union Station and CN Oakville Secondly, the distance between Islington Avenue and the grade separation at Pine Valley Drive required the establishment of a minimum Subdivision. 2.4 % grade. This grade was considered excessive and consequently this route alignment was determined to be infeasible.

Other storage site possibilities may include use of CP’s Agincourt yard. As this is the main freight yard facility for CP in Toronto, the Alternative 2 provided an alignment for the connecting track extending from the Mactier to the Halton Subdivision on the north side likelihood of attaining access to Agincourt appears remote. of the CN right of way. This alignment allowed sufficient distance to fill the grade difference between the right-of-ways and establish a grade separation at Islington Avenue over the existing structure. The track would extend eastward to a location near the Pine Valley 10.9 Infrastructure Requirements – CN Subdivisions Drive structure where it would connect with the north track of the Halton Subdivision and cross to the south side of the right of way via The following assessment of infrastructure requirements and related cost estimates on the CN Subdivisions was prepared solely by the new at grade crossover switches. consultant without input or review by CN. At the time of writing CN had been advised of the proposed routing for service option 4 but had not consented to review the proposed infrastructure requirements as developed.

The infrastructure requirements on the CN Subdivisions are influenced by the location of MacMillan yard within the corridor. The yard is situated on the north side of the corridor at the junction point between the York and Halton Subdivisions and adjacent to the intersection of the York and Newmarket Subdivisions.

Capacity must be identified to handle both the heavy frequency of freight train traffic and the proposed GO train service in this corridor. The transition of the GO trains from the north to the south side of the corridor to connect to the Newmarket Subdivision must be accommodated. Notably, corridor capacity is influenced by the 0.46 mile single gauntlet track segment that extends from Islington Avenue to west of the Humber River. The operation of the Georgetown corridor trains between Halwest and Georgetown, also impact

Bolton Commuter Rail Feasibility Report | 74 MMM Group Limited | December 2010 Track Improvements On the Newmarket Subdivision, one subway structure located at Steeles Avenue, can accommodate two tracks. No modifications are required to this structure to support the Bolton corridor service. The consultant recommended that track improvements on the CN Subdivisions would minimally consist of the following: hh Construction of connecting track between the Mactier and Halton subdivisions as identified in Alternative 2; 10.10 Station Platform and Pedestrian Tunnel Requirements – CN Subdivisions hh Installation of crossover switches in the vicinity of Snider West to improve routing flexibility; GO station facilities include: station building, platform, parking facilities, and landscaping for the station facilities at York University hh Upgrades to the existing By-pass track located south of south main track between Snider West and Snider and extend and Downsview. The station facility costs have been evenly distributed between the Bolton and Barrie corridors. Station facility costs westward approximately 2.5 miles to Pine Valley Drive (speed of 50 MPH); and attributed to the Bolton corridor are estimated at $4.6M. hh Construction of a new south connecting track between the York and Newmarket subdivisions extending from the By-pass track to the south connecting track on the Newmarket Subdivision ( upgrades to the south connecting track are proposed 10.10.1 Woodbridge (Islington) Station under the Barrie Corridor expansion). Two sites were proposed for the Woodbridge station and platform for service option 4. The infrastructure requirements proposed, significantly increase the overall infrastructure capacity on the subject section of the CN Halton and York Subdivisions. The plan would increase overall capacity on the Halton Subdivision by providing a new third main track on The first option was located on the same site that was identified for service options 1, 2 and 3 and described in Section 9.3.3. the south side of the right of way between Snider West and Pine Valley Drive. The construction of the connecting track between the CP and CN rights of way would however, bisect this property, lessening total Track improvement costs for the CN Subdivisions are estimated at $8.6M for the base case. parking capacity. Additional parking area could be provided on the property situated on the east side of Islington Avenue north of the rail corridor however additional signalized intersections, and pedestrian crosswalks would be required to provide safe passage for Signal Requirements patrons crossing Islington Avenue.

Signal improvements to support the infrastructure enhancements would include the installation or relocation of absolute and The distance between the bridge structure at Highway 407 on the Mactier Subdivision and Islington Avenue on the Halton Subdivision intermediate signals. Signal improvement costs for the CN Subdivisions are estimated at $2.3M for the base case. would require the construction of the station platform on the inside curve of the connecting track. Although not an ideal alignment, visibility should not be adversely impacted. Cost estimates for station facilities and parking lots for Woodbridge station are estimated at Rail Traffic Control $9.16M. Rail Traffic Control systems would require modifications to accommodate track and signal changes required to support the infrastructure improvements. Rail traffic control system costs were excluded from the cost assessment. The second proposed location for the station is situated on the parcel of land west of Islington Avenue and north of the CN Halton Subdivision as illustrated in Figure 9.24. The station platform could be constructed on tangent track, however the grade of the Communication Systems connecting track would require the platform to be situated on an eastward grade, which may not be desirable. The feasibility of this No special installations or modification to the existing radio communication system is anticipated. Current GO radios on board the trains alignment must be confirmed by CN. are capable of accessing CN radio frequencies without modifications. 10.10.2 York University Station Track Side Devices Use of the existing platform at York University station for the Bolton corridor trains is recommended. The current track configuration There are no hot box detectors within the CN Subdivisions. The installation of switch heaters at powered switches should be considered provides access to the platform from the south connecting track only. Future expansion of the Barrie corridor service may include the as essential devices on this corridor. construction of either an island or side platform to the east of the right of way. Pedestrian tunnels would be required to provide full access to all platforms. Pedestrian Tunnel costs attributed to the Bolton corridor at York University station are estimated at $2.05M. Structures There are eight structures on the Halton Subdivision that would be impacted by the construction of additional tracks to provide sufficient 10.10.3 Downsview Station capacity. Of these eight structures, five would require expansion. New subways would be required at Islington Avenue (mile 4.11), Pine The proposed configuration for station platforms at Downsview includes two side platforms on either side of the right of way. The Valley Drive (mile 3.69) and Jane Street (mile 1.17). Weston Road (mile 2.38) would require a new overhead bridge and Black Creek configuration of pedestrian tunnels will be dependent on the designated use of the platforms (e.g. northward trains access east (mile 1.40) would require an expansion of the double cell culvert. Structure costs are estimated at $13.35M. platform, southward trains access west platform or full access by all trains). Pedestrian tunnel costs attributed to the Bolton corridor at Downsview station are estimated at $2.05M. There are six culverts that would require widening to support the enhanced track structure. Costs for culvert extensions is estimated at $0.9M.

In the event that CN specifies the requirement for a grade separation to provide an unimpeded transition from the north to the south side of the right of way for commuter trains, the cost to provide a single track fly-under tunnel is estimated $52.4M.

Bolton Commuter Rail Feasibility Report | 75 MMM Group Limited | December 2010 10.11 Midday Storage Facilities – CN Subdivisions Midday storage of train equipment for the Bolton service must occur off corridor. The most likely locations available for the Bolton equipment are GO yard facilities within the USRC or Willowbrook yard. Accommodation of the Bolton equipment must be factored into GO Transit’s master equipment cycle and assignment plan.

Bolton Commuter Rail Feasibility Report | 76 MMM Group Limited | December 2010 11.0 At Grade Rail / Road Crossings Table 11.1: Key Characteristics of Existing At-Grade Rail/Road Crossings Max Speed Average Number ssessment actier ubdivision Location1 Road Road No. of No. of Existing A - M S Crossing Name (Mph [Km/h]) of Trains/Day (M [Km]) Jurisdiction Classification Lanes Tracks Protection2 Passenger Freight Passenger Freight The purpose of this section is to define criteria, assess and make recommendations regarding the potential grade-separation of the Cold Creek Road 19.15 City of Rural 2 N/A 55 1 LB N/A 23 existing at-grade rail/road crossings within the proposed Bolton GO Rail corridor. Vaughan [89] Albion-Vaughan 19.71 Town of Rural 2 N/A 55 1 LBG/WSP N/A 23 Road [31.73[ Caledon/City [89] 11.1 General Corridor Crossing Assessment of Vaughan Coleraine Drive 21.85 Town of Rural 2 N/A 55 2 LBG/WSP N/A 23 There are 26 public and two private at-grade rail/road crossings within the Bolton GO Rail corridor. The characteristics of these crossings [35.17] Caledon [89] are highlighted in Table 11.1. All crossings have been evaluated to determine potential grade separation requirements based on cross King Street 22.85 Region of Peel Arterial 2 N/A 55 1 LBG N/A 23 product volumes of rail and vehicular traffic, operational functionality, safety and cost. [36.78] [89] Humber Station 23.8 Town of Rural 2 N/A 55 1 LB N/A 23 Road [38.31] Caledon [89] Table 11.1: Key Characteristics of Existing At-Grade Rail/Road Crossings Castlederg Side 24.75 Town of Rural 2 N/A 55 1 LB N/A 23 Max Speed Average Number Location1 Road Road No. of No. of Existing road [39.84] Caledon [89] Crossing Name (Mph [Km/h]) of Trains/Day (M [Km]) Jurisdiction Classification Lanes Tracks Protection2 Humber Station 25.58 Town of Rural 2 N/A 55 1 LB N/A 23 Passenger Freight Passenger Freight Road [41.17] Caledon [89] Private Road 0.10 City of Toronto Private 2 N/A 35 3 LBG/WSP N/A 29 Duffy’s Lane 27.3 Town of Rural 2 N/A 55 1 LB N/A 23 [0.16] [57] [43.94] Caledon [89] Old Weston 0.23 City of Toronto Collector 2 N/A 35 4 LBG/WSP N/A 29 Mount Hope 30.14 Town of Rural 2 N/A 55 1 LB N/A 23 3 Road [0.37] [57] Road [48.51] Caledon [89] Denison Road 3.17 City of Toronto Collector 2 N/A 35 4 LBG/WSP N/A 29 Hunsden Side 30.46 Town of Rural 2 N/A 55 2 LBG N/A 23 3 East [5.11] [57] Road [49.03] Caledon [89] 3 John Street 3.84 City of Toronto Collector 2 N/A 35 4 LBG/WSP N/A 29 Mount Pleasant 31.31 Town of Rural 2 N/A 55 2 LBG N/A 23 [6.18] [57] Road [50.39] Caledon [89] 3 King Street 3.95 City of Toronto Local 2 N/A 35 4 LBG/WSP N/A 29 Mount Wolfe 32.24 Town of Rural 2 N/A 55 1 LB N/A 23 [6.36] [57] Road [51.89] Caledon [89] 3 Church Street 4.15 City of Toronto Collector 2 N/A 35 4 LBG/WSP N/A 29 Tottenham Road 33.24 Arterial 2 N/A 55 1 LB N/A 23 [6.68] [57] [53.5] [89] Oak Street3 4.64 City of Toronto Collector 2 N/A 35 2 LBG/WSP N/A 29 Notes: 1. The reference point for the mileage is the CP Rail tracks, located north of Dupont Street. [7.47] [57] 2. LBG indicates lights, bells, and gates and WSP indicates whistle signal prohibited. Islington Avenue 9.95 Region of York Arterial 4 N/A 40 1 LBG/WSP N/A 29 3. These at-grade rail/road crossings, located in the City of Toronto, are slated to be grade-separated as part of the Georgetown South Environmental Assessment Airport Rail Link. [16.02] [65] Kipling Avenue 11.77 City of Local 2 N/A 50 1 LBG/WSP N/A 29 [18.95] Vaughan [81] Woodbridge 11.9 City of Private/Local 2 N/A 50 1 LBG/WSP N/A 29 Foam Road [19.16] Vaughan [81] Rutherford Road 14.13 Region of York Arterial 2 N/A 50 1 LBG/WSP N/A 29 [22.75] [81] Major Mackenzie 15.47 Region of York Arterial 2 N/A 50 1 LBG/WSP N/A 29 Drive [24.9] [81] Nashville Road 16.7 Region of York Arterial 2 N/A 50 2 LBG/WSP N/A 23 [26.88] [81] Huntington Road 17.28 City of Rural 2 N/A 50 1 LB N/A 23 [27.81] Vaughan [81] Kirby Road 18.48 City of Rural 2 N/A 55 1 LB N/A 23 [29.75] Vaughan [89]

Bolton Commuter Rail Feasibility Report | 76 MMM Group Limited | December 2010 11.2 Grade-Separation Criteria 11.3 Individual Corridor Crossing Assessment The following criteria were important considerations in determining which at-grade rail/road crossings warranted grade separation: Existing vehicular traffic for at-grade rail/road crossings was forecasted to horizons 2011, 2021 and 2031 based on growth factors. Growth factors were developed through consultation with appropriate jurisdictional staff, historical traffic data or population forecasts. hh The Draft Grade Crossing Regulations (DGCR), dated December 2002 and prepared by Transport Canada, indicate that In order to assess the potential traffic-based need for grade-separation, an Exposure Index (EI) was calculated. The exposure index new at-grade crossings will not be constructed if the maximum permissible speed on the railway exceeds 80 Mph (130 Km/h) or if the road is a freeway as classified in Geometric Design Guide for Canadian Roads, dated January 1986 and represents the product of daily bi-direction road traffic volumes and train frequencies. The projected Exposure Index assessed for each prepared by Transportation Association of Canada (TAC); and crossing included the future Bolton corridor commuter trains. A threshold value of 200,000 daily movements over a crossing is the hh Section six of the DGCR indicates that before a responsible authority causes or authorizes any of the following changes, it defining criterion in determining which crossings should be considered for grade-separation. shall conduct a detailed safety assessment: The proximity of crossings to locations suitable for staging train movements can severely impact the traffic flow and available capacity. hh A significant change in the road or railway infrastructure, including a relocation of the crossing, or in the traffic The Canadian Rail Operating Rules (CROR), dated May 28, 2008 and prepared by the Railway Association of Canada requires that patterns at or in the vicinity of a crossing, such as the installation of traffic signals on road approaches or a change public crossings at-grade must not be obstructed by a standing train movement or by switching operations for a period longer than five in the location of the meeting or passing points of trains or engines on sidings or on passing tracks or in the switching of railway equipment; minutes.

hh Anything that is likely to cause a significant increase in the traffic volume on the road or line of railway at or in the The variability for freight train lengths and positioning of personnel (i.e. two employees are required on the leading end) are not vicinity of a crossing, such as the addition of a new commuter rail service or the development of a residential area conducive to main line staging of freight movements over public crossings at-grade in normal and unusual operations. The construction or an industrial area or an industrial, commercial or recreation facility; of grade separations for at-grade crossing locations in and around staging yards and at locations in close proximity to GO station hh A significant increase in the speed of traffic on the road or line of railway at or in the vicinity of a crossing; platforms, where crossing protective devices may activate during entraining and detraining activities at adjacent stations, will hh A significant change in the type of vehicles passing over the crossing; or significantly improve operational flow for both rail and vehicular traffic.

hh Any other action that might cause a significant change in road or railway operations that could adversely affect the Each crossing, intersecting with the proposed Bolton GO Rail corridor right-of-way, has been examined to determine the potential safety of a crossing. impacts of increased train crossing movements and vehicular traffic on the safety and operational conditions at the crossing site. There are also a number of variables that factored into the decision to grade-separate a crossing. These variables were developed based on the Canadian Road/Railway Grade Crossing Detailed Safety Assessment Field Guide, dated April 2005 and prepared by Transport Canada they include: 11.4 City of Toronto At-Grade Rail/Road Crossings There are seven at-grade rail/road crossings along the Bolton GO Rail corridor in the City of Toronto. The crossings are located at a hh Vehicular traffic volumes; Private Road (0.1 miles), Old Weston Road (0.23 miles), Denison Road East (3.17 miles), John Street (3.84 miles), King Street (3.95 hh Frequency of train movements; miles) Church Street (4.15 miles) and Oak Street (4.64 miles). The crossings located at miles 3.17 through to 4.64 are situated in a hh Public transportation service usage; residential area, west of Weston Road and south of Highway 401. The crossings located at miles 0.10 and 0.23 are situated in a mixed hh Interconnectivity of the current and future road networks; residential and commercial area, in close proximity to a rail junction and maintenance yard. Figure 11.1 shows the crossings in the City hh Physical site constraints; of Toronto. hh Collision history; hh Number of tracks and road lanes; hh Maximum permissible rail and road speeds; hh Existing levels of safety; hh Other physical characteristics such as gradient and curvature; and hh Recurrent and frequent weather conditions.

Bolton Commuter Rail Feasibility Report | 77 MMM Group Limited | December 2010 Table 11.2 details the annual growth, vehicular volumes, rail volumes and exposure index for 2008, 2011, 2021 and 2031 at the City of Toronto crossings.

Table 11.2: City of Toronto Annual Growth, Vehicular Volumes, Freight and Passenger Volumes and Exposure Index 2008, 2011, 2021 and 2031 Crossing Name Bi-Directional Daily Crossings 2008 2011 2021 2031 Annual Growth1 0% 0% 0% 0% Vehicular 100 100 100 100 Private Road Rail 29 42 60 93 Exposure Index 2,900 4,200 6,000 9,300 Annual Growth2 1.0% 1.0% 0.2% 0.3% Vehicular 6,427 6,623 6,764 6,964 Old Weston Road Rail 29 42 60 93 Exposure Index 186,392 278,177 405,827 647,617 Annual Growth2 1.0% 1.0% 0.2% 0.3% Vehicular 5,205 5,364 5,477 5,639 Denison Road East Rail 29 42 60 93 Exposure Index 150,945 225,275 328,650 524,457 Annual Growth2 1.0% 1.0% 0.2% 0.3% Vehicular 2,513 2,590 2,645 2,723 John Street Rail 29 42 60 93 Exposure Index 72,878 108,766 158,676 253,214 Annual Growth2 1.0% 1.0% 0.2% 0.3% Vehicular 3,920 4,040 4,126 4,247 King Street Rail 29 42 60 93 Exposure Index 113,689 169,673 247,532 395,011 Annual Growth2 1.0% 1.0% 0.2% 0.3% Vehicular 3,974 4,095 4,182 4,306 Church Street Rail 29 42 60 93 Exposure Index 115,247 171,998 250,925 400,425 Annual Growth2 1.0% 1.0% 0.2% 0.3% Vehicular 12,503 12,884 13,157 13,546 Oak Street Rail 29 42 60 93 Exposure Index 362,574 541,117 789,425 1,259,760 Note: 1. Since this is a private road, it is assumed that there will be no growth in traffic volumes. 2. Based on Greater Toronto Area population forecasts detailed in the City of Toronto Official Plan, dated August 2007.

Based on the analysis, the following conclusions have been drawn:

hh Private Road: The exposure indexes indicate that grade-separation is not expected to be warranted under any of the horizon years; hh Old Weston Road: The exposure indexes indicate that grade-separation is expected to be warranted by horizon 2011; Figure 11.1: City of Toronto At-Grade Rail/Road hh Denison Road East: The exposure indexes indicate that grade-separation is expected to be warranted by horizon 2011; hh John Street: The exposure indexes indicate that grade-separation is expected to be warranted by horizon 2031;

Bolton Commuter Rail Feasibility Report | 78 MMM Group Limited | December 2010 hh King Street: The exposure indexes indicate that grade-separation is expected to be warranted by horizon 2021; Note: 1. Based on the population forecasts detailed in the Planning and Economic Committee Report to Commissioner of Planning and Development Services, dated January 7, 2009. hh Church Street: The exposure indexes indicate that grade-separation is expected to be warranted by horizon 2021; and hh Oak Street: The exposure indexes indicate that grade-separation is expected to be warranted now. The current exposure index indicates that grade-separation is needed now. The role of this arterial road in the boundary road network (i.e. Islington Avenue provides a connection between Steeles Avenue West and Highway 7) further supports the grade-separation of this The at grade crossings at Old Weston Road and Denison Road and will be included in the analysis performed for the Georgetown crossing. corridor EA. The crossings at John, King, Church and Oak Streets are located in the proposed depressed corridor area of the Weston Subdivision. Grade separation of these roadways is to occur on the GO Weston Subdivision only and will remain at grade on the CP Mactier Subdivision. 11.6 Kipling Avenue (Mile 11.77) This at-grade rail/road crossing is located within the community of Woodbridge, west of the Woodbridge Fairgrounds, in the City of 11.5 Islington Avenue (Mile 9.95) Vaughan. The area consists primarily of residential developments, the Woodbridge Foam Plant and a warehouse facility. Kipling Avenue is a local road that terminates on the north side of Highway 407; in this area it performs an arterial function, linking Langstaff Road to This at-grade rail/road crossing is located north of Steeles Avenue West and south of Highway 407 and Highway 7, in the City of Highway 7. It continues again south of Highway 407 as an arterial road. Figure 11.3 shows the crossing at Kipling Avenue. Vaughan. Figure 11.2 shows the crossing at Islington Avenue.

N N At-Grade Rail/Road Crossing

At-Grade Rail/Road Crossing

Islington Avenue Kipling Avenue

Figure 11.3: Kipling Avenue At-Grade Rail/Road Crossing at Mile 11.77

Table 11.4 details the annual growth, vehicular volumes, rail volumes and exposure index for 2008, 2011, 2021 and 2031 at the Kipling Figure 11.2: Islington Avenue At-Grade Rail/Road Crossing at Mile 9.95 Avenue crossing.

Table 11.3 details the annual growth, vehicular volumes, rail volumes and exposure index for 2008, 2011, 2021 and 2031 at the Table 11.4: Kipling Avenue Annual Growth, Vehicular Volumes, Rail Volumes and Exposure Index 2008, 2011, 2021 and 2031 Islington Avenue crossing. Bi-directional Daily 2008 2011 2021 2031 Crossings Table 11.3: Islington Avenue Annual Growth, Vehicular Volumes, Rail Volumes and Exposure Index 2008, 2011, 2021 and 2031 Annual Growth1 3.6% 3.6% 2.3% 1.6% Bi-directional Daily Vehicular 9,204 10,249 12,812 15,036 2008 2011 2021 2031 Crossings Rail 29 42 60 93 Annual Growth1 3.6% 3.6% 2.3% 1.6% Exposure Index 266,918 430,459 768,710 1,398,391 Vehicular 17,817 19,840 24,801 29,107 Note: 1. Based on the population forecasts detailed in the Planning and Economic Committee Report to Commissioner of Planning and Rail 29 42 60 93 Development Services, dated January 7, 2009. Exposure Index 516,693 833,270 1,488,048 2,706,967

Bolton Commuter Rail Feasibility Report | 79 MMM Group Limited | December 2010 The exposure indexes indicate that grade-separation is needed now. It is noted that primarily residential surrounding land use and local Woodbridge Foam Private Road is a two-lane private road that is used exclusively by workers and truck traffic to access the Woodbridge classification of this two-lane road may not support the grade-separation of this crossing. Foam facility. Traffic volumes on this road are expected to be negligible and are not expected to significantly conflict with the rail volumes. The exposure indexes do not warrant the grade-separation of this crossing at any of the horizon years. The City of Vaughan Pedestrian and Bicycle Master Plan Study, prepared by Marshall Macklin Monaghan Ltd. and dated January 2007, proposes several active transportation improvements along Kipling Avenue. Further study would be required in order to determine whether grade-separation can be accommodated along Kipling Avenue with the proposed active transportation improvements. 11.8 Rutherford Road (Mile 14.13) This at-grade rail/road crossing is located in a primarily rural area, west of Highway 27 and east of Huntington Road and Highway 50, in 11.7 Woodbridge Foam Private Road (Mile 11.90) the City of Vaughan. Figure 11.5 shows the crossing at Rutherford Road. This at-grade rail/road crossing is located northwest of the Kipling Avenue at-grade rail/road crossing, in the community of Woodbridge, City of Vaughan. Figure 11.4 shows the crossing at this private road.

N

At-Grade Rail/Road Crossing Woodbridge Foam Private Road

Figure 11.5: Rutherford Road At-Grade Rail/Road Crossing at Mile 14.13 Figure 11.4: Woodbridge Foam Private Road At-Grade Rail/Road Crossing at Mile 11.90 Table 11.6 details the annual growth, vehicular volumes, rail volumes and exposure index for 2008, 2011, 2021 and 2031 at the Table 11.5 details the annual growth, vehicular volumes, rail volumes and exposure index for 2008, 2011, 2021 and 2031 at the Rutherford Road crossing. Woodbridge Foam Private Road crossing.

Table 11.6: Rutherford Road Annual Growth, Vehicular Volumes, Rail Volumes and Exposure Index 2008, 2011, 2021 and 2031 Table 11.5: Woodbridge Foam Private Road Annual Growth, Vehicular Volumes, Rail Volumes and Exposure Index 2008, 2011, 2021 and 2031 Bi-directional Daily Bi-directional Daily 2008 2011 2021 2031 2008 2011 2021 2031 Crossings Crossings Annual Growth1 3.6% 3.6% 2.3% 1.6% Annual Growth1 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% Vehicular 17,837 19,862 24,829 29,140 Vehicular2 100 100 100 100 Rail 29 42 60 93 Rail 29 42 60 93 Exposure Index 517,272 834,204 1,489,716 2,710,002 Exposure Index 2,900 4,200 6,000 9,300 Note: 1. Based on the population forecasts detailed in the Planning and Economic Committee Report to Commissioner of Planning and Note: 1. Since this is a private road, it is assumed that there will be no growth in traffic volumes. Development Services, dated January 7, 2009. 2. Traffic volumes are assumed to be negligibly small based on the private nature of this road. The exposure indexes indicate that grade-separation is needed now. The arterial road classification and road network connectivity (i.e. this road connects Highway 50 and Highway 27) of this two-lane road also supports grade-separation.

Bolton Commuter Rail Feasibility Report | 80 MMM Group Limited | December 2010 There are plans to extend Highway 427 north of Highway 7. The Highway 427 Transportation Corridor Environmental Assessment Study Based on the technically preferred Highway 427 EA alignment, a ramp connecting Major Mackenzie Drive to the future Highway (Highway 427 EA), prepared by MRC and dated May 2008, identifies a technically preferred alternative for the Highway 427 alignment. 427 extension is proposed in close proximity to the Major Mackenzie Drive crossing. It is expected that the additional road network A ramp connecting Rutherford Road to the future Highway 427 extension is proposed east of the Rutherford Road crossing. It is connectivity provided by the Highway 427 extension will support the grade-separation of this crossing. expected that the proposed Highway 427 extension connection to Rutherford Road will support the grade-separation of the Rutherford The Draft 2009 to 2031 York Region Road Construction Program, dated February 2009, indicates that Major Mackenzie Drive will Road crossing by increasing the road network connectivity of Rutherford Road. be widened to four lanes from Highway 50 to Weston Road and the existing jog at Major Mackenzie Drive and Highway 27 will be eliminated. This will also support the grade-separation of this crossing as the additional capacity and better connectivity will attract 11.9 Major Mackenzie Drive (Mile 15.47) more vehicles.

This at-grade rail/road crossing is located east of Huntington Road and Highway 50, west of Highway 27 and immediately north of the The arterial road classification and road network connectivity (i.e. this road connects Highway 50 and Highway 27) of this two-lane triangle junction for the CP Vaughan Intermodal Terminal, in the City of Vaughan. The area surrounding this crossing is primarily rural. road also support grade-separation. Although the exposure indexes indicate that grade-separation is warranted at horizon 2031, due to Figure 11.6 shows the crossing at Major Mackenzie Drive. the road network improvements described above, the proximity of Major Mackenzie Drive to the Vaughan Intermodal Terminal access and the proposed location of the Kleinburg GO Station, grade separation of this crossing is identified as a Base Case infrastructure requirement. The costs assoicated grade separation of Major Mackenzie Drive will be considered under the York Region plan.

N 11.10 Nashville Road (Mile 16.70) This at-grade rail/road crossing is located east of Huntington Road and Highway 50 and west of Highway 27, in the City of Vaughan. Major Mackenzie Drive Nashville Road terminates to the east at Islington Avenue. The surrounding land use is rural. Figure 11.7 shows the crossing at Nashville Road.

At-Grade Rail/Road Crossing

Figure 11.6: Major Mackenzie Drive At-Grade Rail/Road Crossing at Mile 15.47

Table 11.7 details the annual growth, vehicular volumes, rail volumes and exposure index for 2008, 2011, 2021 and 2031 at the Major Mackenzie Drive crossing.

Table 11.7: Major Mackenzie Drive Annual Growth, Vehicular Volumes, Rail Volumes and Exposure Index 2008, 2011, 2021 and 2031 Bi-directional Daily Current 2011 2021 2031 Crossings Annual Growth1 3.6% 3.6% 2.3% 1.6% Figure 11.7: Nashville Road At-Grade Rail/Road Crossing at Mile 16.70 Vehicular 1,956 2,178 2,723 3,196 Rail 29 42 60 93 Exposure Index 56,734 91,495 163,390 297,230 Note: 1. Based on the population forecasts detailed in the Planning and Economic Committee Report to Commissioner of Planning and Development Services, dated January 7, 2009.

Bolton Commuter Rail Feasibility Report | 81 MMM Group Limited | December 2010 Table 11.8 details the annual growth, vehicular volumes, rail volumes and exposure index for 2008, 2011, 2021 and 2031 at Nashville Table 11.9 details the annual growth, vehicular volumes, rail volumes and exposure index for 2008, 2011, 2021 and 2031 at Road crossing. Huntington Road crossing.

Table 11.8: Nashville Road Annual Growth, Vehicular Volumes, Rail Volumes and Exposure Index 2008, 2011, 2021 and 2031 Table 11.9: Huntington Road Annual Growth, Vehicular Volumes, Rail Volumes and Exposure Index 2008, 2011, 2021 and 2031 Bi-directional Daily Bi-directional Daily 2008 2011 2021 2031 2008 2011 2021 2031 Crossings Crossings Annual Growth1 3.6% 3.6% 2.3% 1.6% Annual Growth1 3.6% 3.6% 2.3% 1.6% Vehicular 7,101 7,907 9,884 11,601 Vehicular 373 416 519 610 Rail 23 36 52 83 Rail 23 36 52 63 Exposure Index 163,323 284,658 513,989 962,860 Exposure Index 8,582 14,958 27,009 38,404 Note: 1. Based on the population forecasts detailed in the Planning and Economic Committee Report to Commissioner of Planning and Note: 1. Based on the population forecasts detailed in the Planning and Economic Committee Report to Commissioner of Planning and Development Services, dated January 7, 2009. Development Services, dated January 7, 2009.

The exposure indexes indicate that grade-separation is not expected to be warranted under any of the horizon years. The exposure indexes indicate that grade-separation is expected to be warranted by horizon 2011. The arterial road classification and road network connectivity (i.e. this road connects Highway 50 and Highway 27) of this two-lane road also supports grade-separation. 11.12 Kirby Road (Mile 18.48) This at-grade rail/road crossing is located between Huntington Road and Cold Creek Road, in the City of Vaughan. The surrounding land 11.11 Huntington Road (Mile 17.28) use is rural. Figure 11.9 shows the crossing at Kirby Road. This at-grade rail/road crossing is located north of Nashville Road, in the City of Vaughan. The surrounding land use is rural. Figure 11.8 shows the crossing at Huntington Road.

N At-Grade Rail/Road Crossing

Huntington Road

Figure 11.8: Huntington Road At-Grade Rail/Road Crossing at Mile 17.28 Figure 11.9: Kirby Road At-Grade Rail/Road Crossing at Mile 18.48

Bolton Commuter Rail Feasibility Report | 82 MMM Group Limited | December 2010 Table 11.10 details the annual growth, vehicular volumes, rail volumes and exposure index for 2008, 2011, 2021 and 2031 at Kirby Table 11.11 details the annual growth, vehicular volumes, rail volumes and exposure index for 2008, 2011, 2021 and 2031 at Cold Road crossing. Creek Road crossing.

Table 11.10: Kirby Road Annual Growth, Vehicular Volumes, Rail Volumes and Exposure Index 2008, 2011, 2021 and 2031 Table 11.11: Cold Creek Road Annual Growth, Vehicular Volumes, Rail Volumes and Exposure Index 2008, 2011, 2021 and 2031 Bi-directional Daily Bi-directional Daily 2008 2011 2021 2031 2008 2011 2021 2031 Crossings Crossings Annual Growth1 3.6% 3.6% 2.3% 1.6% Annual Growth1 3.6% 3.6% 2.3% 1.6% Vehicular 580 646 807 948 Vehicular 150 167 209 246 Rail 23 36 52 63 Rail 23 36 52 63 Exposure Index 13,340 23,251 41,982 59,694 Exposure Index 3,459 6,029 10,887 15,480 Note: 1. Based on the population forecasts detailed in the Planning and Economic Committee Report to Commissioner of Planning and Note: 1. Based on the population forecasts detailed in the Planning and Economic Committee Report to Commissioner of Planning and Development Services, dated January 7, 2009. Development Services, dated January 7, 2009.

The exposure indexes indicate that grade-separation is not expected to be warranted under any of the horizon years. The exposure indexes indicate that grade-separation is not expected to be warranted under any of the horizon years.

11.13 Cold Creek Road (Mile 19.15) 11.14 Albion-Vaughan Road (Mile 19.71) This at-grade rail/road crossing is located east of Albion-Vaughan Road, in the City of Vaughan. The surrounding land use is rural. This at-grade rail/road crossing is located east of Highway 50, in the southeast quadrant of the Bolton Community, Region of Peel. Figure 11.10 shows the crossing at Cold Creek Road. Albion-Vaughan Road acts as boundary between the Town of Caledon and the City of Vaughan. The surrounding land use includes a mix of residential, rural and industrial development. Figure 11.11 shows the crossing at Albion-Vaughan Road.

Figure 11.11: Albion-Vaughan At-Grade Rail/Road Crossing at Mile 19.71

Figure 11.10: Cold Creek Road At-Grade Rail/Road Crossing at Mile 19.15

Bolton Commuter Rail Feasibility Report | 83 MMM Group Limited | December 2010 Table 11.12 details the annual growth, vehicular volumes, rail volumes and exposure index for 2008, 2011, 2021 and 2031 at the Table 11.13 details the annual growth, vehicular volumes, rail volumes and exposure index for 2008, 2011, 2021 and 2031 at the Albion-Vaughan Road crossing. Colerain Drive crossing.

Table 11.12: Albion-Vaughan Road Annual Growth, Vehicular Volumes, Rail Volumes and Exposure Index 2008, 2011, 2021 and 2031 Table 11.13: Coleraine Drive Annual Growth, Vehicular Volumes, Rail Volumes and Exposure Index 2008, 2011, 2021 and 2031 Bi-directional Daily Bi-directional Daily 2008 2011 2021 2031 2008 2011 2021 2031 Crossings Crossings Annual Growth1 2.5% 2.5% 0.4% 3.5% Annual Growth1 2.5% 2.5% 2.5% 2.5% Vehicular 10,690 11,516 11,958 16,891 Vehicular 5,276 5,684 7,285 9,337 Rail 23 36 52 63 Rail 23 36 52 63 Exposure Index 245,870 414,590 621,833 1,064,104 Exposure Index 121,342 204,608 378,807 588,232 Note: 1. Based on correspondence with technical staff in the Town of Caledon Note: 1. Based on correspondence with technical staff in the Town of Caledon.

The exposure index indicates that grade-separation is needed now. The exposure indexes indicate that grade-separation is expected to be warranted by horizon 2011.

11.15 Coleraine Drive (Mile 21.85) 11.16 King Street (Mile 22.85) This at-grade rail/road crossing is located in the southern quadrant of the Bolton community, Region of Peel. The surrounding area land This at-grade rail/road crossing is located in the western boundary of the Bolton community, Region of Peel. The surrounding land use use includes a mix of residential, rural and industrial development. Figure 11.12 shows the crossing at Coleraine Drive. includes a mix of residential, rural and industrial development. Figure 11.13 shows the crossing at King Street.

Figure 11.12: Coleraine Drive At-Grade Rail/Road Crossing at Mile 21.85

Figure 11.13: King Street At-Grade Rail/Road Crossing at Mile 22.85

Bolton Commuter Rail Feasibility Report | 84 MMM Group Limited | December 2010 Table 11.14 details the annual growth, vehicular volumes, rail volumes and exposure index for 2008, 2011, 2021 and 2031 at the King Table 11.15 details the annual growth, vehicular volumes, rail volumes and exposure index for 2008, 2011, 2021 and 2031 at the Street crossing. Humber Station Road crossing.

Table 11.14: King Street Annual Growth, Vehicular Volumes, Rail Volumes and Exposure Index 2008, 2011, 2021 and 2031 Table 11.15: Humber Station Road Annual Growth, Vehicular Volumes, Rail Volumes and Exposure Index 2008, 2011, 2021 and 2031 Bi-directional Daily Bi-directional Daily 2008 2011 2021 2031 2008 2011 2021 2031 Crossings Crossings Annual Growth1 4.0% 4.0% 2.0% 2.0% Annual Growth1 2.5% 2.5% 0.4% 3.5% Vehicular 10,644 11,974 14,596 17,792 Vehicular 1,040 1,120 1,163 1,643 Rail 23 36 52 63 Rail 23 36 52 63 Exposure Index 244,821 431,046 758,973 1,120,896 Exposure Index 23,920 40,334 60,496 103,524 Note: 1. Based on correspondence with technical staff in the Region of Peel. Note: 1. Based on correspondence with technical staff in the Town of Caledon.

The exposure index indicates that grade-separation is needed now. The arterial classification of this two-lane road also supports grade- The exposure indexes indicate that grade-separation is not expected to be warranted at any of the horizon years. separation. 11.18 Castlederg Side Road (Mile 24.75) 11.17 Humber Station Road (Mile 23.80) This at-grade rail-road crossing is located between Humber Station Road and The Gore Road, in the Town of Caledon. The surrounding This at-grade rail/road crossing is located southwest of the Humber River, in the Town of Caledon. The surrounding land use includes a land use includes a mix of rural development and forests. Figure 11.15 shows the crossing at Castlederg Side Road. mix of rural development and forests. Figure 11.14 shows the crossing at Humber Station Road.

Figure 11.15: Castlederg Side Road At-Grade Rail/Road Crossing at Mile 24.75 Figure 11.14: Humber Station Road At-Grade Rail/Road Crossing at Mile 23.80

Bolton Commuter Rail Feasibility Report | 85 MMM Group Limited | December 2010 Table 11.16 details the annual growth, vehicular volumes, rail volumes and exposure index for 2008, 2011, 2021 and 2031 at the Table 11.17 details the annual growth, vehicular volumes, rail volumes and exposure index for 2008, 2011, 2021 and 2031 at the Castlederg Side Road crossing. Humber Station Road crossing.

Table 11.16: Castlederg Side Road Annual Growth, Vehicular Volumes, Rail Volumes and Exposure Index 2008, 2011, 2021 and 2031 Table 11.17: Humber Station Road Annual Growth, Vehicular Volumes, Rail Volumes and Exposure Index 2008, 2011, 2021 and 2031 Bi-directional Daily Bi-directional Daily 2008 2011 2021 2031 2008 2011 2021 2031 Crossings Crossings Annual Growth1 2.5% 2.5% 0.4% 3.5% Annual Growth1 2.5% 2.5% 0.4% 3.5% Vehicular 990 1,067 1,107 1,564 Vehicular 1,030 1,110 1,152 1,627 Rail 23 36 52 63 Rail 23 36 52 63 Exposure Index 22,770 38,395 57,588 98,547 Exposure Index 23,690 39,946 59,915 102,528 Note: 1. Based on correspondence with technical staff in the Town of Caledon. Note: 1. Based on correspondence with technical staff in the Town of Caledon.

The exposure indexes indicate that grade-separation is not expected to be warranted at any of the horizon years. The exposure indexes indicate that grade-separation is not expected to be warranted at any of the horizon years.

11.19 Humber Station Road (Mile 25.58) 11.20 Duffy’s Lane (Mile 27.30) This at-grade rail/road crossing is located north of Castlederg Side Road, in the Town of Caledon. This is the second crossing of Humber This at-grade rail/road crossing is located south of the Old Church Road, in the Town of Caledon. The surrounding land use includes a Station Road with the Bolton GO Rail corridor, which follows a curved around the Humber River. The surrounding land use includes mix of rural development and forests. Figure 11.17 shows the crossing at Duffy’s Lane. a mix of rural development and forests. Figure 11.16 shows the crossing at Humber Station Road.

Figure 11.17: Duffy’s Lane At-Grade Rail/Road Crossing at Mile 27.30 Figure 11.16: Humber Station Road At-Grade Rail/Road Crossing at Mile 25.58

Bolton Commuter Rail Feasibility Report | 86 MMM Group Limited | December 2010 Table 11.18 details the annual growth, vehicular volumes, rail volumes and exposure index for 2008, 2011, 2021 and 2031 at the Table 11.19 details the annual growth, vehicular volumes, rail volumes and exposure index for 2008, 2011, 2021 and 2031 at the Duffy’s Lane crossing. Mount Hope Road crossing.

Table 11.18: Duffy’s Lane Annual Growth, Vehicular Volumes, Rail Volumes and Exposure Index 2008, 2011, 2021 and 2031 Table 11.19: Mount Hope Road Annual Growth, Vehicular Volumes, Rail Volumes and Exposure Index 2008, 2011, 2021 and 2031 Bi-directional Daily Bi-directional Daily 2008 2011 2021 2031 2008 2011 2021 2031 Crossings Crossings Annual Growth1 2.5% 2.5% 0.4% 3.5% Annual Growth1 2.5% 2.5% 0.4% 3.5% Vehicular 330 356 369 521 Vehicular 960 1,034 1,074 1,517 Rail 23 36 52 63 Rail 23 36 52 63 Exposure Index 7,590 12,798 19,196 32,849 Exposure Index 22,080 37,232 55,843 95,560 Note: 1. Based on correspondence with technical staff in the Town of Caledon. Note: 1. Based on correspondence with technical staff in the Town of Caledon.

The exposure indexes indicate that grade-separation is not expected to be warranted at any of the horizon years. The exposure indexes indicate that grade-separation is not expected to be warranted at any of the horizon years.

11.21 Mount Hope Road (Mile 30.14) 11.22 Hunsden Side Road (Mile 30.46) This at-grade rail/road crossing is located east of the Highway 50, in the Town of Caledon. The surrounding land use includes a mix of This at-grade rail/road crossing is located east of Mount Hope Road, in the Town of Caledon. The surrounding land use includes a mix of rural development and forests. Figure 11.18 shows the crossing at Mount Hope Road. rural development and forests. Figure 11.19 shows the crossing at Hunsden Side Road.

Figure 11.19: Hunsden Side Road At-Grade Rail/Road Crossing at Mile 30.46

Figure 11.18: Mount Hope Road At-Grade Rail/Road Crossing at Mile 30.14

Bolton Commuter Rail Feasibility Report | 87 MMM Group Limited | December 2010 Table 11.20 details the annual growth, vehicular volumes, rail volumes and exposure index for 2008, 2011, 2021 and 2031 at the Table 11.21 details the annual growth, vehicular volumes, rail volumes and exposure index for 2008, 2011, 2021 and 2031 at the Hunsden Side Road crossing. Mount Pleasant Road crossing.

Table 11.20: Hunsden Side Road Annual Growth, Vehicular Volumes, Rail Volumes and Exposure Index 2008, 2011, 2021 and 2031 Table 11.21: Mount Pleasant Road Annual Growth, Vehicular Volumes, Rail Volumes and Exposure Index 2008, 2011, 2021 and 2031 Bi-directional Daily Bi-directional Daily 2008 2011 2021 2031 2008 2011 2021 2031 Crossings Crossings Annual Growth1 2.5% 2.5% 0.4% 3.5% Annual Growth1 2.5% 2.5% 0.4% 3.5% Vehicular 180 194 201 284 Vehicular 280 302 313 442 Rail 23 36 52 63 Rail 23 36 52 63 Exposure Index 4,140 6,981 10,471 17,918 Exposure Index 6,440 10,859 16,287 27,872 Note: 1. Based on correspondence with technical staff in the Town of Caledon. Note: 1. Based on correspondence with technical staff in the Town of Caledon.

The exposure indexes indicate that grade-separation is not expected to be warranted at any of the horizon years. The exposure indexes indicate that grade-separation is not expected to be warranted at any of the horizon years.

11.23 Mount Pleasant Road (Mile 31.31) 11.24 Mount Wolfe Road (Mile 32.24) This at-grade rail/road crossing is located south of Highway 9, in the Town of Caledon. The surrounding land use includes a mix of rural This at-grade rail/road crossing is located south of Highway 9, in the Town of Caledon. The surrounding land use includes a mix of rural development and forests. Figure 11.20 shows the crossing at Mount Pleasant Road. development and forests. Figure 11.21 shows the crossing at Mount Wolfe Road.

Figure 11.20: Humber Station Road At-Grade Rail/Road Crossing at Mile 31.31 Figure 11.21: Mount Wolfe Road At-Grade Rail/Road Crossing at Mile 32.24

Bolton Commuter Rail Feasibility Report | 88 MMM Group Limited | December 2010 Table 11.22 details the annual growth, vehicular volumes, rail volumes and exposure index for 2008, 2011, 2021 and 2031 at the Table 11.23 details the annual growth, vehicular volumes, rail volumes and exposure index for 2008, 2011, 2021 and 2031 at the Mount Wolfe Road crossing. Tottenham Road crossing.

Table 11.22: Mount Wolfe Road Annual Growth, Vehicular Volumes, Rail Volumes and Exposure Index 2008, 2011, 2021 and 2031 Table 11.23: Tottenham Road Annual Growth, Vehicular Volumes, Rail Volumes and Exposure Index 2008, 2011, 2021 and 2031 Bi-directional Daily Bi-directional Daily 2008 2011 2021 2031 2008 2011 2021 2031 Crossings Crossings Annual Growth1 2.5% 2.5% 0.4% 3.5% Annual Growth1 2.5% 2.5% 2.5% 2.5% Vehicular 3,795 4,088 4,245 5,996 Vehicular 7,688 8,279 10,597 13,565 Rail 23 36 52 63 Rail 23 36 52 63 Exposure Index 87,283 147,178 220,748 377,752 Exposure Index 176,813 298,029 551,060 854,623 Note: 1. Based on correspondence with technical staff in the Town of Caledon. Note: 1. Based on correspondence with technical staff in Simcoe County

The exposure indexes indicate that grade-separation is expected to be warranted by horizon 2021. It is noted that this crossing only has The exposure indexes indicate that grade-separation is expected to be warranted by horizon 2011. The arterial road classification of this lights and bells as a protective device. It is recommended gates be installed at this crossing by horizon 2021. road also supports grade-separation of this crossing. It is noted that this crossing only has lights and bells as a protective device. It is recommended gates be installed at this crossing by horizon 2011. 11.25 Tottenham Road (Mile 33.24) This at-grade rail/road crossing is located north of Highway 9, in the Town of New Tecumseth of Simcoe County. The surrounding land use includes a mix of rural development and forests. Figure 11.22 shows the crossing at Tottenham Road.

At-Grade Rail/Road N Crossing

Tottenham Road

Figure 11.22: Tottenham Road At-Grade Rail/Road Crossing at Mile 33.24

Bolton Commuter Rail Feasibility Report | 89 MMM Group Limited | December 2010 11.26 Conclusions and Recommendations for Grade-Separations hh Kirby Road (mile 18.48): The exposure indexes indicate that grade-separation is not expected to be warranted under any of the horizon years; Based on the information above, the following conclusions and recommendations have been made: hh Cold Creek Road (mile 19.15): The exposure indexes indicate that grade-separation is not expected to be warranted under hh City of Toronto Crossings: The exposure indexes indicate that grade-separation requirements as follows: any of the horizon years;

hh Private Road (mile 0.1) not required. hh Albion-Vaughan Road (mile 19.71): The current exposure index indicates grade-separation is needed now;

hh Old Weston Road (mile0.23) and Denison Road East (mile 3.17) required by 2011, to be handled under Georgetown hh Coleraine Drive (mile 21.85): The exposure indexes indicate that grade-separation is expected to be warranted by horizon Corridor EA. 2011;

hh John Street (mile 3.84), King Street(mile 3.95), Church Street (mile 4.15) and Oak Street (mile 4.64) to be grade hh King Street (mile 22.85): The current exposure index and the role of this road in the boundary road network support separated over the depressed corridor of the Weston Subdivision and remain at grade with the Mactier Subdivision. grade-separation now; hh Humber Station Road (mile 23.80): The exposure indexes indicate that grade-separation is not expected to be warranted hh Islington Avenue (mile 9.95): The current exposure index and the role of this road in the boundary road network support under any of the horizon years; grade-separation now; hh Castlederg Side Road (mile 24.75): The exposure indexes indicate that grade-separation is not expected to be warranted hh Kipling Avenue (mile 11.77): The exposure indexes indicate that grade-separation is needed now. The current residential under any of the horizon years; land use and local classification of this road may not support grade-separation; hh Humber Station Road (mile 25.58): The exposure indexes indicate that grade-separation is not expected to be warranted hh Woodbridge Foam Private Road (mile 11.90): The exposure indexes are not expected to warrant the grade-separation of under any of the horizon years; this crossing at any of the horizon years; hh Duffy’s Lane (mile 27.30): The exposure indexes indicate that grade-separation is not expected to be warranted under any hh Rutherford Road (mile 14.13): The current exposure indexes and the role of this road in the boundary road network of the horizon years; support grade-separation now. The additional network connectivity provided by technically preferred Highway 427 alignment is also expected to support grade-separation of this crossing; hh Mount Hope Road (mile 30.14): The exposure indexes indicate that grade-separation is not expected to be warranted under any of the horizon years; hh Major Mackenzie Drive (mile 15.47): The arterial road classification, existing road network connectivity, the technically preferred Highway 427 alignment, the proposed road widening of this section of Major Mackenzie Drive and the hh Hunsden Side Road (mile 30.46): The exposure indexes indicate that grade-separation is not expected to be warranted proposed jog elimination are all expected to support the grade-separation of this crossing. Although the exposure under any of the horizon years; indexes indicate that grade-separation is warranted at horizon 2031, the proximity of the road to the Vaughan Intermodal hh Mount Pleasant Road (mile 31.31): The exposure indexes indicate that grade-separation is not expected to be warranted Terminal access and the proposed location of the Vaughan GO station significantly impact the use of this crossing. Grade under any of the horizon years; separation of Major Mackenzie Drive is identified as a Base Case infrastructure requirement. hh Mount Wolfe Road (mile 32.24): The exposure indexes indicate that grade-separation is expected to be warranted by hh Nashville Road (mile 16.70): The exposure indexes and the role of this road in the boundary road network are expected to horizon 2021. It is also recommended gates be installed at this crossing by horizon 2021; and support grade-separation at horizon 2011; hh Tottenham Road (mile 33.24): The exposure indexes indicate that grade-separation is expected to be warranted by horizon hh Huntington Road (mile 17.28): The exposure indexes indicate that grade-separation is not expected to be warranted under 2011. The arterial road classification of this road also supports grade-separation of this crossing. It is also recommended any of the horizon years; gates be installed at this crossing by horizon 2011.

Bolton Commuter Rail Feasibility Report | 90 MMM Group Limited | December 2010 on ail nfrastructure equirements West, and the proposed rail / road grade separation at Road 2C2 (Figure 9.12). The Emery Village Development Plan includes a direct 12.0 N -R I R connection to Arrow Road.

12.1 Access Roads and Intersections Mactier Subdivision Consequently the station will be quickly accessible from all directions. Construction of new access roads and intersections are foreseen. The following intersections have been identified for further assessment, to be conducted in studies subsequent to this Feasibly study: Transportation accessibility by all modes, the availability of parking and the provision of Kiss ‘n’ Ride facilities at transit stations influence the level of ridership at each station. In this study, particular attention was given to the investigation of available access roads and 1. Finch Avenue West at Weston Road; intersections, and the possible construction of new access roads in order to facilitate quick access to each station. 2. Weston Road at New Access Road (New Intersection);

This sub-section discusses the existing and proposed access roads and intersections at each newly proposed GO Station. 3. Weston Road at Lanyard Road; 4. Arrow Road at existing Access Road (after rail / road grade separation); and 5. Finch Avenue / Arrow Road. 12.1.1 Mount Dennis GO Station Two potential locations, north and south of Eglinton Avenue were identified for a Mount Dennis GO Station. Both of these locations are 12.1.3 Woodbridge GO Station easily accessible from Eglinton Avenue however the location north of Eglinton Avenue was identified as the preferred site as it is directly The Woodbridge site is directly accessible from Islington Avenue and two new signalized intersections are foreseen. Construction of accessible from Ray Avenue via Industry Street, Keelesdale Drive and Black Creek Drive. In addition, Ray Avenue is also connected to a additional access roads is not required at this location. The following intersections will require further investigation to determine the signalized intersection at Weston Road and Black Creek Drive. Black Creek Drive is connected via Industry Street and Keelesdale Drive. geometry and control type: There is a need to extend Goddard Avenue and construct a new road to connect Ray Avenue with the parking area and Kiss ‘n’ Ride facility at the proposed station location. Modifications to existing signalized and unsignalized intersections and signal timing plans may 1. Islington Avenue at New Access (Auto Access); and be needed. 2. Islington Avenue at New Access (Bus Access).

Details are shown in Figure 9.13 for service options 1 -3 and Figure 9.19 for service option 4.. The following existing intersections should be evaluated for modifications and associated geometrical improvements:

1. Weston Road at Ray Avenue; and One other possible location for the Woodbridge GO station has been identified to support service option 4. The site is located west of 2. Ray Avenue at Goeddar Avenue; Islington Avenue, east of Pine Valley Drive and north of the CN Halton Subdivision rail line. 3. Ray Avenue at Industry Street; 4. Industry Street at Keelesdale Drive; The following intersections will require further investigation to develop the geometry and control type: 5. Keelesdale Drive at Black Creek Drive; 1. Islington Avenue at New Access (Auto Access); 6. Black Creek Drive at Eglinton Avenue West; and 2. Islington Avenue at New Access (Bus Access); and 7. Photography Drive at Black Creek Drive. 3. Pine Valley Drive at New Access (Auto Access). The site layout plan is shown in Figure 9.11. Details are provided in Figure 9.20.

12.1.2 Emery GO Station A GO Transit Station is included in the Emery Village Development Plan by the City of Toronto. The potential location identified for the station is the southeast quadrant of Finch Avenue West at Weston Road. This site is directly accessible from Weston Road, Finch Avenue

Bolton Commuter Rail Feasibility Report | 106 MMM Group Limited | December 2010 12.1.4 Vaughan (Elder Mills) GO Station 12.1.6 Bolton GO Station Two locations in the northeast and southwest quadrants of the intersection of Rutherford Road and the rail corridor were identified. The identified location for the Bolton Station, in the northeast quadrant of Humber Station at King Street, is directly accessible from Both of these locations are directly accessible from Rutherford Road. In order to provide separate entrance for autos and buses two new Humber Station Road. Separate entrances are proposed for autos and buses, and consequently two new intersections will be required. intersections are required. Irrespective of the station location, an evaluation of the following three intersections is recommended: The following intersections are recommended to be examined for further improvements:

1. Highway 27 at Rutherford Road; 1. Humber Station Road at King Street; 2. Rutherford Road at New Access Road (Auto Access); and 2. Humber Station Road at New Access Road (Auto Access); and 3. Rutherford Road at New Access Road (Bus Access). 3. Humber Station Road at New Access Road (Bus Access).

The details of locations are shown in Figure 9.14. The details are shown in Figure 9.16.

12.1.5 Kleinburg GO Station 12.2 Major Utility Relocations The identified location for the Kleinburg Station is located in the southeast quadrant of the rail corridor at Major Mackenzie Drive. This There are 128 separate utility crossings across the Bolton corridor, according to CP records. These utilities may be located site is directly accessible from Major Mackenzie Drive and construction of new access roads is not required. The following intersections above or underground. Many of the crossings occur at road ROW intersections and will therefore affect grade separation expansions. are required to be investigated for future improvements: See Appendix B for approximate utility locations.

1. Major Mackenzie Drive at New Access Road (New Intersection); The costs of utility relocates have not been included in this report. Costs associated with utility relocation depend heavily on the type 2. Major Mackenzie Drive at Huntington Road; and and location of utility plant and should be avoided, if possible. Utility companies should be contacted in the preliminary design stage of 3. Major Mackenzie Drive at Highway 27. any improvements to the track as many companies require significant lead time.

The details are shown in Figure 9.15.

Bolton Commuter Rail Feasibility Report | 107 MMM Group Limited | December 2010 13.0 Train Equipment Assessment Motive Power Inc also manufactures a 3600 horsepower locomotive (MP36). The MP36 specifications are similar to the MP40 except that the tractive horse power, weight and fuel capacity rating is lower and the emissions standards compliance is advertised at Tier 0 through Tier 2 compliant. The scope of the feasibility study included a requirement to investigate three types of train equipment. This included and assessment of the performance capabilities, availability, capital and operating expenses and regulatory concerns regarding the following equipment types: 13.2 Diesel Multiple Unit (DMU) hh Conventional GO equipment consists including diesel locomotive and standard bi-level passenger coaches; The Budd Company of Philadelphia produced rail diesel cars (RDC’s) between 1949 and 1962 designed for use on low density passenger hh Diesel multiple units (DMU); and lines or commuter rail systems. The RDC was a self propelled diesel-hydraulic rail passenger car that could be used individually or hh Low powered locomotives. coupled with several coaches. The RDC is an early example of the Diesel Multiple Units (DMU) now widely used on European and other passenger systems world wide. The evaluation of equipment types included a comparative assessment of the applicable regulatory requirements, product availability, performance characteristics, mechanical compatibility with GO Transit’s standard bi-level coach cars, emissions ratings and capital and The use of Diesel Multiple Unit (DMU) equipment that satisfies European Standards and not the more stringent requirements of North operating costs. American standards have been successfully implemented in North American applications. The most prevalent deviation from North American Standards for DMU equipment utilized in Europe is the crashworthiness or ability of the equipment to withstand a collision The equipment types were assessed for use in peak and off peak service and the fleet requirements and possible equipment cycles were with heavy rail rolling stock. Authorization to operate European standard compliant equipment on North American rights-of-way shared derived from the service schedule run times. by heavy rail is accompanied by operational and/or procedural conditions that ensure the operational safety of the non-compliant equipment. These conditions can include directives for the implementation of safety devices and/or procedural measures that impose a 13.1 Conventional GO Equipment positive separation between heavy rail and non-compliant DMU equipment (either physical or time-based). All service options proposed In January 2008 GO Transit took possession of 27 new 4000 horsepower, EPA Tier 2 compliant locomotives from Motive Power for the Bolton rail corridor will involve the shared use of rights-of-way with heavy rail services of CP and with CN, GO and VIA Rail trains Incorporated, with an outstanding deliverable of 20 more engines scheduled in 2010. on the direct service options 1 and 4. APTA SS-C&S-034-99, Rev. 2 Standard for the Design and Construction of Passenger Railroad Rolling Stock would apply to all train consists assigned to the Bolton corridor. The performance characteristics of the 4000 horsepower MP40 units provide a maximum speed of 93 MPH and the ability to haul 12-car bi-level coaches. Continued use of the conventional GO equipment has several benefits: In October 2008, Jacobs Engineering Group prepared a report for GO Transit entitled Consulting Services for a Light Rail Feasibility Study on the Stouffville Corridor. The Jacobs report investigated various DMU rolling stock options for potential use on GO Transit’s Stouffville h h Full compliance with current regulations and standards; corridor. hh Fleet continuity; Due to the recent finalization of the Jacob’s report, GO Transit requested that the Bolton feasibility study team review the Report and hh Equipment assignment flexibility; specifically Chapter 3 – Review of Rolling stock Alternatives to determine the suitability of DMU equipment for the Bolton corridor hh Standardized maintenance and service requirements and procedures; service. The Jacobs report reviewed the use of three categories of new DMU equipment in operation on North America rail networks. hh Common parts inventory; The categories defined the equipment by regulatory compliance status, functionality and service mode suitability. hh Standardized operation, training and trouble shooting for train crew and maintenance personnel; Category 1 DMU’s were described as self powered rail cars compliant with US FRA, AAR, APTA and Transport Canada regulations and hh Ability to cascade refurbished equipment; and authorized to operate in mixed traffic with heavy rail equipment. hh Purchasing advantages for future orders. Category 2 DMU’s did not meet all regulations and standards but were capable of providing low floor passenger entry and exit. These The typical GO train configuration utilized on established commuter corridors includes an MP40 locomotive coupled to 10 -12 bi-level DMU’s have been utilized in North American applications where regulatory exemptions have been granted. coaches. Category 3 DMU’s were described as suitable for urban light rail application, similar to streetcars. The forecasted ridership volumes, anticipate a requirement of 4-6 bi-level coaches (616-924 seats) per train. It was determined that only Category 1 DMU’s were suitable for the Bolton corridor service, based solely on the compliance requirement Territorial attributes and conditions such as gradients, maximum operating speed and curvature must be considered in the evaluation of applicable safety standards and specifically. APTA SS-C&S-034-99, Rev. 2 Standard for the Design and Construction of Passenger of alternate equipment options in order to maximize equipment utilization and tractive effort, reduce fuel consumption, capital and Railroad Rolling Stock. Operational procedures to separate heavy rail movements from DMU movements could not be considered a operating costs and minimize greenhouse gas emissions. feasible option, given the presence of CP freight trains on the corridor segments to be used by the Bolton service and the inability to The potential to reduce capital costs alone, provides impetus to explore alternate equipment types to the standard MP40 locomotive for implement positive train separation. the future Bolton corridor service.

Bolton Commuter Rail Feasibility Report | 108 MMM Group Limited | December 2010 The Report documented five manufacturers producing or marketing Category 1 DMU equipment with only one vendor product in The BL20GH diesel electric locomotive provides a high fuel efficient, low exhaust emissions alternative to the conventional MP40 at an operation. anticipated considerably lower capital cost. Brookville Power Corporation has indicated that the BL20GH could be expected to maintain the following speeds assuming a train consist of two coaches each weighing 70 tons: The South Florida Regional Transportation Authority has utilized Colorado Railcar Manufacturing DMU equipment since October 2006. hh 0% grade 65-80 MPH Since the Jacobs report was completed, two major developments have occurred in the DMU market in North America. First, TriMet, hh 1% grade 50 MPH a commuter service provider located in Portland, Oregon has implemented a fully compliant DMU service on a 14.7 mile right of way hh 2% grade 38 MPH shared with the Portland and Western Railroad. TriMet purchased three single power cab cars equipped with cabs at both ends and one trailer car equipped with one cab from Colorado Railcar. Service inauguration was on February 2, 2009. And in October 2010, hh 3% grade 28 MPH the Sonoma- Marin Area Rail Transit District (SMART) in Southern California is in the process of awarding a $57 million contract with As indicated in Section 4.2 of this report, there are numerous segments on the Mactier Subdivision where the grade exceeds 1% Sumitomo Corporation of America (SCOA) to supply 18 FRA compliant DMU's, parts, support and special tools. This is approximately and one location where the grade exceeds 2%. Given that the ridership demand would require a minimum of five coaches to provide $6.3 million per two-car consist. adequate seating during the 2015 peak service, the haulage capacity of the BL20GH appears insufficient. Unfortunately, Colorado Railcar Manufacturing ceased operation on December 23, 2008. Recently however, US Railcar, LLC has acquired the proprietary rights and information, manufacturing documentation, inventory and other equipment of the former Colorado Table 13.1: Equipment Specification Comparative Brookville Equipment Corporation Railcar Manufacturing company necessary to resume production of both single and bi-level Diesel Multiple Units for both regional Conventional GO Equipment US Railcar DMU Low Powered Locomotives BL20GH and intercity that comply with existing FRA safety standards. Current DMU configurations are capable of operating at speeds from 79 Maximum Speed MP40 – 93 MPH 79 - 90 MPH 70 MPH to 90 MPH. Anticipated enhancements include upgrading the diesel electric model to achieve speeds of up 125 MPH. The US Railcar MP36 - 83 MPH DMU is manufactured as a single and bi-level unit. Maximum seating capacity is published as 94 and 188 seats for single and bi-level Engine unit MP40 – 4000 HP 600 HP per DMU 2500 HP DMU's respectively and 102 and 218 for single and bi-level coaches. According to the DMU specifications, each DMU can pull two MP36- 3600 HP non-powered coaches, however, US Railcar has confirmed that multiple configurations to suit grade and speed requirements can include Maximum Haulage Capacity MP40 – 12 bi-level coaches two non- motorized coaches two bi-level coaches multiple DMU's marshalled in a push/pull configuration (source US Railcar LLC www.usrailcar.com). However, the car description does MP36-10 bi-levels coaches not indicate if washrooms or other amenities are provided (similar to GO bi-level coaches). US Railcar indicated that bi-level DMU's are Seating Capacity Cab Car Average 154 Single unit -DMU 94 Coach 102 154 Bi-level unit - DMU 188 Coach 218 currently in service on TriRail, a commuter line in Florida. Capital Cost Engines MP40 - $5M MP36 $4.2 million Single power unit $5M NA Bi-level power unit $7.5M It is therefore recommended that the development of DMU equipment compliant with North American standards and regulations be Capital Cost - Coach $2.6M Single coach - $4.5M NA monitored for possible future use. Successful implementation by a manufacturer will require the re-evaluation of ridership demand to - Cab Car $3.3M Bi-level coach $7M vehicle capacity. Operational benefits including performance characteristics, acceleration and deceleration rates, low emissions, fuel costs and lower per unit capacity costs need to be contrasted and compared with costs to maintain stand alone equipment and the costs attributed to a building and sustaining a dedicated maintenance facility including parts inventory, technical specialists etc. Additionally, operational constraints such as platform access, available clearance envelope between DMU and conventional equipment and station platforms, accessibility and car layout standards must not be overlooked.

13.3 Low Powered Locomotives Low powered locomotives were determined to include those locomotives of less than 3000 HP. GO requested a review of low-powered locomotives to determine if potential savings in capital costs could be derived, as the expected lower ridership demand would make the use of MP40’s less efficient.

The study team requested that GO Transit indicate suitable manufactures of low powered locomotives. Brookville Equipment Corporation of Brookville Pennsylvania was suggested.

Brookville Equipment Corporation manufactures low powered diesel electric, diesel hydraulic and CoGeneration2 locomotives. In 2007, Brookville Equipment Corp. provided four low powered locomotives to the Metro- North Railroad (MNRR) in New York.

Bolton Commuter Rail Feasibility Report | 109 MMM Group Limited | December 2010 Table 13.2: Equipment Specification Comparative 13.4 Optimizing Consist Size versus Projected Ridership MP 40 Diesel Locomotive MP 36 Diesel Locomotive BL20GH Diesel Locomotive The forecasted ridership demand described in Section 7.0 was used to evaluate optimal consist configuration requirements. Model: Data Source/ Data Source Data Source Comments The equipment requirements for the four Service Options by equipment type are summarized in Tables 13.3 and 13.4 respectively. Table Traction HP 4000 3600 2000 (could be up BL20GH 13.3 provides a comparison between the coach requirements for the GO Conventional equipment for each service option and Table 13.4 to 4000 if req) Specification provides a comparison of the requirements by service option for DMU type equipment. Figure 13.1 provides a graphical representation of Cost ($M) 5 GO Transit 4.2 GO Transit NA the coach requirements by Service Option, equipment type and implementation year. Av. Maintenance 28 GO Transit 28 GO Transit NA Cost ($ Thou) Table 13.3: Summary of Coach Requirements by Service Option – GO Conventional Equipment (even distribution of passengers/train) Weight of Power 147.5 GO Transit 147.5 GO Transit 120.45 BL20GH Cars (t) Specification Specification Specification 2015 2021* 2031* Length of Power 20.72 20.72 18.034 BL20GH Option 1 Ridership 2,487 2,999 4,564 Car (m) Specification Total Coaches 17 20 30 Fuel Capacity 2200 US Gallons GO Transit 2200 US Gallons GO Transit 2500 US Gallons BL20GH (2009/10 models Specification (2009/10 models Specification Specification Coaches/Train 6 4 64 to have 2400 US to have 2400 US Gallons) Gallons) Option 2 Ridership 1,313 1,584 2,410 Fuel Consumption 3.6 Imperial Gallons/ GO Transit 3.6 Imperial Gallons/ GO Transit 95.7 g/hr BL20GH Total Coaches 9 11 16 mile Specification mile Specification (100% load) Specification Coaches/Train 3 3 4 EPA Designation Tier 2 Tier 2 Tier 3 MOH* Option 3 Ridership 1,253 1,511 2,300 Weight of Passenger Total Coaches 9 10 15 Cars (t) Standard Coach (t) 60.1 GO Transit 60.1 GO Transit 60.1 GO Transit Coaches/Train 3 2 3 Specification Specification Specification Option 4 Ridership 2,391 2,884 4,388 Accessible Coach (t) 62.11 GO Transit 62.11 GO Transit 62.11 GO Transit Total Coaches 16 19 29 Specification Specification Specification Cab Car (t) 60.66 GO Transit 60.66 GO Transit 60.66 GO Transit Coaches/Train 6 4 6 Specification Specification Specification *assumes 5 peak period trains Total Weight of 751.07 Calculated 751.07 Calculated 483.62 Calculated Train (t) Height of 4.57 4.57 4.57 BL20GH Locomotive (m) Specification Length of Each 25.78 25.78 25.78 Trailer Car (m) Length of Train (m) 278.52 Calculated 278.52 Calculated 172.714 Calculated Train Max 1.11 Tare 1.11 (Tare) NA Acceleration (m/s2) Nominal 0.7 Average Full load Average 0.7-0.8 NA Acceleration (m/s2) (Fully Loaded) Train Max 1.11 Tare 1.11 (Tare) NA Deceleration (m/s2) Nominal 0.7 Average Full load Average 0.7-0.8 0.54 Typical for Deceleration (m/s2) (Fully Loaded) Locomotive as per other systems Current Curve Data Calculated from Calculated Calculated from Calculated Calculated from Calculated Tractive Effort Curve Tractive Effort Curve Tractive Effort Curve Total Number of 6 (1 power, 5 6 (1 power, 5 6 Cars trailers) trailers) Top Speed (mph) 93 82 80

* MOH = Mobile Off Highway

Bolton Commuter Rail Feasibility Report | 110 MMM Group Limited | December 2010 Table 13.4: Summary of Coach Requirements by Service Option – Bi-Level DMU Equipment (even distribution of passengers/ train) The equipment costs for years 2015, 2021 and 2031 are presented in Table 13.5.

2015 2021* 2031* Due to significantly lower ridership demand, the equipment costs for the Summerhill option are less for both GO Conventional and DMU Option 1 Ridership 2,487 2,999 4,564 consists. Service Options 1 (Weston) and 4 (CN Subs) have similar ridership demand and equipment costs for years 2015 and 2021 Total DMU (D) D-6 D-10 D-10 however, in 2031, the Weston service requires one additional coach for both GO Conventional and DMU equipment types. & Coaches (C) C-6 C-10 C-15 D&C/Train D-2 D-2 D-2 The DMU equipment costs (based on quotes received from US Railcar) for all service options are significantly higher than the GO C-2 C-2 C-3 conventional equipment costs. Option 2 Ridership 1,313 1,584 2,410

Total DMU (D) D-6 D-10 D-10 Table 13.5: Equipment Costs by Service Option, Implementation year and Equipment Type & Coaches (C) C-3 C-0 C-5 2015 2021 2031 D&C/Train D-2 D-2 D-2 $M GO DMU GO DMU GO DMU C-1 C-0 C-1 Option 1 $ 60.3 $ 87.0 $ 78.0 $ 145.0 $ 105.0 $ 180.0 Option 3 Ridership 1,253 1,511 2,300 Option 2 $ 38.7 $ 68.0 $ 59.1 $ 75.0* $ 67.2 $ 110.0 Total DMU (D) D-6 D-10 D-10 Option 3 $ 38.7 $ 68.0 $ 56.4 $ 75.0* $ 64.5 $ 110.0 & Coaches (C) C-3 C-0 C-5 Option 4 $ 57.6 $ 87.0 $ 75.3 $ 110.0 $ 102.3 $ 180.0 D&C/Train D-2 D-2 D-2 C-1 C-0 C-1 *Equipment costs based on five peak trains, however, ridership demand indicates only three trains required. Note: GO equipment includes the use of MP36 locomotives and standard bi-level coaches Option 4 Ridership 2,391 2,884 4,388 Total DMU (D) D-6 D-10 D-10 & Coaches (C) C-6 C-5 C-15 Figure 13.2 provides a graphical representation of the equipment costs ($M) by service option, implementation year and equipment type. D&C/Train D-2 D-2 D-2 C-2 C-1 C-3 Note: GO equipment includes the use of MP36 locomotives and standard bi-level coaches

Equipment Cost by Year and Service Option

$200.0

Comparison of Equipment Requirements $150.0 30

25 $100.0

20

$50.0 15

10 $- GO DMUGODMU GO DMU 5 2015 2021 2031 Option 1 Option 2 Option 3 Option 4 0 GO DMU GO DMU GO DMU Figure 13.2: Graphical Representation of Equipment Costs by Service Option, Implementation Year and Equipment Type. 2015 2021 2031 Option 1 Option 2 Option 3 Option 4

Figure 13.3: Coach Requirements by Service Option, Equipment Type and Implementation Year The equipment required to support the Shuttle service option must also include additional coaches for connecting Georgetown trains needed to accommodate the transferring Bolton passengers. These additional costs would apply regardless of the type of equipment 13.5 Equipment Cost Comparison used on the Bolton corridors. As the current train configuration for the Georgetown trains includes a 10 coach arrangements, a The forecasted ridership demand was used to determine the equipment requirements in Section 13.4 for each service option and each maximum of two additional coaches can be added to each connecting Georgetown train, pulled by an MP40 locomotive. The estimated implementation horizon. In addition, equipment requirements were compared for trains consisting of conventional GO equipment and costs to the Georgetown corridor are displayed in Table 13.6. It should be noted that in the peak period for each horizon year, the seating Diesel Multiple Units. capacity provided by the two additional Georgetown coaches is inadequate to accommodate the transferring Bolton passengers. The

Bolton Commuter Rail Feasibility Report | 111 MMM Group Limited | December 2010 overall ridership demand on the Bolton corridor does not warrant the operation of additional peak trains to reduce the number of Table 14.1: Right of Way Property Requirement Assessment – Mactier Subdivision passengers transferring per train to Georgetown peak service trains. Between Location And Location Side of ROW Property Requirement (ha) Cold Creek Road West 0.35 Table 13.6: Estimated Equipment Costs to Georgetown Corridor – Shuttle Service Kirby Road Huntington Road East 0.21 Bolton Psgrs to Major Mackenzie Drive Rutherford Road East 0.61 # Coaches Req’d Total Coaches Year Georgetown Peak # Psgr /train $/ Train Total Costs /train Required Islington Avenue Steeles Avenue East 0.1 Period Sheppard Avenue Wilson Avenue East 0.49 2015 1,313 440 3 $8.1M $9 $24.3M Oak Street East 0.36 2021 1,584 320 2 $5.4M $10 $27.0M Denison Avenue East 0.11 2031 2,410 480 4 $10.8 $20 $54.0M Ray Avenue East 0.30 Total Estimated Property Requirements 2.53 It should also be recognized that the Summerhill service option will also create a ridership transfer to the Georgetown line. Table 13.7 indicates that the transfer of passengers to the Georgetown line can be managed adequately with two additional coaches per Estimated property requirements for station facilities are presented in Table 14.2. connecting train. Table 14.2: Station Property Assessment Station Property Requirement (ha) Table 13.7: Estimated Equipment Costs to Georgetown Corridor – Summerhill Service Bolton Layover/Maintenance Facility 4 (40000 m2) Bolton Psgrs to 2 # Coaches Req’d Total Coaches Bolton 3.64 (36442.2 m ) Year Georgetown Peak # Psgr /train $/GTW Train Total Costs /train Required Kleinburg 4.17 (41639.5 m2) Period Vaughan 3.77 (37668.8 m2) 2015 775 258 2 $5.4M 6 $16.2M Woodbridge 2.31 (23071.4 m2) 2021 934 187 2 $5.4M 10 $27.0M Emery 4.54 (45433.9 m2) 2031 1422 284 2 $5.4M 10 $27.0M Mount Dennis 1.01 (10117.6 m2) The Georgetown corridor passenger forecast demand and projected service schedules must also be assessed to ensure that adequate Total Station Facility Property Required 23.44 seating is provided for Georgetown passengers on peak service trains scheduled to connect to the Bolton corridor. The operational Total ROW Property Required 2.53 handling of Bolton corridor passenger “reserved coaches” at station platforms must also be considered. Total Property Required 25.97

14.0 Property Requirements 15 Conclusions and Recommendations Property requirements were estimated to accommodate new track alignments on the Mactier Subdivision. Additional property The implementation a new commuter rail transit service on the Bolton corridor is feasible based on the analysis. However the cost requirements are presented in Table 14.1. of infrastructure must be weighed against the potential ridership demand. In addition, the project must be prioritized relative to Property requirements were not included for the CP North Toronto Subdivision, CN Halton and York Subdivisions or the GO Subdivisions. the potential benefits of other proposed GO Transit initiatives. The environmental benefits associated with the reduction of private automobile use resulting from use of the new service option must not be overlooked.

Comparison Barrie and Bolton Corridors GO Transit provided two ridership samples assessed on October 21, 1987 and October 10, 1996 for the Bradford corridor (now the Barrie corridor). The samples were selected randomly and provided an indication of the ridership growth on the corridor over a nine year period. During both sample time periods, the corridor offered service to Bradford only. The actual a.m. peak ridership was reported at 1,117 and 1,707 riders on each of the respective sample days.

Bolton Commuter Rail Feasibility Report | 112 MMM Group Limited | December 2010 If the one day samples can be regarded as representative of then peak ridership, 558,500 annual peak trips in 1987 and 853,500 annual Option 1 Direct Bolton to Union via Weston peak trips in 1996 would have occurred on the Bradford corridor. This would equate to a gross passenger growth rate of 53% between From a ridership perspective the Bolton to Union via Weston option attracted similar ridership as Option 4. Ridership samples initially 1987 and 1996 and an average annual increase of 6%. included a station stop at Bloor. In practice a Bloor stop would not likely occur due to capacity constraints on the Weston Subdivision and the existing service connections to the Bloor station provided by local Georgetown corridor trains. A direct transfer of forecasted The actual observed annual ridership for the Barrie (former Bradford) corridor for the year 2007 was 2,603,600. Over a twenty year Bloor passengers was attributed to the Mount Dennis station. Ridership under Service Option 1 may, however, be negatively impacted by horizon, 2,045,100 more passenger trips have been attracted to the corridor. This would equate to a gross growth rate of 366% in a the requirement of a passenger transfer at Mount Dennis. twenty year span or an annual increase of 18.3%. The ridership projections for years 2021 and 2031 ridership demand that could be managed by three uni-directional trains if the number Forecasted ridership on the Barrie corridor was assessed for years 2011, 2021 and 2031. Ridership was based on an 80% occupancy of coaches per train, were increased from 5-6 coaches in year 2015, to seven coaches per train in 2021 and 9-10 coaches per train rate/coach as indicated in by the 2007 ridership data. Ridership is forecasts as follows: in 2031. Off peak service demand is relatively low with only 1,620 and 2,465 riders forecasted in years 2021 and 2031 respectively. 2011 3,037,533 Future expansion plans on adjacent GO corridors include the provision for off peak service. Bus connections between the Bolton corridor 2021 4,122,367 stations and adjacent corridor stations could provide an alternative to an off peak rail service for the Bolton corridor. 2031 5,207,200 The issue of capacity on the Weston Subdivision, USRC and Union Station will determine if Service Option 1 is viable. This represents an increase of 17% between 2007 and 2011, 36% between 2011 and 2021, 26% between 2021 and 2031 and 100% Option 2 Shuttle Bolton to Weston/Mount Dennis Station between 2007 and 2031. The shuttle option was developed to avoid track occupancy of the Weston Subdivision by Bolton corridor trains. Two alternatives for Ridership Comparison Barrie and Bolton Corridors midday equipment storage were examined. The first alternative included utilizing the Bolton layover/maintenance facility for midday 6,000,000 equipment storage to avoid the duplication of assets and the maintenance of two layover sites. An examination of the infrastructure

5,000,000 requirements specified by CP eliminated this alternative as a feasible option during the 2015 implementation year, as the operation of this service would require the construction of the Additional Service/Counter-flow infrastructure plan. 4,000,000

rs The second alternative included the establishment of a midday storage facility in the vicinity of the Mount Dennis station. Two alternative de 3,000,000 Ri sites were assessed. The first site was situated adjacent to the corridor in the vicinity of Ray Avenue on the former Kodak lands and the 2,000,000 second site was located off corridor at CP’s Lambton yard.

1,000,000 Good access to the corridor can be established from the Kodak property however, use of the site would require an agreement with the 0 1987 1996 2007 2011 2015 2021 2031 City of Toronto and the TTC.

Year

Barrie Corridor Bolton Corridor Option 1 CP Lambton yard could be accessed by the CP connecting track that extends between the Galt and Mactier Subdivisions. Coordination

Figure 15.1: Ridership Comparison – Barrie and Bolton Corridors with the Milton corridor expansion project would be required to ensure that Bolton corridor equipment storage requirements at Lambton would complement the infrastructure improvements proposed on the Galt Subdivision. Between 2011 and 2031, the annual ridership on the Bolton corridor is projected to increase by 104% or 5% per annum. Figure 15.1 provides a comparison of the project ridership on the Barrie and Bolton Corridors. A shuttle service that provided midday storage in the vicinity of the Mount Dennis station would demand considerably less intensive infrastructure requirements in stage 1. However, operational concerns with respect to the coordination of the passenger transfer Service Options at Weston and/or Mount Dennis would detract from the feasibility of this option. The coordination of equipment assignments and passenger transfers under normal operation and during service disruptions, presents concern for the reliability of the provision of service Four service options were identified for assessment. Ridership demand projections indicated a relatively low forecast for all service consistent with GO Transit's performance standards and customer expectations. The total number of passengers required to transfer to options when compared to the actual ridership on established corridors. and from the Georgetown corridor must be assessed in conjunction with the ridership projections for the enhanced Georgetown service. Significant infrastructure cost estimates for capacity expansions on the Mactier Subdivision impacted each service option assessed. Additional train equipment for the Georgetown corridor, platform and tunnel enhancements at Weston and/or Mount Dennis station must be further assessed. Operational logistics to ensure passenger handling at the transfer point(s) must also be examined. The portion of the Mactier Subdivision that parallels the Weston Subdivision will be enhanced to its maximum track capacity under the Georgetown corridor expansion project. This will leave few capacity expansion alternatives should actual demand significantly exceed In addition, the extra coach equipment required on connecting Georgetown trains would maximize train lengths, restrict passenger projected demand for a Service Option 1, 2 or 3. growth for the Georgetown corridor, further restrict capacity on the Weston Subdivision by producing prolonged station dwells to enable corridor passenger transfers and create customer communications issues at Union Station and the online transfer station(s) during Service Option 4 requirements have yet to be reviewed by CN. service interruptions.

Bolton Commuter Rail Feasibility Report | 113 MMM Group Limited | December 2010 Option 3 Bolton to Summerhill Additional infrastructure improvements on the Mactier Subdivision were specified by CP to support the operation of service Stages 2 and From a ridership perspective, the Summerhill Service is clearly the least attractive service option. The data indicates that a terminus 3. The construction of new track between Kipling and Islington and associated structural improvements would impact all service options. at Summerhill holds only limited attractiveness for GO passengers. This is due to the lack of high density employment within walking Further track expansions identified between Emery and Lawrence Avenue would impact service options 1, 2 and 3 only. The construction distance of this location (and also at other potential stations on this route) and the distance to the central business district (CBD) of of a new track on the east side of the right of way between Emery (mile 9.2) and Lawrence (mile 3.63) would impact structures at the Toronto. Although access to the CBD is available via a transfer to the TTC subway service, this would involve an additional transit fare following locations: Ormont Drive (mile 8.88); Weston Road (mile 8.04); Finch Avenue West (mile 7.81); Sheppard Ave (mile 6.52;) and between the transit services. Ridership on this corridor could be increased if the PRESTO integrated farecard was implemented, as the Wilson Avenue (mile 5.21) for all service options except option 4. cost to transfer between services could be reduced. The current and future projected freight volumes on the North Toronto Subdivision; the relative importance of the subdivision to CP’s Option 4 Direct Bolton to Union via CN Subdivisions overall east/west corridor; and access to the main Ontario based freight and maintenance yard in Agincourt makes the development of The assessment of service option 4 indicates compelling reasons to support this routing alternative as the preferred alternative of all a Summerhill terminus service more challenging. Anticipated base case improvements included the construction of a new main track options evaluated. extending from Osler to Summerhill including a passenger siding that would extend between the Summerhill and Spadina/Dupont stations. The construction of the track from the passenger siding at Spadina/Dupont to Osler is expected to provide sufficient capacity to Ridership demand forecasts are comparable to that observed in Service Option 1. Equipment costs to handle the projected riderships for support stages 2 and 3 service frequencies. Option 1 and 4 would be similar for all horizon years. Anticipated capacity constraints on the GO Weston Subdivision, USRC and Union Station were identified as a critical concerns for The implementation of service option 4 would provide additional service to York University and Downsview however, future rail service Service Option 1 and to a slightly lesser extent option 4. The expansion of the Georgetown corridor service and the introduction of the to the Emery station vicinity would not be provided. future Pearson Airport Rail Link service are expected to consume most if not all of the Weston Subdivision capacity. In addition, the overall width of the joint GO/CP rail corridor extending between Oak Street and Osler would constrain the maximum number of track Service option 4 has the same end to end transit time as Option 1 (56 minutes). alignments to a maximum of six tracks. Of the six track alignments, two have been identified for the CP Mactier Subdivision. The use of the Newmarket Subdivision by Bolton corridor trains would significantly improve infrastructure utilization on the Barrie corridor and would principally avoid the capacity constraints on the Weston Subdivisions. The recent purchase of the Newmarket and Infrastructure Costs Weston Subdivision by GO Transit will reduce operating fees for the Bolton corridor trains that would operate under service option 4. Infrastructure cost estimates range from between $160M and $226M for the base case and between $50M and $127M for the Additional Service/Counter-flow plan. Infrastructure costs for Option 4 for both the Base Case and Additional Service/Counter-flow plans indicate significant savings over the other three options however the proposed plant improvements and associated costs for Option 4 must be assessed by CN The infrastructure costs associated with the Base Case are estimated as follows: representatives before a final cost comparison can be made for the various routing options. hh Option 1 $182M Capacity Constraints & Infrastructure Improvements hh Option 2B $190M Each of the four service options included specific capacity concerns. hh Option 3 $226M hh Option 4 $162M CP identified access to Vaughan Intermodal Terminal and corridor fluidity as the primary capacity concerns on the Mactier Subdivision. These issues impacted all four service options and primarily affected the base case infrastructure requirements. The base case infrastructure requirements provided capacity to support only three peak service trains. This would equates to approximately $30.6 (Option 1), $31.6M (Option 2B), $37.7M (Option 3) and $26.7M (Option 4) per train in plant infrastructure costs A single-track segment that included five structures between Kipling and Islington Avenues provided adequate capacity for all four alone. service options to support three uni-directional trains in Stage 1, however, in Stages 2 and 3 of the GO2020 plan CP determined that capacity on this single segment was insufficient to support both the freight and enhanced GO rail service plans. The cost of infrastructure improvements per peak period trip on the Bolton corridor in 2015 would equate to approximately $36.5K, $72.2K, $90K and $33.5K for service options 1, 2B, 3 and 4 respectively. These costs excludes land purchases, train equipment The construction of a second main track between Islington and Emery would provide additional capacity by eliminating the single track procurement and operating charges. segment between Kipling and Islington Avenues in the base case plan. This infrastructure improvement is required for service options 1, 2 and 3. CP has yet to specify base case requirements within this segment to support service option 4 (limited to the interconnection at the CN Halton Subdivision).

The double-track portion of the Mactier Subdivision extending between Emery and Lawrence Avenue would provide sufficient capacity to support the base case plan under service options 1, 2 and 3, however, capacity constraints between Eglinton Avenue and Black Creek Drive would require track upgrades and track expansion. A further track extension between Black Creek Drive and Osler was identified to support service option 3 only.

Bolton Commuter Rail Feasibility Report | 114 MMM Group Limited | December 2010 Figure 15.2 displays the infrastructure cost per peak period trip by service option and implementation year. Figure 15.3 provides the cost estimates on the CP and CN (Halton/York) Subdivisions by service options.

Infrastructure Cost per Peak Period Trip Infrastructure Costs by Service Option

$140,000.00 $400,000,000.00

$120,000.00 $350,000,000.00

$300,000,000.00 $100,000.00 $250,000,000.00 $80,000.00 $200,000,000.00 $60,000.00 $150,000,000.00 $40,000.00 $100,000,000.00

$20,000.00 $50,000,000.00

$- $0.00 Option 1 Option 2A Option 2B Option 3Option 4 Option 1Option 2A Option 2B Option 3Option 4

2015 2021 2031 Base Case All Day Total Costs

Figure 15.2: Cost per Peak Period Trip by Service Option and Implementation Year Figure 15.3: Comparison of Infrastructure Cost by Service Option

Infrastructure costs associated with the Additional Service/Counter-flow plan for Options 1, 2 and 3 would require significant additional Train Equipment capacity over and above the base case plan requirements. The infrastructure improvements only provide a single track right-of-way with The ridership demand forecast indicated that the Bolton service could be operated with three peak period trains for all horizon years sidings for passenger service train meets. A single track commuter train network will limit routing flexibility and recoverability especially with 4-6 coaches assigned per train in Stage 1 and an increase in the number of coaches assigned to each train in Stages 2 and 3. within peak service periods. The number of coaches, track grades and service performance expectations would exclude serious consideration of low powered The total estimated infrastructure costs per peak period trip in years 2021 and 2031 are presented in Table 15.1. locomotives for peak service trains. If off peak service was provided, corridor equipment assigned to peak period service could be cycled and utilized for off peak periods. Table 15.1 Estimated Infrastructure Cost Per Peak Period Trip There are no evident cost savings to procuring lower horse power locomotives to support Bolton corridor off peak service only. If low 2021 2031 powered locomotives could be utilized on other GO corridors during the peak period, there may be possible capital savings to GO if Option 1 $47.8K $31.4K these units were cycled into off peak service on the Bolton corridor. The shared corridor use of low powered locomotive would require Option 2A $89.8K $59.0K an investigation into the distribution and cycling of GO Transit's overall locomotive fleet. Option 2B $94.1K $61.9K Option 3 $117K $76.8K The current high cost relative to that of conventional equipment and the limited availability of North American compliant DMU Option 4 $36.4K $24.0K equipment would exclude consideration of this technology at present. If the demand for North American compliant DMU equipment The total infrastructure costs associated with Summerhill Option 3 is estimated $353M however this estimate includes an assessment increases and other manufacturers enter the market place, equipment selection, configuration and unit prices could become more of the requirements over the entire route (excluding midday storage facility costs). In contrast, the cost estimates for Options 1, 2 and 4 favorable for future possible use. Additionally, use of DMU equipment on other lower density GO Transit corridors would provide a more exclude necessary improvements on the GO Transit Subdivisions. In order to provide an equitable comparison between service options, competitive purchasing incentive. proportional capacity improvement costs on the Weston, Newmarket (Option 4 only), USRC, Union Station and CN Oakville Subdivisions With respect to the use of conventional equipment, capital and operating savings can be achieved by the utilization of MP36 must be included in the overall infrastructure assessment and factored into the total costs. locomotives instead of MP40's. The maximum operating speed of the MP36 locomotive is sufficient to meet the maximum permissible track speeds on the corridors. In addition the MP36 locomotives have sufficient horse power capacity to manage the train consist equipment required for the service. The MP40 locomotives would be over rated for the demands of this corridor. In addition, the capital costs of the MP36 unit is $0.8M less per unit than the MP40 locomotives.

When fuel consumption is considered, it is anticipated that fuel savings could be achieved from the use of the lower horse powered MP36 locomotive.

Bolton Commuter Rail Feasibility Report | 115 MMM Group Limited | December 2010 Summary APP E ENdiC S

The ridership demand for the Bolton corridor is low when compared with actual ridership on other GO Transit corridors. Of the four A) Minutes of Stakeholder Meetings Service Options assessed, options 1 and 4 attract the most riders to the line. Based on ridership forecasts, Options 2 and 3 were not considered as viable alternatives. Transit times for Service Options 1 and 4 are comparable. B) Corridor Drawings CP Mactier Subdivision The projected base case infrastructure cost estimates for Service Options 1 and 4 indicated a requirement for $182M and $161M C) Corridor Drawings CN Halton and York Subdivisions respective capital investments. Option 4 costs although assessed at $21M less than Option 1, must be viewed with the understanding that CN have not approved the operation or capital plans for the Halton and York Subdivisions. In addition, a grade separated D) Corridor Drawings - GO Georgetown Corridor MRC concept 1Xs-8 TRACKS connection to permit GO trains to cross to the south side of the right of way would increase the capital costs by an estimated $52.4M. FOR EA.dwg The capital estimate for the Additional Service/Counter-flow plan for Service Option requires significantly less investment than all other E) Existing Structures Drawings options. Even when grade separation costs are included, Option 4 still has the lowest estimated capital costs. F) Proposed Capacity Expansion Plans Option 4 provides an opportunity to reduce access fees on the Mactier Subdivision, however, would incur access fees on the CN Subdivisions. G) Proposed Service Schedules Use of the Newmarket Subdivision would permit optimization of the infrastructure asset utilization on the Barrier corridor south of H) Construction Schedule and Budget Snider. I) Ridership Alternatives Background Data

Bolton Commuter Rail Feasibility Report | 116 MMM Group Limited | December 2010