Durham Region TMP Higher-Order Transit Strategy ......Durham Region TMP Higher -Order Transit STRATEGY DEVELOPMENT REPORT Prepared for The Regional Municipality of Durham Table of

Background Report

Durham Region TMP Higher-Order Transit Strategy Development Report

Prepared for The Regional Municipality of Durham by IBI Group and Parsons

January 2018

If this information is required in an accessible format, please contact 1-800-372-1102 ext. 3753

IBI GROUP Background Report Durham Region TMP Higher-Order Transit STRATEGY DEVELOPMENT REPORT Prepared for The Regional Municipality of Durham

Table of Contents

January 2018 i

1 Introduction ............................................................................................... 1

1.1 Objectives ......................................................................................... 1

1.2 Transportation Directions .................................................................. 1

1.3 Transit Network Development Approach .......................................... 3

1.4 Report Structure ............................................................................... 4

2 Current Plans ............................................................................................. 5

2.1 Regional Official Plan ....................................................................... 5

2.2 Long Term Transit Strategy .............................................................. 6

2.3 DRT Five Year Service Strategy ....................................................... 6

2.4 Provincial Initiatives .......................................................................... 7

3 Background ............................................................................................... 9

3.1 Existing Transit Network ................................................................... 9

3.2 Travel Demand Trends ................................................................... 11

3.2.1 Transit Mode Share ......................................................................11

3.2.2 Transit Trip Destinations ...............................................................12

3.2.3 Density and Transit ......................................................................13

3.3 Transit Service Performance .......................................................... 14

3.4 Transit Access to GO Stations ........................................................ 17

3.5 Summary and Implications for Transit Network Development ........ 17

4 Future Transportation Needs and Opportunities ................................. 18

4.1 Population and Employment Growth .............................................. 18

4.2 Transit Travel Demand Growth ....................................................... 19

4.2.1 2031 Travel Demand ....................................................................19

4.3 Changes in Travel Patterns ............................................................ 20

4.4 Role of Transit in Addressing Travel Demand ................................ 22

IBI GROUP Background Report Durham Region TMP Higher-Order Transit Strategy Development Report Prepared for The Regional Municipality of Durham

Table of Contents (continued)

January 2018 ii

5 Development of the 2031 Transit Network ............................................ 23

5.1 Principles for Transit Network Development ................................... 23

5.1.1 Transit Measures..........................................................................23

5.1.2 Transit Options .............................................................................26

5.1.3 Matching Demand to Service .......................................................29

5.1.4 Thresholds for Rapid Transit ........................................................30

5.2 High Level Network Alternatives ..................................................... 31

5.2.1 Base Network ...............................................................................32

5.2.2 Enhanced Network .......................................................................32

5.3 Comparison of Base and Enhanced Networks ............................... 33

6 Proposed 2031 Transit Network ............................................................. 35

6.1 Assessment Considerations ........................................................... 35

6.2 Transit Corridor Assessments ........................................................ 42

6.2.1 Highway 2 ....................................................................................42

6.2.2 Simcoe Street ...............................................................................48

6.2.3 Taunton Road ..............................................................................54

6.2.4 Whites Road .................................................................................56

6.2.5 Brock Road ..................................................................................57

6.2.6 Westney Road ..............................................................................59

6.2.7 Bayly Street / Victoria Street / Bloor Street ...................................61

6.2.8 Other High Frequency Corridors ...................................................63

6.3 GO Transit ...................................................................................... 67

6.3.1 Lakeshore East Corridor...............................................................68

6.3.2 Seaton GO Rail ............................................................................69

6.3.3 GO Rail Extension to Uxbridge .....................................................71

6.3.4 Future Service on the Havelock Subdivision .................................71



January 2018 iii

6.3.5 Future Protection for High Speed Rail ..........................................72

7 Transit Needs Beyond 2031 ................................................................... 73

7.1 Population and Employment Forecasts .......................................... 73

7.2 Transportation Demand and Network Implications ......................... 74

7.3 Recommendations Beyond 2031 .................................................... 74

8 Rapid Transit Costs ................................................................................ 75

8.1 Capital Cost .................................................................................... 75

List Of Exhibits

Exhibit 1.1: Transportation Directions ................................................................. 2

Exhibit 3.1: Existing Transit Network in Durham Region (2017) ....................... 10

Exhibit 3.2: Mode Share Comparisons for AM Peak Period Trips from Durham, 2001-2011 ..................................................................................... 11

Exhibit 3.3: Transit Mode Share by Municipality for AM Peak Period, 2001-2011 .............................................................................................. 11

Exhibit 3.4: Transit Trips Starting in Durham – AM Peak Period ...................... 12

Exhibit 3.5: Comparison of Urban Densities and Transit Mode Shares in Urban Growth Centres in 2001 ................................................................. 13

Exhibit 3.6: Density and Transit Mode Share – AM Peak Period ...................... 14

Exhibit 3.7: DRT Historical Ridership (millions) ................................................ 15

Exhibit 3.8: Monthly Bus Boardings in Durham Region (2015) ......................... 16

Exhibit 3.9: Access Mode to GO Rail ................................................................ 17

Exhibit 4.1: Development Growth by Municipality (Model Forecasts) ................ 19



January 2018 iv

Exhibit 4.2: Peak Period Growth in Transit Demand ......................................... 20

Exhibit 4.3: Transit Trips Starting in Durham Region by Destination – AM Peak Period ............................................................................................ 21

Exhibit 4.4: Transit Share by Trip Destination – AM Peak Period ..................... 21

Exhibit 5.1: Characteristics of On-Street, Fully Segregated and Grade Separated Transit Options ............................................................. 28

Exhibit 5.2: Carrying Capacity .......................................................................... 31

Exhibit 5.3: 2031 Base Network Assumptions .................................................. 32

Exhibit 5.4: Enhanced Network Assumptions ................................................... 33

Exhibit 5.5: High-level Summary of Model Results – AM Peak Period ............. 34

Exhibit 5.6: High-level Summary of Model Results – PM Peak Period ............. 34

Exhibit 6.1: Regional Transit Network Types .................................................... 36

Exhibit 6.2: Specific Designation for Key Regional Transit Corridors ............... 38

Exhibit 6.3: Recommended Higher-Order Transit Network ............................... 40

Exhibit 6.4: Recommended Higher-Order Transit Network (South Enlargement) ................................................................................. 41

Exhibit 6.5: Highway 2 Corridor Features ......................................................... 44

Exhibit 6.6: Potential Highway 2 Corridor Cross-sections to 2031 .................... 45

Exhibit 6.7: Proposed Highway 2 Corridor Cross-sections beyond 2031 .......... 47

Exhibit 6.8: Simcoe Street Corridor Features ................................................... 49

Exhibit 6.9: Proposed Simcoe Street Corridor Cross-Sections ......................... 51

Exhibit 6.10: Taunton Road Corridor Features ................................................. 55

Exhibit 6.11: Proposed Taunton Road Corridor Cross-sections ....................... 55

Exhibit 6.12: Whites Road Corridor Features ................................................... 57

Exhibit 6.13: Proposed Whites Road Corridor Cross-sections .......................... 57

Exhibit 6.14: Brock Road Corridor Features ..................................................... 59



January 2018 v

Exhibit 6.15: Proposed Brock Road Corridor Cross-sections ........................... 59

Exhibit 6.16: Westney Road Corridor Features ................................................ 60

Exhibit 6.17: Proposed Westney Road Corridor Cross-sections ....................... 60

Exhibit 6.18: Bayly Street / Victoria Street / Bloor Street Corridor Features ..... 62

Exhibit 6.19: Proposed Bayly Street-Victoria Street-Bloor Street Corridor Cross-sections ......................................................................................... 62

Exhibit 6.20: Rossland Road Corridor Features ............................................... 63

Exhibit 6.21: Harwood Avenue Corridor Features ............................................ 64

Exhibit 6.22: Brock Street/Baldwin Street Corridor Features ............................ 65

Exhibit 6.23: Thornton Road Corridor Features ................................................ 65

Exhibit 6.24: Harmony Road Corridor Features ................................................ 66

Exhibit 6.25: Highway 7/Winchester Road Corridor Features ........................... 67

Exhibit 6.26: Daily GO Rail Boardings by Station on Lakeshore East Line ....... 68

Exhibit 6.27: GO Rail Trips from Durham during AM Peak Period .................... 69

Exhibit 6.28: Metrolinx 15 Year Plan and Seaton GO Rail ................................ 70

Exhibit 6.29: Future Rail Lines Enabled by the “Missing Link” .......................... 71

Exhibit 7.1: Population and Employment Growth Beyond 2031 ........................ 73

Exhibit 7.2: Beyond 2031 Travel Demand (AM Peak Period) ........................... 74

Exhibit 8.1: Rapid Transit Capital Costs ........................................................... 76

Exhibit 8.2: Transit Capital by Phase ................................................................ 76


January 2018 1

1 Introduction Durham Region is updating its Transportation Master Plan (TMP), a strategic planning document designed to define the policies, programs and infrastructure improvements required to plan for Durham’s future transportation needs.

The purpose of the TMP update is to:

gauge and assess the progress of the previous TMP;

update the Region’s travel demand forecasting tools to reflect the most recent population and employment projections;

revisit and update its strategies and policies to reflect current trends, needs and best practices; and

identify transportation projects to meet Durham Region’s future needs.

1.1 Objectives The focus of this report is on the higher-order transit network and related infrastructure, providing insight on Durham’s integrated transportation system and identifying the needs and opportunities for higher-order transit services to support future growth. The report will:

summarize higher-order transit directions in the Regional Official Plan;

provide an overview of existing conditions (existing network and some key planned additions);

identify trends in the Region and in the Greater Toronto Area;

provide an overview of the range of higher-order transit solutions and what they can achieve;

present the analysis and evaluation of the alternative improvements for the Regional transit network; and

identify the proposed transit network for 2031, including implementation phasing.

1.2 Transportation Directions The Transportation Directions that guide the development of the TMP’s policies, strategies and actions are presented below. The Transportation Directions are comprised of three main components. The first level consists of high level principles, generally reflecting the Vision for the Region. The second level consists of the Directions themselves while the third level includes detailed policies, strategies and actions.


January 2018 2

By prioritizing both efficiency and sustainability, Durham Region’s transportation system will focus on seven guiding principles which are integral to the plan and reflect the Vision for Durham Region:

Guiding Principles 1. A focus on users 2. Connectivity 3. Public health and safety 4. Economic prosperity 5. Environmental protection 6. Collaboration and leadership 7. Innovation

Transportation Directions Key Transportation Directions have been developed for the TMP to oversee the provision of an effective transportation system and are outlined in Exhibit 1.1. Directions #2 and #5 are the most relevant to the transit system:

Exhibit 1.1: Transportation Directions

• Strengthen the relationship between land use and

transportation 01

• Elevate the role of integrated public transit including Rapid Transit

02

• Make walking and cycling more practical and

attractive03

• Optimize road infrastructure and

operation 04

• Promote sustainable travel choices 05

• Invest strategically in the transportation system06

• Improve goods movement to support economic

development07


January 2018 3

DIRECTION #2: Elevate the role of integrated public transit including Rapid Transit

Durham Region will continue to emphasize transit’s role in building a healthier and more inclusive community, and in developing stronger urban centres and corridors. Further development of rapid transit services within Durham Region will make transit more competitive compared to the car, and will be complemented by improved access to transit by foot and bicycle. Seamless integration of service across Durham Region’s boundaries will be pursued through stronger partnerships with GO Transit, York Region Transit, and the Toronto Transit Commission. The goal will be to significantly increase transit’s share of travel for commuting during peak periods, and for many other trip purposes during off-peak periods. Transit services will become more reliable, and advanced technologies will support new fare, security and customer information strategies.

DIRECTION #5: Promote sustainable travel choices.

Durham Region will pursue a number of approaches to maximize the return on investment in facilities and services for walking, cycling, public transit and carpooling. Those modes provide a suite of alternatives to driving and enable a variety of healthy, independent lifestyles for people — including children, youth, seniors and adults with disabilities — who cannot or choose not to operate their own car. Transportation demand management (TDM) measures engage with travellers, and offer information, incentives and assistance to make choices that work best for individual needs and preferences. TDM-supportive features in new developments, like parking for bicycles and carpooling, enable more sustainable choices and can be fostered through planning approval processes. In collaboration with the Area Municipalities, the Region can also implement parking management approaches that lead to a more efficient balance between car travel and more sustainable modes

1.3 Transit Network Development Approach The TMP’s Transportation Directions will guide the development of the transit network with the goal to increase transit share of travel for commuting as well as other purposes during all times of the day.

Identifying future needs to facilitate transit demand in Durham requires a strategic approach that considers all network solutions to optimize infrastructure and operation. In this approach, improvements are individually evaluated based on existing conditions and projected demand forecasts, in addition to supplementary reports from completed secondary studies and environmental assessments.

Developing a long-term transportation network for Durham requires a structured and comprehensive framework of recommendations. As a starting point, proposed recommendations were examined through the Region’s existing transit network and previous transportation master plan (2005), committed transit


January 2018 4

projects presented in the 2013 Regional Development Charges Background Study, and 2016 Capital Budget and Nine-Year Forecast. Additionally, plans such as the 2010 Long Term Transit Strategy, 2015 Five-Year Service Strategy, and municipal needs identified through consultation with the municipalities and review of the associated master plans were examined to capture all transportation needs in Durham Region.

1.4 Report Structure This report is structured to provide a summary of the process used to arrive at a series of recommendations for transit improvements as part of the TMP. The sections are as follows:

Section 2: Current Plans provides a summary of current plans and initiatives that shape transit in Durham Region.

Section 3: Background provides an overview of the existing transit network, overall travel demand and transit’s current performance.

Section 4: Future Transportation Needs and Opportunities contains both a summary of the forecast population and employment growth in Durham, the potential for growth in transit travel and the need for transit to play a greater role in meeting future travel demand.

Section 5: Development of the 2031 Transit Network outlines the principles for the development of the future transit network, discusses the application of technology and service strategy options, summarizes the assessment of a basic and enhanced transit network and assesses the various key corridors in Durham.

Section 6: Proposed 2031 Transit Network provides a summary of the proposed 2031 transit network elements.

Section 7: Transit Needs Beyond 2031 presents a review of projected growth beyond 2031 and highlights the implications for the continued improvement to the transit network and service.

Section 8: Rapid Transit Costs presents the capital costs for rapid transit projects in the 2031 network.


January 2018 5

2 Current Plans 2.1 Regional Official Plan Convenient, effective and efficient public transit service are key to allowing Durham Region and its member municipalities to reach their full development potential. In order to support new growth in the Region, a greater emphasis on non-auto transportation modes is needed. Travel demand forecasts indicate that the existing and currently planned road network will be unable to accommodate future travel demands in personal vehicles based on projected growth.

The Regional Official Plan (ROP) indicates a strong support for improved transit services with a goal for improving transportation linkages both within the Region and between the Region and adjacent areas. Strong support through improved public transit service is included in the Plan as follows:

The Plan supports planning, design and operation of an integrated and coordinated transit priority network along the major arterials linked with the existing and proposed commuter rail network to serve both inter-regional and inter-municipal travel demand. The Plan supports the development of transportation hubs that act as development nodes as well as major transfer points between modes.

The Plan supports the intensification of development along major transit corridors and the implementation of policies for transit-oriented development.

The Plan supports the implementation of new or extension of existing GO Rail services within the Region.

The development of a comprehensive rapid transit network in the Region will continue to develop over time. Work has already been undertaken to set the groundwork for such a network based on current routes and services, ridership and planned growth within the Region.

In developing an improved transit service as supported by the ROP, the TMP should consider the following:

Shaping land use through the provision of rapid transit in key corridors. Focus on the development of not only higher density development within these corridors but major nodes of residential and employment development that is best served by rapid transit. The Highway 2 corridor throughout the Region is an example of that potential. Lead the development with commitment to rapid transit services and the implementation of base services early in the process.

Enhancing connectivity not only with the existing GO Transit services and future Regional Express Rail, but also between major intra-regional nodes and adjacent external regional services.


January 2018 6

Ensuring accessibility for people of all physical abilities.

Ensuring that all levels of transit services are efficient, reliable, comfortable and convenient.

Utilizing technology and service levels that fit the goals of the Region and meet the demands of the travelling public.

Providing a network and service for a range of travel patterns and users (e.g. off-peak travel, reverse peak, etc.).

2.2 Long Term Transit Strategy The Long Term Transit Strategy (LTTS), completed in 2010, was the initial starting point for developing a number of recommendations to further advance Durham Region’s Higher-Order Transit Network. The LTTS identified major transit corridors and proposed a strategy for the implementation of rapid transit services across the Region to not only serve the internal needs of the Region but to effectively connect the network to adjacent municipalities

The Vision of the LTTS study was to:

Create an adaptive, safe, reliable, accessible, and desirable transit system that shapes and connects Durham Region and beyond in an economically and environmentally sustainable manner.

The LTTS considered a number of multi-modal transportation alternatives to meet projected transportation demands to 2031 and beyond. The development of a long-range or ultimate rapid transit network was a major component of that study. Major transit corridors were identified and a rapid transit strategy outlined for long-term implementation including light rail transit (LRT), bus rapid transit (BRT), express services and enhanced conventional services across the Region.

Based on current forecast ridership to 2031, a scaled-back version of the LTTS system will be implemented in the medium term with the opportunity to upgrade the service as per the LTTS over the longer term beyond 2031.

2.3 DRT Five Year Service Strategy The DRT Five Year Service Strategy, adopted as part of the 2016 Servicing and Financing Study, outlined an objective “to develop and operate a transit system that will be available, consistent, direct, frequent and seamless.” The intent was to increase transit market share through targeted improvements for inter-municipal trips, improved connections to GO Transit and inter-regional trips to east Toronto. Recommendations from Durham’s Five Year Service Strategy were used to review alternative solutions and assess future directions undertaken by the Region’s TMP process.


January 2018 7

The implementation strategy for the targeted improvements relates to the following:

1. Route extensions, revisions and restructuring across the entire Region to provide more and direct connections to major traffic generators;

2. Early service to new developing areas including Seaton, west Whitby and north Oshawa;

3. Improved service hours on a variety of routes;

4. Enhanced service frequency on routes with growing ridership;

5. New route connections across the Region’s local municipalities

6. Expansion of the high frequency service network along:

• North-South Corridors: – Brock Road – Harwood Avenue / Westney Road / Salem Road – Brock Street – Simcoe Street – Harmony Road

• East-West Corridors: – Highway 2 – Taunton Road – Rossland Road

The 2031 recommended transit network has been built on this base. In addition, consideration has been given to enhancing transit operating speeds through the use of separate or reserved lanes for transit vehicles as well as the provision of priority treatment in specific high frequency corridors. These enhancements respond to the strategy to reduce auto travel mode split in favour of transit over the long term.

2.4 Provincial Initiatives In addition to the Durham Region plans, there are a number of Provincial planning initiatives that are shaping transit in Durham Region. The Metrolinx Regional Transportation Plan for the Greater Toronto and Hamilton Area (The Big Move), completed in 2008, reviewed and identified a long term rapid transit and commuter rail network for the Region. It confirmed the Highway 2 Rapid Transit corridor as a high priority through its designation in the 15-year plan. It also identified an extension of the GO Rail Lakeshore East line to Bowmanville and a new GO Rail line to Seaton. These GO Rail service expansions are a top priority for Durham Region.

A major initiative that has evolved since the completion of The Big Move is Regional Express Rail (RER). Announced in 2015, RER will provide 15-minute two-way all day service on the Lakeshore East GO line from Union Station to


January 2018 8

Oshawa within 10 years. Current plans are to electrify the Lakeshore East corridor as far as the existing Oshawa GO station in that timeframe.

Metrolinx is currently undertaking a review of the Regional Transportation Plan and released a Draft Updated Regional Transportation Plan in September 2017. The Draft Plan identified the Highway 2 BRT as a project “in development,” and the GO RER and GO Rail service extension to Bowmanville as projects “in delivery." In June 2016, the Province announced funding to expand GO Rail service to Bowmanville by 2024.

Although Durham Region already benefits from frequent GO Rail service, the introduction of RER has the potential to transform transit options by providing a more effective service for two-way trips within the Region, as well as adding capacity for traditional Toronto-focused GO Rail markets. Modelling carried out for the TMP shows that RER will complement rather than compete with other Regional rapid transit corridors. Perhaps more importantly, it will support the implementation of a High Frequency Bus Network as identified in DRT’s Five Year Service Strategy by providing a more integrated system of local routes to feed into RER service.


January 2018 9

3 Background 3.1 Existing Transit Network The two transit operators in Durham Region are GO Transit, which operates inter-regional rail and bus services, and Durham Region Transit (DRT), which operates local bus services. The existing transit network in Durham Region is shown in Exhibit 3.1.

GO Transit operates 13 base bus routes and the Lakeshore East rail line in Durham Region, connecting Durham Region to municipalities throughout the Greater Toronto and Hamilton Area (GTHA). GO Rail and GO Bus routes provide direct links from Durham Region to Peterborough, Scarborough, Markham, Richmond Hill, Vaughan, North York, and Toronto Union Station.

DRT was founded in 2006 through amalgamation of the Ajax/Pickering, Whitby, Oshawa and Clarington transit systems. The current transit network in Durham is focused on the more densely populated lakeshore municipalities, but does offer rural transit service to the northern communities of Port Perry, Sunderland, Cannington, Uxbridge and Beaverton.

DRT operates 68 daily routes, including specialized services and community buses. Many of these routes focus on connecting employment nodes, post-secondary institutions, and shopping centres, while others operate as collector services, delivering riders to one of the Lakeshore East GO Rail stations, GO Bus stops, and PULSE stops in Durham Region. PULSE is a rapid, high-frequency bus route operated by DRT that connects downtown Oshawa to the University of Toronto Scarborough Campus via Highway 2.

The routes with the highest frequencies are Route 915 (connecting the Ajax GO station to UOIT), Route 401 Simcoe (connecting UOIT, downtown Oshawa and Oshawa GO) and the PULSE route. These regional routes provide a spine upon which to build out a strong network to link the lakeshore municipalities.

DRT’s recently adopted Five Year Service Strategy outlines future actions to address route structure, serve new growth areas, expand service hours and frequencies and develop a high frequency spine network. The higher-order transit components developed in this report will be complementary to this transit service strategy.


January 2018 10

Exhibit 3.1: Existing Transit Network in Durham Region (2017)

+


January 2018 11

3.2 Travel Demand Trends Trends observed in the travel behaviour of Durham Region residents between 2001 and 2011 are presented in this section. Travel behaviour explains a large part of the performance of the existing transportation network, but network performance also has a notable impact on the travel choices that the Region’s residents make. A more detailed analysis was presented in the Existing Transportation System Report.

3.2.1 Transit Mode Share In 2011, transit trips accounted for 8% of all trips in the 6:30 am to 9:30 am period. Transit, including GO Rail, has maintained an average 7% share in the two decades up to 2011, with a low of 6% in 2001. The lakeshore municipalities of Ajax, Pickering, Whitby, and Oshawa continue to have higher transit mode shares (7-12%) compared to Clarington (3%) and the northern municipalities (1-2%) where transit service is very limited.

Exhibit 3.2: Mode Share Comparisons for AM Peak Period Trips from Durham, 2001-2011

Source: 2001-2011 Transportation Tomorrow Surveys

Exhibit 3.3: Transit Mode Share by Municipality for AM Peak Period, 2001-2011

Municipality 2001 2011 Brock 0% 0% Uxbridge 1% 1% Scugog 0% 2% Pickering 8% 11% Ajax 10% 12% Whitby 7% 8% Oshawa 6% 7% Clarington 2% 3% Durham Region 6% 8%



January 2018 12

3.2.2 Transit Trip Destinations While overall modal share has shown little change, the strong growth in transit trips to Downtown Toronto has been accompanied by a significant shift to transit, particularly GO Rail as shown in Exhibit 3.4. The transit mode share to Downtown Toronto stood at 73% in 2011, up from 65% in 2001; a trend that is reflected across other GTHA municipalities, such as York Region. However, trips to Downtown Toronto are only about 6% of all morning peak period trips from Durham Region, so this shift does not significantly impact the overall Region-wide mode share.

Exhibit 3.4: Transit Trips Starting in Durham – AM Peak Period


There has been an increase in transit mode share for trips destined for downtown Toronto, which has resulted in an overall 36% transit mode share for all non-motorized trips made across the Durham-Toronto boundary.

The shift of mode share for long commuting trips to Downtown Toronto has also led to a reduction in average auto trip lengths from 14.6 km in 2001 to 13.8 km in 2011, but overall average trip length has been stable at around 13.5 km.

As this shift to GO Rail continues and trips to Downtown Toronto continue to grow, congestion and parking constraints around commuter parking lots will become a greater issue for the Region. In part to address this issue, Metrolinx has recently expanded parking through the construction of parking structures at the GO stations in Whitby (February 2010), Ajax (August 2013), and Pickering (February 2012 and March 2014) and expanded the parking lot at the Oshawa GO station (December 2013).


January 2018 13

3.2.3 Density and Transit Urban density is one metric that is commonly used to assess how transit supportive an area is. Higher density corridors can usually support more frequent transit service and higher-order modes such as bus rapid transit (BRT) and light rail transit (LRT). This relationship between transit usage and urban density can be seen across the GTHA. Exhibit 3.5 shows a positive correlation between transit mode share of morning peak period trips and the density of various urban growth centres across the GTHA in 2001.

Comparing the transit mode shares in North York Centre and Downtown Hamilton shown in the exhibit reveals this two-way relationship. While North York Centre is slightly less dense than Downtown Hamilton, the former area is well served by the TTC Yonge and Sheppard subway lines, frequent TTC buses, and GO buses, making it more accessible by transit than Downtown Hamilton.

Exhibit 3.5: Comparison of Urban Densities and Transit Mode Shares in Urban Growth Centres in 2001

Source: Ontario Ministry of Transportation – Transportation Trends and Outlooks for the Greater Toronto Area and Hamilton, Needs and Opportunities (2007), p.30

Etobicoke Centre

Scarborough Centre

North York Centre

Yonge-Eglinton Centre

Downtown Toronto

Downtown Brampton

Downtown PickeringDowntown Burlington

Midtown Oakville

Downtown Oshawa

Newmarket CentreDowntown Milton

Mississauga City Centre

Richmond Hill Centre

Downtown Hamilton

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500Gross Density in (People+Jobs) / Hectare

Trip

End

Tra

nsit

Mode

Spl

it

Toronto Centres

Other GTAH Centres


January 2018 14

In Durham the relationship between density and transit share is shown in Exhibit 3.6. Ajax and Pickering have comparatively high mode shares given their urban density, due to their proximity to Toronto and availability of GO Rail.

Exhibit 3.6: Density and Transit Mode Share – AM Peak Period

Source: Density – 2011 population and employment in traffic zones within the urban area, Transit mode share – 2011 TTS

3.3 Transit Service Performance Transit ridership has grown in Durham Region since amalgamation of the municipal transit systems in 2006. Exhibit 3.7 shows the local transit ridership growth from pre-amalgamation to 2016. Over this time period DRT ridership has grown by over 3.4 million trips at a rate of about almost 310,000 trips per year. This growth in ridership has outpaced population growth in Durham Region, as the ridership per capita has increased from 13.8 in 2006 to a high of 19.6 in 2014. PULSE ridership continues to grow, with approximately 2 million riders in 2016.

The recent declines in ridership in 2015 and 2016 are a result of a teachers’ strike in that resulted in lower student ridership in the months of April and May 2015, and significant route changes and a fare increase that resulted in lower ridership in other passenger categories. In 2016, adult ridership increased but was offset by declines in co-fare (GO transfer), student and U-Pass ridership for an overall slight decline from the previous year.

Ridership growth has not been limited to captive transit riders, as the share of riders who live in households that have access to a car has increased from 91% to 94%. The DRT 2013 Customer Survey reiterates this point, as only 27% of the individuals surveyed said that not having access to a car was their primary reason for taking transit. Convenience and cost accounted for 70% of responses. Access to the transit systems in Durham Region is a key part of making transit convenient enough to grow ridership by attracting choice riders. DRT and GO Transit have done well in this area, as DRT and GO Bus routes

30

24 23

1614

11 118

0%

2%

4%

6%

8%

10%

12%

14%

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

Ajax Whitby Oshawa Pickering Uxbridge Clarington Scugog Brock

Tran

sit M

ode

Shar

e

Urb

an D

ensi

ty(P

opul

atio

n +

Jobs

per

ha)

Municipality

Urban Density

Transit Mode Share


January 2018 15

provide service to approximately 70% of all residents, or 450,000 people (within 400 m of a transit route).

Exhibit 3.7: DRT Historical Ridership (millions)

Source: CUTA Factbooks, 2017 DRT Servicing and Finance Study

The ridership growth is also due in large part to the steps Durham Region has taken following the recommendations of the 2003 TMP, in which improving public transit in order to provide more travel choices was a primary goal.

Since 2006, Durham has increased overall service by boosting revenue vehicle hours per capita from 0.68 to 0.91, keeping pace with the ridership per capita growth over the same period. Further service improvements came with the introduction of several 900-series inter-municipal routes to better connect municipalities within Durham Region. Building on this, DRT implemented initial steps towards a bus rapid transit system with the introduction of PULSE in 2013. This service currently provides a rapid, high-frequency connection with short travel times between Oshawa, Whitby, Ajax, Pickering, and Scarborough. Construction of bus-only lanes along Highway 2 for the PULSE service also began in 2013.

DRT has also made improvements on the fare side – DRT has adopted the PRESTO fare card system and implemented the One Durham Region Fare to better integrate fares with GO Transit and improve transfers between the systems. Ongoing service improvements such as these are an important component of achieving the modal shift envisioned by the 2003 TMP.

Monthly boardings for the top twenty routes by ridership in the fall of 2015 are shown in Exhibit 3.8. DRT routes 900, 401, and 915 are the three busiest routes in Durham Region. Route 900 is the backbone of the DRT PLUSE rapid transit system, connecting University of Toronto Scarborough with central Pickering, Ajax, Whitby, and Oshawa along Highway 2. Routes 401 and 915 provide service to UOIT and Durham College. Route 401 connects to Downtown

6.85 6.947.62

8.50 8.519.12

9.79 10.30 10.60 10.79 10.31 10.26

2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016

Year


January 2018 16

Oshawa and Oshawa GO station, while Route 915 connects to Ajax GO station. All three routes serve more riders than any GO Bus route operating in Durham Region, the busiest of which connects Downtown Oshawa to the University of Toronto Scarborough, Scarborough Centre, North York Centre, and Yorkdale Mall.

Exhibit 3.8: Monthly Bus Boardings in Durham Region (2015)

Source: DRT and GO Transit data for September 2015.

The high ridership on routes connecting to post-secondary institutions in Durham is in part due to the U-Pass system in Durham Region, through which all full-time students at Durham College, UOIT, and Trent University Oshawa are granted unlimited travel on DRT routes and some GO Bus routes. On Routes 401 and 915, U-Pass holders account for 45% and 48%, respectively, of annual boardings.

A major hurdle in attracting new riders to the system has been the large difference between auto and transit travel times. Transit travel times are competitive with auto travel times along certain routes within Durham Region during the peak commute periods, for example along the Highway 2 corridor or parallel to the GO Rail corridor. However, transit travel times are much less competitive for trips to or from locations away from the main transit hubs and to adjacent municipalities (with the exception of downtown Toronto). For example, a trip from the Downtown Oshawa urban growth centre to Markham Centre takes approximately 35 minutes to an hour by automobile but takes at least 1.5 hours by transit, making it hard to attract non-captive riders.

164,

500

37,0

00

29,7

00

29,5

00

28,2

00

26,3

00

24,6

00

22,9

00

22,9

00

20,6

00

231,

900

108,

200

56,2

00

52,5

00

25,4

00

78,7

00

69,5

00

57,5

00

41,4

00

38,4

00

401 407 416 302 402 410 411 225 403 219 900 915 910 916 923 92 51 90 96 52

DRT Local Routes DRT Regional Routes GO Bus Routes


January 2018 17

3.4 Transit Access to GO Stations During peak commuter periods, some of the key destinations for DRT users include the four GO Stations on the Lakeshore East line. With increasing GO Rail demand and limited parking, transit is an attractive alternative for accessing GO Rail. DRT offers a reduced co-fare of 75¢ for riders transferring to/from GO Rail.

Exhibit 3.9 summarizes typical weekday access modes to GO Rail at each of the GO stations in Durham and the estimated transit demand to the GO stations. It is estimated that 2,800 riders take DRT to GO Rail on a daily basis.

Exhibit 3.9: Access Mode to GO Rail

Pickering GO Station

Ajax GO Station

Whitby GO Station

Oshawa GO Station

Weekday GO Rail Boardings 5,000 5,400 5,700 4,100

Access Mode to GO

Park and Ride 61% 59% 71% 73% Pick Up/Drop Off 19% 16% 13% 14% Transit 9% 21% 12% 12% Cycle 1% 1% 0% 0% Walk 10% 3% 3% 0% Other 0% 0% 0% 1% Estimated Weekday Transit Trips to GO 450 1,150 700 500

Source: 2011 Transportation Tomorrow Survey

3.5 Summary and Implications for Transit Network Development

The improvements to transit service made by DRT in recent years have increased ridership and performance. Future growth in Durham will require continued improvement to services to attract a greater mode split to transit to avoid or reduce expected congestion on the roads. A key priority will be an improvement in transit travel times to make service more competitive with the private automobile. This will require the development of rapid transit type services in key corridors and the implementation of priority measures for transit.


January 2018 18

4 Future Transportation Needs and Opportunities

4.1 Population and Employment Growth The Region’s growth forecast for the year 2031, as per the Regional Official Plan (ROP), is for a population of 960,000 and employment of 350,000. These forecasts are consistent with the Province’s initial 2031 growth targets in the Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe (2006). Since that time, the province has amended its growth targets for 2031 and the amended population and employment forecasts for Durham Region are 970,000 and 360,000, respectively.

For the demand forecasting using the Durham Region Transportation Planning Model (DRTPM), land use forecasts allocated by traffic zone were used as summarized in Exhibit 4.1. These forecasts differ slightly from the overall total numbers from the ROP, even though they are consistent with the ROP, due to the approval of Regional Official Plan Amendment (ROPA) 128 by the OMB. Further, the existing employment and employment forecast for persons with No Fixed Place of Work are also excluded from the traffic zone allocations, even though they are included in the area municipal totals in the ROP.

The majority of the growth will occur in the urban areas, primarily in the lakeshore municipalities. The major growth areas include Seaton in Pickering, Brooklin in Whitby, the communities in Clarington and Regional Urban Growth Centres in Pickering and Oshawa. With the adoption of ROPA 128, previously identified growth areas that were included in the assessments for the Long-Term Transit Strategy Study, were removed from the current 2031 forecasts. Thus, the current 2031 land use forecasts exclude growth in areas such as North Oshawa and Northeast Pickering.


January 2018 19

Exhibit 4.1: Development Growth by Municipality (Model Forecasts)

Municipality Population Employment 2011 2031 % Growth 2011 2031 % Growth

Ajax 114,100 137,300 20% 28,800 44,600 55% Brock 11,800 13,800 17% 3,400 4,400 29% Clarington 88,000 139,600 59% 18,100 36,200 100% Oshawa 155,800 195,100 25% 50,100 85,400 70% Pickering 92,400 188,600 104% 34,200 80,800 136% Scugog 22,600 22,100 -2% 7,700 8,900 16% Uxbridge 21,500 23,500 9% 7,200 8,900 24% Whitby 127,000 191,900 51% 38,900 71,400 84% Durham 633,100 912,000 44% 188,400 340,500 81%

Source: Durham Region Transportation Planning Model (DRTPM). Employment allocations exclude persons with No Fixed Place of Work.

4.2 Transit Travel Demand Growth Future transit demand was forecasted using the DRTPM. The Durham Model is a four-stage multimodal transportation demand model for AM and PM peak-period travel. It was first developed in 2008-2009 by Dr. Eric Miller of the University of Toronto and HDR as a custom-built derivative of Dr. Miller’s “GTAModel.” The Durham Model allows for a wide variety of transportation scenarios to be simulated; it can be used to provide a detailed evaluation of the effectiveness of alternative transportation strategies for different time periods. In 2014, HDR updated and re-calibrated the Durham Model to 2011-2012 TTS data.

4.2.1 2031 Travel Demand The 2031 land use forecasts and assumptions for the 2031 base network were inputs to the DRTPM to develop estimates for 2031 travel demand by auto and transit modes. The projected growth in trips is comparable to the growth in population and employment. In the AM peak period, trips are projected to grow by 43% and in the PM peak period trips are projected to grow by 55%. These compare to development growth of about 52% (population and employment combined). Transit trips are growing slightly faster than auto trips at a rate of 45% in the AM and 60% in the PM, resulting in a small increase in mode share.

Exhibit 4.2 summarizes the growth by mode to 2031. While transit trips are growing at a faster rate, the absolute increase in auto trips (149,000 in the PM peak period) is approximately ten times the growth in transit trips (13,900).


January 2018 20

Exhibit 4.2: Peak Period Growth in Transit Demand

Metric

AM Peak Period PM Peak Period

2011 2031 % Growth 2011 2031

% Growth

Auto Trips 236,950 338,040 +43% 272,790 421,570 +55% Transit Trips 28,470 41,230 +45% 23,250 37,170 +60% Total Trips 265,420 379,270 +43% 296,040 458,730 +55% Transit share 10.7% 10.9% +1% 7.9% 8.1% +3%

Source: DRTPM. Includes AM trips originating in Durham and PM trips destined to Durham.

4.3 Changes in Travel Patterns As identified under existing trends, growth in transit demand is not uniform across all travel markets. As residential and employment areas develop in Durham (and throughout the rest of the Greater Toronto Area) residents will have more choice in where they live and work, and this decision is determined in part by the availability and quality of transportation connections between the two. The modelled trip distribution considers the link between worker and workplaces, students and schools, as well as other origin-destination pairs for non-work/non-school trips.

The largest segment of transit demand in Durham is travel from Durham to Downtown Toronto with over 21,000 transit trips, or 52% of all transit trips starting Durham, destined to the downtown core of Toronto in the morning peak period as shown in Exhibit 4.3. However, even though there will continue to be significant growth in this market (+29% or +4,800 peak period trips from 2011), this is not the fastest growing segment for transit. Between 2011 and 2031, transit trips from Durham to Suburban Toronto will grow by 62% and internal Durham transit trips will grow by 51%.

0

100

200

300

400

500

2011 AM 2031 Base AM 2011 PM 2031 Base PM

Thou

sand

sAuto Transit


January 2018 21

Exhibit 4.3: Transit Trips Starting in Durham Region by Destination – AM Peak Period

Source: 1986-2011 Transportation Tomorrow Surveys, 2031 DRTPM

Overall, for all modes, the largest and fastest growing segment of travel are internal trips within Durham Region. Internal trips are projected to grow by 54% between 2011 and 2031, exceeding 280,000 trips in the morning peak period. However, the projected transit share for this market is less than 5% as shown in Exhibit 4.4. While trips to downtown Toronto have a transit share of over 80%, the auto mode remains the primary mode for trips to, from and within Durham. There is significant potential to increase transit use in Durham.

Exhibit 4.4: Transit Share by Trip Destination – AM Peak Period

* Share of motorized trips. Excludes walking and cycling. Source: 1986-2011 Transportation Tomorrow Surveys, 2031 DRTPM.

0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90% Within

Durham

Durham -DowntownToronto

Durham -SuburbanToronto

Durham -York


January 2018 22

4.4 Role of Transit in Addressing Travel Demand As Durham continues to grow, travel demand will exceed the existing capacity of the road network. Capacity improvements will be required in some form. However, continuously increasing road capacity is not a feasible nor sustainable solution as road rights-of-way are not unlimited, and the costs to construct and resulting environmental impacts could be prohibitive. The role of transit in meeting transportation needs of Durham residents will become increasingly important.

The role of transit in meeting broader community objectives is also a key focus of the TMP. Key areas of focus include:

Supporting community health and well-being. Encouraging investment in the regional economy, including attracting

knowledge-based businesses. Addressing rural transit needs. Shaping and supporting land use and facilitating development of

complete communities. Supporting multi-modal travel options including walking and cycling.


January 2018 23

5 Development of the 2031 Transit Network 5.1 Principles for Transit Network Development To be competitive, the transit network will need to achieve specific goals related to providing complete coverage, supporting the Region’s land use and planning objectives and forming a coherent network that can provide competitive service.

The DRT Five Year Service Strategy has identified a High Frequency Network (HFN) as a longer term objective. It will be supported by earlier actions in the plan to reorganize the local route structure, which will support the HFN; serve new areas, which will increase coverage and system reach; and increase service hours and frequencies, which will increase ridership. The HFN does not specifically indicate which corridors should have higher-order transit, but rather indicates routes where ridership potential exists to support higher frequency service.

The network must also support the high level planning objectives of the Region. In Section 2 of this report, the objectives of supporting growth nodes, supporting GO Transit services and providing greater internal connectivity were identified. Higher-order transit can provide a catalyst for development, particularly where investments in BRT and protection for LRT are coupled with stations located at sites that are either already developed, are slated for higher density development, or support regional-scale destinations such as educational facilities, shopping and employment nodes.

When combined with a set of local bus routes, the HFN and the higher-order transit network will need to form a cohesive whole, which provides good local coverage, strong connections and selective infrastructure investments to provide a high quality service in corridors with sufficient demand.

5.1.1 Transit Measures When looking at the effectiveness of transit services, there are four key factors that need to be considered:

Speed – How fast does the service operate? Particularly compared to similar trips by automobile.

Reliability – How much variability is there in the travel time? Passengers need to add time to their journeys to account for unpredictable travel times.

Comfort – Are the component parts of the trip comfortable? This includes accessing the local stop, waiting, riding, exiting and making your way to your final destination. Comfort includes climate control, shelter, quality of the vehicle and personal safety.

Convenience – Measures the ease and directness of travel and the ability to plan effectively. Backtracking, inconvenient transfers, poor


January 2018 24

or incorrect information, multiple fare transactions and poor access to and from the transit service all affect convenience.

To understand transit travel behaviour, each these factors will be discussed in more detail.

a. Speed

To be competitive transit must be fast. Currently, transit trips are often 2-3 times longer than car trips. There are several measures that can be implemented to improve transit speeds, including:

Providing a level of segregation from other traffic, as has been done along a sections of Highway 2 to allow transit vehicles to by-pass traffic congestion thereby providing a higher average speed along the route and improving competiveness.

Implementing pre-paid fares and allowing multiple door access to speed up the boarding process. Off-board fare collection on the Viva system in York Region has effectively reduced dwell times at bus stops, particularly busy stops. Presto card readers at major stops would allow passengers to “tap on” as the bus arrives and board at the front and rear doors.

Providing transit vehicle priority through enhanced vehicle and signal systems integration to allow buses to flow more smoothly along the route. This can be combined with far-side stops to reduce the amount of time buses are delayed at red lights.

Developing well planned transfer facilities and coordinating timing points along routes to reduce the additional time that riders spend making transfers. Transfer time is perceived to be longer than an equivalent time spent sitting on a moving bus, providing additional benefits.

b. Reliability

Transit riders need to plan their journeys from start to finish and need to build in time for service reliability. This can increase total travel time if passengers need to “leave 15 minutes early” to account for buses running off schedule, missed connections or traffic delays along the route. Reliability can be improved or enhanced by implementing the following measures:

Providing priority for transit vehicles over private auto traffic via segregation or signal priority. If buses can by-pass delays and run at the same speed every trip, the reliability is greatly increased and connections can be managed more easily.

Tailoring schedule time to actual conditions can improve reliability by building some of the occasional delays into the service schedule. This measure is a careful balance between keeping the buses running on


January 2018 25

time and having to slow down along the route to meet scheduled travel times.

Implementing vehicle control through continuous monitoring and instituting proactive operational adjustments can reduce delays and speed up emergency response.

Providing passenger information on next vehicle arrival times primarily reduces anxiety for passengers who may have missed their regular bus and are waiting for the next one. This certainly of bus arrivals makes travel predictable and more comfortable.

c. Comfort

A comfortable trip can reduce a passenger’s focus on time. Methods to enhance the comfort of a trip could include:

Providing sufficient service to make the ride comfortable by reducing the amount of time spent standing or sitting at bus stops. Being on board a bus is considered more comfortable than waiting at a stop.

Providing passenger amenities within the station and system to enhance comfort, including information on next bus arrival times, shelters, benches and system information. Passengers that can occupy their time or plan other trips while waiting will perceive the wait time to be less.

Providing appropriate passenger and system information helps passengers plan the remainder of their journeys or look up information for a future journey.

Providing appropriate signage to guide and reinforce passenger travel throughout the system is important to take some of the stress out of unfamiliar surroundings and assist passengers in orienting themselves. It will also reduce the number of missed connections and eliminate the likelihood of passengers boarding the wrong bus.

d. Convenience

The network should be designed with passenger convenience in mind. Methods to enhance convenience could include:

Improving access to stations and stops through improved sidewalk connections and improved road crossings.

Providing routes and stops to minimize walking distances to access transit.

Providing on-line information for trip planning so that passengers can map things out in advance and be properly prepared for their journey.

Defining specific landmarks at stations so that passengers can easily orient themselves.


January 2018 26

Designing stations to provide logical flow thereby reducing confusion and maximizing efficiency.

Providing good directional signage to assist passengers during their journey.

Providing appropriate safety and warning signage to safeguard passengers.

Ensuring good sight lines within and around stations, so people can see what is coming next and make informed decisions en route.

Providing on-board and in-station announcements to orient and inform passengers during their trip of any changed or unusual conditions, to announce stops, or to remind passengers of safety messages provides an enhanced trip.

5.1.2 Transit Options There are a wide range of transit options available, depending on a number of key characteristics of the existing and future ridership, types of trips made, land use surrounding the corridor and the ability of each service to attract riders. This section outlines the complete suite of transit options. Several of the options are not considered viable as the land use and trip making patterns do not warrant the investment in subways, and local bus routes are currently in operation in more areas of the Region than just those corridors being considered for higher-order transit.

There are five distinguishing characteristics that can be used to classify transit options:

Operational Flexibility;

Types of Trips Served (short distance, long distance commuter);

Degree of Permanence;

Ability to Shape Land Use; and

Ability to Attract Ridership.

Operational Flexibility relates to how the service is operated either on public roadways or on dedicated transit infrastructure. DRT is in the process of modifying many local bus routes to create more direct service. These changes are relatively easy with a continuous street grid. Stops can be relocated and shelters moved to new stop locations if necessary. Generally operational flexibility decreases as the level of investment in the infrastructure increases.

On-street services have a high level of operation flexibility, fully segregated lanes have less flexibility, and completely grade separated facilities such as transitways, subways and commuter rail have the lowest operational flexibility.


January 2018 27

The Types of Trips Served also varies by option. Local buses and express buses tend to serve more local trips, or at least the local portion of a trip. Fully segregated lanes, which tend to have stations spaced further apart, tend to serve a mix of both local and commuter trips, whereas fully segregated systems tend to serve longer distance trips. The subway in Toronto and GO Transit tend to serve longer distance or inter-regional trips rather than local trips, which is typical for these types of services.

Degree of Permanence refers to how easily service could be modified or how likely it will be that once service is established it will continue for the foreseeable future. This relates to the level of investment and the effort required to plan, design and implement the infrastructure. Local bus services require stop signs and bus shelters. These can be relocated easily, leading to a lower degree of permanence. GO Train and subway infrastructure is at the other end of the spectrum, with high levels of investment in the vehicles and infrastructure representing a long term commitment to service.

Ability to Shape Land Use is a measure of how the infrastructure and transit service provided can influence the form and amount of land use change desired in a community. Local and express bus services will tend to support the existing land use rather than helping to shape it whereas the introduction of new stations along a BRT or LRT line tend to support intensification along the corridor. Options with wider station spacing such as subway or commuter rail tend to support more nodal forms of development in the areas immediately around stations. This can be seen at some of the existing GO stations, where clusters of offices and retail development are found in close proximity to the station.

Ability to Attract Ridership is a measure of how each option is perceived in the community and how it can improve ridership. While some of the ability to attract ridership is based on the overall network and the level of service, higher-order transit tends to attract more ridership than other options based on speed, frequency, convenience and comfort.

Exhibit 5.1 summarizes the characteristics of the various transit options.


January 2018 28

Exhibit 5.1: Characteristics of On-Street, Fully Segregated and Grade Separated Transit Options

On-Street Bus-Based Services Fully Segregated Lanes Other Grade Separated Technologies Key Character-istics

Operational Flexibility: HIGH Service, and service frequency, can be adjusted easily and, with appropriate notification, changes can be made in weeks or months to adjust to changes in demand and ridership patterns.

Types of Trips Served: ALL TYPES Local bus routes tend to serve more local trips and express trips slightly longer trips.

Degree of Permanence: LOW Services can be adjusted or relocated relatively easily.

Ability to Shape Land Use: LOW Local bus service is used to respond to development and travel demand rather than shaping it.

Ability to Attract Ridership: MODERATE to HIGH Services can be adjusted to match demand and respond to changes in travel patterns.

Operational Flexibility: MEDIUM The network can be easily extended and routes can be interconnected to provide a demand-responsive network; however, the main corridor is relatively fixed given the investment in dedicated facilities.

Types of Trips Served: ALL TYPES Local trips of a few stations to longer distance commute trips can easily be made, although shorter distance trips tend to predominate as they account for a large share of seat-miles operated.

Degree of Permanence: HIGH The level of investment to create segregated lanes provides a strong degree of permanence as modifications to remove service requires reconfiguration of the roadway.

Ability to Shape Land Use: HIGH LRT/BRT corridors are increasingly planned in conjunction with area land use plans to encourage the form and types of development conducive to increased transit ridership.

Ability to Attract Ridership: VERY HIGH Stations and corridors can be used to shape main street type development and provide a high degree of mobility in each corridor.

Operational Flexibility: LOW The investment in grade separated facilities is high and once installed cannot be altered, although extensions and additional routes can be added.

Types of Trips Served: ALL TYPES Local trips of a few stations to longer distance commute trips, although longer distance trips tend to predominate, as they account for a large share of seat-miles operated.

Degree of Permanence: VERY HIGH The infrastructure investment required to create grade-separated facilities means that these facilities are only constructed where justified for long term use.

Ability to Shape Land Use: VERY HIGH Stations are increasingly planned in conjunction with area land use plans to encourage the form and types of development conducive to increased transit ridership.

Ability to Attract Ridership: VERY HIGH Stations can be used to anchor and shape development and provide a high degree of mobility to the station area.

Options Local Express: Diesel or hybrid powered buses operating express between defined points. These buses operate in mixed traffic and are subject to traffic and signal delays and are capable of carrying lower volumes of people. This is usually implemented as an overlay of a local route. This approach was used for York Region’s Quick Start initiation of the Viva system. Transit Priority – Diesel or hybrid powered buses that operate in mixed traffic but are provided priority through signal phasing, queue jump lanes or special turning lanes. Communication between the buses, central dispatch (which determines the need for priority based on schedule performance) and the traffic signals is required to support this system. Analysis of the potential impacts on other road uses will need to be considered. HOV – Diesel or hybrid powered buses that operate on an exclusive right-of-way (reserved lanes) sharing the ROW with autos having multiple passengers (2+ or 3+) and with traffic crossings at signalized intersections. These systems are capable of carrying medium volumes of people with some reduction in speed and significantly reduced reliability compared to fully separated right-of-way operation.

BRT – Diesel or hybrid powered buses that operate on an exclusive right-of-way (reserved lanes) with traffic crossings at signalized intersections. These systems are capable of carrying medium volumes of people with some reduction in speed and significantly reduced reliability compared to fully separated right-of-way operation. LRT – Electrically powered vehicles that operate on an exclusive right-of way (reserved lanes) with traffic crossings at signalized intersections. These systems are capable of carrying medium to high volumes of people with some reduction in speed and reliability compared to fully separated right-of-way operation, but with significantly improved speed and reliability over mixed traffic operation.

Transitway (Grade Separated BRT) – Diesel or hybrid powered buses that operate on a fully segregated right-of-way (reserved lanes) with no traffic crossings. These systems are capable of carrying high volumes of people with little reduction in speed and very high levels of reliability. Ottawa operates one of the largest Transitway systems, and carries more than 10,000 people on 180 buses per hour. Grade Separated LRT – Electrically powered vehicles that operate on a separated right-of way with no traffic crossings. These systems are capable of carrying high volumes of people with little reduction in speed and with a higher level of reliability over mixed traffic operation. Subway – High capacity, high volume electrically-powered vehicles operating in a separated right-of-way. In most applications subways are below grade, allowing them to service densely-developed urban areas without impacting street-level activity. Station spacing determines the average operating speed, with systems typically having closer spacing in downtown and wider spacing in the suburbs where stations are typically 1000 to 3000 metres apart. Commuter Rail – Heavy rail trains operating on dedicated or freight tracks making limited stops, and usually focussed on carrying passengers to the urban core of the region. GO Transit operates this service in the GTHA. Existing heavy rail corridors are used, as new corridors are prohibitively difficult to establish.


January 2018 29

GO Transit currently provides the only grade separated transit services in Durham Region, and the TTC subway and SRT are the only other grade separated services in the Greater Toronto Area. New fully grade separated transit lines are not likely warranted in Durham given the ridership and land use patterns. The density of travel justifying new grade separated services is not predicted in the 2031 and Long Range transportation models.

At the other end of the spectrum, local bus service will continue to provide an important connector service to any other form of higher-order transit that is implemented, and must be organized to support the higher-order transit services to the degree possible.

Transit in segregated curb or median lanes is recommended when passenger volumes regularly exceed the capacity of a general purpose traffic lane. If transit can carry more people in a lane than mixed traffic operation, the lane can be designated as transit-only, providing a higher quality transit trip, which will further enhance transit ridership. This has been evident along Highway 2, where the bus-only curb lanes are providing a faster and more reliable service than is provided on other routes in the system.

The Highway 2 Transit Priority Measures EA has identified sufficient right-of-way to protect for median transit service. Allocating road space to allow for future conversion is critical to controlling future implementation costs and providing the types of services that can compete with the automobile for choice trips.

5.1.3 Matching Demand to Service Durham’s Official Plan forecasts a 300,000 (45%) increase in the population by 2031 and explicitly indicates that the travel needs related to this growth will be accommodated through increased non-auto travel. The plan supports the general widening of roads to Regional standards to provide additional road capacity across the Region. Transit is expected to accommodate a greater proportion of the forecast growth in travel demand in the Region as part of a balanced transportation network.

Ridership forecasts indicate that the demand for transit services across the Region will vary by corridor with greater demands indicated for east-west corridors connecting to the City of Toronto.

The LTTS study considered the cross section of potential transit service levels while looking at the main transit corridors across the Region. The selection of a transit strategy for any corridor will depend on demand and the desire of the Region to serve or spur various types of development. Various potential transit methods were identified and evaluated in this study, including:

Do Nothing – with or without Transit Priority Improvements;

Travel Demand Management/Transportation System Management;

High Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) or reserved curb bus lanes;


January 2018 30

Bus Rapid Transit; and

Light Rail Transit. Exhibit 5.2, illustrates the effective carrying capacity of the various levels of transit service from local buses to heavy rail subway.

As illustrated, surface transit vehicles in mixed traffic operating through a normal grid of road traffic signals, have a practical upper limit capacity of approximately 2,000 passengers per hour per direction. Improving service, vehicle technology and the separation of transit into partially or full segregated service allows for an increase in capacity from 2,000-8,000 for partially separated rights of way to 8,000 to 30,000+ for fully separated rights of way.

The previous study concluded that, in order to encourage more people to use public transit, the new transit system must be significantly faster and more reliable than the existing bus service transit system, and provide a quality of service comparable to that of private automobiles. Hence, the ‘Do Nothing’ option with buses operating in mixed traffic represents a continuation of current trends with no significant infrastructure or operational improvements, and does not satisfy the principal objectives of the Region’s program.

Travel Demand Management (TDM) / Transportation System Management provide measures to reduce the number of vehicles, primarily single-occupancy vehicles operating on the roadway especially during peak periods. Examples include encouraging transit usage and encouraging carpooling. The travel forecasting and modeling shows that TDM alone cannot fully address the projected future demand, existing traffic operation concerns, and safety issues. However, TDM should still be used in conjunction with the proposed transit methods for this study.

To achieve the study objective, transit service must have a much greater degree of “protection” from the delays associated with mixed traffic operation. HOV lanes in tandem with bus transit may improve the reliability of bus service, but examples from other locations have shown that HOV lanes are extremely difficult to enforce because of the lack of physical separation between the transit lane and general traffic lanes. Also, transit reliability would remain poor during off-peak periods and weekends, if the HOV lane restrictions are not in effect.

5.1.4 Thresholds for Rapid Transit The various transit technologies are suited to providing varying degrees of service measured as person-carrying capacity and vehicle operating speed. Years of experience with various technologies have found very consistent relationships between the mode, the degree of segregation, station spacing, and size of the vehicle providing service. Exhibit 5.2 below illustrates the various technologies and their related passenger-carrying capacities. These are indicative in planning transit services. Each technology has some variability to reflect the impacts of each design parameter, for instance average operating speed is higher where stations or stops are spaced further apart, and lower


January 2018 31

where stations or stops are close together. This can vary by line or even along the line as stations are typically spaced closer together in dense urban areas (400-800 m apart) and further apart in suburban areas (600-3000 m apart).

Exhibit 5.2: Carrying Capacity

Source: Adapted from Toronto Transit Commission

5.2 High Level Network Alternatives Chapter 3 of this report presented a summary of transportation performance measures for the existing network while Chapter 4 described future 2031 demands that will need to be accommodated through the recommendations of the TMP update.

Two high-level network scenarios were developed to represent a range of potential network needs and opportunities – 2031 Base Network and 2031 Enhanced Network. The Base Network comprises limited network improvements whereas the Enhanced Network reflects a more robust network with significant improvements. The network scenarios are described in more detail in the following sections.

Travel demand forecasts were developed for both of the above network scenarios using the DRTPM. The travel demand forecasts and the resulting network performance were used in the assessment of network improvements.


January 2018 32

The individual project reviews were then used to develop the proposed 2031 network.

5.2.1 Base Network The 2031 Base Network includes committed and funded projects by the Region, the Province or other agencies as summarized in Exhibit 5.3.

Exhibit 5.3: 2031 Base Network Assumptions

Regional/Local Roads

• Roads with construction activities in Durham Region 2015 9-Year Capital Plan

• Road improvements in York, Peel, Toronto in most recent capital plans

Provincial Roads

• Improvements listed in MTO Southern Ontario Highways Program 2012 and 2014

Durham Region Transit

• DRT improvements between 2012 and 2013 • 2018 Base service plan in DRT 2013-2018 Five Year Plan • York Region 2015 10 year roads and transit construction

program • Local route changes in Peel and Toronto to accommodate

new Regional transit projects Metrolinx • Metrolinx First Wave* Projects, including:

– VivaNext Rapidway on Yonge Street and Highway 7 in York Region

– GO Rail Richmond Hill extension to Gormley in York Region

– Sheppard East RT * Source: 2015-2020 Metrolinx Five Year Strategy. Excluding projects outside of the model area (Halton, Hamilton, etc.)

5.2.2 Enhanced Network A second network scenario was developed to represent a high level of infrastructure investment. This scenario, referred to as the Enhanced Network, included projects identified in previous studies and plans such as the 2013 Development Charge Study, the Long-Term Transit Strategy (LTTS) and regional transit projects identified by Metrolinx for the Next Wave of funding. Key assumptions for the Enhanced Network are provided in Exhibit 5.4.


January 2018 33

Exhibit 5.4: Enhanced Network Assumptions

Regional/Local Roads

• 2031 Base Network, plus – 2013 Development Charge Study 2028 Regional

Road Network, which also includes improvements for some area municipal arterial roads

Provincial Roads • 2031 Base Network, plus – Future Highway 401 widenings and – Interchange modifications, as identified in Provincial

Class EA studies for Highway 401

Durham Region Transit

• 2031 Base Network, plus – 2018 Enhanced service plan in DRT 2013-2018 Five

Year Plan – Alternative E in Durham LTTS, which assumes major

transit enhancements such as rapid transit on Highway 2, Simcoe Street, Taunton Road, Whites Road, Brock Road, Salem Road-Harwood Avenue, Brock Street and portions of Highway 7

– Local route changes in York, Peel, and Toronto to accommodate new regional transit projects

Metrolinx • 2031 Base Network, plus – Metrolinx Next Wave* Projects, including GO Rail

Lakeshore East extension to Bowmanville * Source: 2015-2020 Metrolinx Five Year Strategy. Excluding projects outside of the model area (Halton, Hamilton, etc.)

This chapter presents an assessment of these two scenarios, which along with individual project reviews, are used to develop the proposed 2031 higher-order transit network.

5.3 Comparison of Base and Enhanced Networks With the substantial level of transit investment in the Enhanced Network, there is a shift in travel demand from auto trips to transit trips as shown in Exhibit 5.5 and Exhibit 5.6 for the AM and PM peak periods, respectively. In the morning peak, transit trips grow by 63% compared to auto trips at 41% resulting in an increased transit mode share. Overall, the Enhanced Network has less auto travel and auto delay while trips made on Durham Region Transit in the morning peak period triples that of 2011 conditions.

Congestion is not completely eliminated with the Enhanced Network, but given the additional road network capacity assumed in the Enhanced Network, there are fewer areas of constraints and east-west constraints, particularly around Highway 7 and Highway 407.


January 2018 34

Exhibit 5.5: High-level Summary of Model Results – AM Peak Period

Metric 2011

2031 Base 2031 Enhanced

Total % Growth Total

% Growth

Auto Trips (Origin in Durham)

236,950 338,040 +43% 333,090 +41%

Transit Trips (Origin in Durham)

28,470 41,230 +45% 46,450 +63%

Total Trips (Origin in Durham)

265,420 379,270 +43% 379,540 +43%

Transit share 10.7% 10.9% +1% 12.2% +14% DRT Boardings 18,290 36,170 +98% 56,380 +208% DRT Passenger KM 79,740 177,370 +122% 317,530 +298% DRT Passenger hours 2,980 6,660 +123% 11,160 +274% GO Boardings 17,420 22,940 +32% 23,620 +36% Exhibit 5.6: High-level Summary of Model Results – PM Peak Period

Metric 2011

2031 Base 2031 Enhanced

Total % Growth Total

% Growth

Auto Trips (Destination in Durham)

272,790 421,570 +55% 406,920 +49%

Transit Trips (Destination in Durham)

23,250 37,170 +60% 38,030 +64%

Total Trips (Destination in Durham)

296,040 458,730 +55% 444,940 +50%

Transit share 7.9% 8.1% +3% 8.5% +9% DRT Boardings 18,160 39,440 +117% 42,990 +137% DRT Passenger KM 70,130 150,430 +115% 186,860 +166% DRT Passenger hours 2,580 5,830 +125% 6,740 +161% GO Rail Boardings 13,230 15,210 +15% 17,700 +34% The Base and the Enhanced scenarios are intended to bracket the performance of the transportation system based on only committed improvements (low investment) and previously proposed plans (high investment). The Enhanced scenario represents a significant investment, particularly in transit infrastructure.


January 2018 35

6 Proposed 2031 Transit Network 6.1 Assessment Considerations Facilitating a Higher-Order Regional Transit Network in Durham Region requires the examination of candidate corridors and establishing a recommended concept for each. Each corridor concept was developed with the intent of providing a realistic representation of transportation in Durham Region in 2031. The proposed corridors are consistent with the coordinated and comprehensive strategies of the TMP: providing travel mode choices; improving the transportation system; mitigating environmental and community effects, and elevating the role of public transit.

The Region has proposed a vision of Higher-Order Transit on a number of key future transit corridors addressing needs and opportunities across the Region by 2031.These corridors were chosen on the basis of the 2010 Long Term Transit Strategy and expand on the High Frequency Network identified in DRT’s Five Year Service Strategy. The following items were considered to evaluate the appropriate concept for each corridor:

Proposed road widening and new construction projects along the corridor;

Recommendations for rapid transit from the LTTS vision;

Proposed active transportation projects according to the 2012 Regional Cycling Plan;

Projected peak period transit ridership in both the base and enhanced

scenarios;

Projected corridor density within an 800 m radius (population and employment);

Projected auto volume-to-capacity ratios at peak points along the corridor; and

Opportunities and constraints, including: a) Physical feasibility b) Land Use c) Traffic d) Environment e) Accessibility f) Development

The recommended Higher-Order Regional Transit Network consists of a number of hierarchal transit service types, which have been outlined in Exhibit 6.1. Alternative cross-sections were developed for each corridor as a tool to visualize proposed configurations. Cross-sections were developed by incorporating


January 2018 36

proposed road widening projects, if possible, and various forms of transit and active transportation within the available right-of-way (ROW). As a minimum for each corridor, the following transit configurations were considered:

Rapid Transit with exclusive ROW

High Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) Lane

Transit Service in Shared Lane

Exhibit 6.1: Regional Transit Network Types

Transit Service Type

Potential Technologies

Physical Characteristics

Typical Peak Frequency

Typical Capacity (Pass./hr/dir)

Rapid Transit in Exclusive Right-of-Way

Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) or Light Rail Transit (LRT)

Median lanes or dedicated curbside lanes

5 minutes or less

2,000 - 8,000 (BRT)

2,000 - 14,000 (LRT)

High Frequency Bus in HOV Lane

Standard or articulated buses

Typically six lane road with curb lane dedicated to HOV, including transit

5 - 10 minutes

Up to 2,000

High Frequency Bus in Shared Lane

Standard or articulated buses

Mixed traffic with transit priority (Queue Jumps plus signal priority at key intersections)

10 - 20 minutes

Up to 1,000

Other Transit Spines Standard bus or Coach Includes GO Bus corridors

Mixed traffic operations

20 - 60 minutes

Typically 50 seats per bus

Local Transit (Durham Region Transit)

Standard bus or small bus

Mixed traffic operations

15 - 30 minutes

Varies

Based on projected ridership and land use objectives, Highway 2 and Simcoe Street emerge as the highest priority corridors for rapid transit.

Each corridor was individually assessed on addressing critical needs to the existing network and further increasing service based on projected ridership and growth in future development areas. Some of the key transit service improvements include:

Supporting curbside HOV lanes with benefits to the speed and reliability of service, providing semi-exclusive priority to transit service mixed with general traffic


January 2018 37

Increasing transit service to employment areas in southeast Pickering and extending service into Seaton, northward along Whites Road and Brock Road, as well as westward along Taunton Road

Providing direct north-south routes connecting to Pickering and Ajax GO Stations, in addition to future GO Stations, Thornton’s Corners and Central Oshawa

Increasing frequency of routes directly connected to UOIT, Durham College, and Trent University campuses

Expanding service into northeast Oshawa to provide coverage to new greenfield development

Restructuring services into Bowmanville to expand coverage to future growth areas and reduce the size of one-way routes

There are a number of corridors with strong ridership potential that warrant development of or protection for future higher-order transit implementation. The proposed transit designations for key Regional transit corridors are summarized in Exhibit 6.2. Each corridor is presented in further detail in Section 6.2.


January 2018 38

Exhibit 6.2: Specific Designation for Key Regional Transit Corridors

Transit Corridor Limits Rapid Transit (Exclusive ROW)

High Frequency Bus In HOV Lane

High Frequency Bus In Shared Lane

Whites Road Bayly Street to Highway 7 ■ Brock Road Bayly Street to Highway 7 ■ Westney Road Bayly Street to Highway 2 ■

Highway 2 to Taunton Road ■ Harwood Avenue Bayly Street to Highway 2 ■ Brock Street / Baldwin Street

Victoria Street to Thickson Road

■

Thornton Road Thornton’s Corners GO Station to Taunton Road

■

Simcoe Street Olive Avenue (Central Oshawa GO Station) to Highway 407

■

Harmony Road Bloor Street to Highway 407 ■ Bayly Street / Victoria Street / Bloor Street

Whites Road to Pickering GO Station

■

Pickering GO Station to Brock Road

Protect for future ■

Brock Road to Salem Road ■ Salem Road to Harmony Road ■

Highway 2 York Durham Line to Simcoe Street

■

Simcoe Street to Highway 418 Protect for Future ■

Highway 418 to Regional Road 57

■

Rossland Road Highway 7 to Harmony Road ■ Taunton Road York Durham Line to Simcoe

Street ■

Simcoe Street to Harmony Road

Protect for Future ■

Harmony Road to Townline Road

Protect for Future

Highway 7 York Durham Line to Brock Road

■

Winchester Road Brock Street / Baldwin Street to Simcoe Street

■


January 2018 39

In addition to the above, other Transit Spines primarily focused in rural areas of the Region have been identified. Key routes in northern municipalities and Clarington include:

Highway 2, between Regional Road 57 (Bowmanville GO) and Newcastle

Brock Road, between Highway 7 and Uxbridge

Highway 12, between Port Perry and Beaverton

Simcoe Street, between Highway 407 and Port Perry

Highway 47 / Toronto Street, between Uxbridge and York-Durham Line (Lincolnville GO)

Regional Road 8, between Uxbridge and Port Perry

Regional Road 12, between Cannington and Lake Ridge Road (Pefferlaw)

Regional Road 23, between Beaverton and Regional Road 12 (Pefferlaw)

Regional Road 17, between Newcastle and Orono

Highway 35/115, between Highway 401 and Peterborough

Exhibit 6.3 and Exhibit 6.4 illustrate the recommended Higher-Order Regional Transit Network integrated with other forms of higher-order transit in the Region such as the GO Transit rail system and the Provincial Transitways along Highways 407, 412, and 418, as identified in the Highway 407 East EA and the 407 Transitway TPAP EA.

Recognizing that the Transitways are likely beyond 2031, the proposed commuter lots can be implemented as bus transfer stops, park and rides and carpooling facilities at interchanges on an interim basis until they become Transitway stations.


January 2018 40

Exhibit 6.3: Recommended Higher-Order Transit Network


January 2018 41

Exhibit 6.4: Recommended Higher-Order Transit Network (South Enlargement)


January 2018 42

6.2 Transit Corridor Assessments Early in the study process, a transportation vision exercise was undertaken to discuss the future configurations of specific future rapid transit corridors. This workshop was the basis of the initial concept for each corridor to be modelled and assessed. This section of the report documents the need and justification for the higher-order transit corridors that were considered in the TMP. Further studies, particularly for rapid transit projects that require significant capital investment, will be required to complete the Environmental Assessment process for each transit project.

6.2.1 Highway 2

Existing and Future Conditions Highway 2 is an exceptional regional east-west corridor for rapid transit with high projected transit ridership. It is a continuous 40 km corridor connecting five area municipalities, Regional Centres and major employment and population nodes. It provides direct access to the TTC service hub at University of Toronto Scarborough.

DRT’s current PULSE route operates on Highway 2 and benefits from an existing length of reserved bus lanes in Ajax, from Westney Road to Salem Road, and in Pickering, from Liverpool Road to Brock Road, with construction ongoing on additional segments in Pickering and Ajax.

The LTTS identified an ultimate LRT service on Highway 2 from the Toronto-Durham boundary to Courtice Road, with high-frequency bus providing service between Courtice Road and Newcastle.

Buffered cycle lanes exist or are planned for the majority of Highway 2 between Toronto-Durham boundary and Henry Street. East of Henry Street, cycling facilities will be provided on parallel roadways as per the Region’s Primary Cycling Network.

Highway 2 is an attractive regional corridor for rapid transit based on opportunities such as:

High projected transit ridership

Existing frequent transit service with sections of dedicated lanes in Pickering and Ajax

Continuous east-west corridor connecting five area municipalities, population and employment centres, and multiple growth centres

Access to Toronto/Scarborough and University of Toronto Scarborough

Highway 2 also has several constraints that make it a challenging corridor to incorporate rapid transit:


January 2018 43

Narrow 20 m ROW in Downtown Whitby and Downtown Oshawa

Highway 2 becomes a one-way pair in Downtown Oshawa

Market share competition for ridership with GO Train when Regional Express Rail (RER) is implemented with frequent, two-way service

Alternatives Considered Population and employment growth in Durham Region will increase travel demand in the lakeshore municipalities (particularly in Ajax/Pickering), which would lead to a significant level of congestion during the peak periods. To further examine the LTTS-proposed recommendation, a Class EA for Highway 2 Transit Priority Measures was carried out in 2011/2012 to plan for and implement initial modifications to Highway 2 as a first step to implementing the vision of LTTS. Three sections of Highway 2 were designated as ‘transit priority opportunity areas’ in Pickering and Ajax. The Class EA study assessed initial measures (roadway modifications) to implement Bus Rapid Transit in the study corridor.

The Class EA considered four alternative design concepts within a 45 m right-of-way, which included on-road cycling lanes and buffer, sidewalk and boulevard in each direction. The alternatives design concepts were described as:

Alternative 1 – Widen Highway 2 to 6 Lanes for All Traffic

Alternative 2 – Widen Highway 2 for Curbside HOV Lanes (Including Buses)

Alternative 3 – Widen Highway 2 for Dedicated Transit in Curb Lanes

Alternative 4 – Widen Highway 2 for Dedicated Transit in the Median Lanes

Alternative 4 was selected as the preferred alternative for the corridor as median rapid transit operation would offer superior service, reduce lane violation by motorists, reduce friction from right-turning vehicles and remove conflicts with driveways. In the first phase of the project, which is comprised of multiple sections of Highway 2 in Pickering and Ajax only, the Highway 2 corridor uses dedicated curbside lanes. The interim curbside transit lanes facilitated quicker implementation with lower cost for the lower initial ridership and avoided multiple transitions to/from the median between dedicated transit sections. The technology (BRT vs LRT) will be subject to further assessment through more detailed ridership analysis.

Proposed Solution

To provide appropriate transit capacities for Highway 2, buses will operate in exclusive rapid transit lanes between the Toronto-Durham boundary and Simcoe Street, with protection for future service to Highway 418 in the long-term. High Frequency Bus Service in a shared lane has been recommended east of Simcoe Street to Bowmanville GO Station during this interim period. Exhibit 6.5 summarizes key projected features and travel patterns for Highway 2.


January 2018 44

Exhibit 6.5: Highway 2 Corridor Features Transit Type Rapid Transit

Corridor Limits Toronto-Durham Boundary to Simcoe Street

Simcoe Street to Bowmanville GO Station (protect for future rapid transit)

Length 40 km

Projected Transit Ridership in the AM peak hour* (at peak point along corridor)

2031 Base: 1500

2031 Enhanced: 2900

2031 Proposed: 2900

* based on transit peak hour factor of 0.5

This TMP proposes rapid transit service in exclusive lanes from the Toronto-Durham boundary to Simcoe Street (continuous, except for the constrained sections in Pickering Village, downtown Whitby and downtown Oshawa), with protection for a future extension of rapid transit to the Bowmanville GO Station. A phased approach to implementation is suggested, with buses operating in reserved bus lanes initially, until increases in ridership demands require additional transit capacity which could be provided by replacing bus service with light rail transit (LRT). Ridership demands requiring LRT carrying capacity are not anticipated until after 2031.

Future segments of bus-only lanes on Highway 2 should consider protection for median LRT service. The design requirements for LRT are more rigorous and later conversion would be less challenging if LRT standards are used in the initial design of BRT. Segments of Highway 2 which are currently operating with curbside lanes should be converted to median operation when adjacent segments of the corridor are installed; this will create longer exclusive segments, which will improve overall performance.

The proposed vision for Highway 2 is shown conceptually in Exhibit 6.6. Exhibit 6.7 shows components of the Highway 2 corridor that have timeframes beyond 2031.


January 2018 45

Exhibit 6.6: Potential Highway 2 Corridor Cross-sections to 2031

Limits Description Existing Demonstration Concept 1 Toronto-

Durham boundary – Notion Road

Widen to 6/7 lanes with 2 Rapid Transit lanes in exclusive ROW, 4 general purpose lanes, and 1 turning lane.

5 Lanes (36 – 45 m ROW)

7 Lanes (45 m ROW)

2 Notion Road – Rotherglen Road

Rapid Transit will operate with mixed traffic with queue jump lanes

4 Lanes (20 m ROW)

4 Lanes (20 m ROW) Mixed Traffic

3 Rotherglen Road – Cochrane Street

Widen to 6/7 lanes with 2 Rapid Transit lanes in exclusive ROW, 4 general purpose lanes, and 1 turning lane.

4/5 Lanes (36 – 45 m ROW)

7 Lanes (45 m ROW)

4 Cochrane Street – Garden Street

Maintain existing configuration. Rapid transit will operate in priority transit lanes or mixed traffic through downtown Whitby.

2 Lanes + 2 Parking (20 m ROW)

4 Lanes (20 m ROW)


January 2018 46

Limits Description Existing Demonstration Concept 5 Garden

Street – East of Thornton Road

Widen to 6/7 lanes with 2 Rapid Transit lanes in exclusive ROW (curbside or median), 4 general purpose lanes, and 1 turning lane.

5 Lanes (36 – 45 m ROW)

7 Lanes (45 m ROW)

6 East of Thornton Road – Simcoe Street

Rapid transit in curbside ROW with uni-directional travel on one-way street and opposite direction rapid transit on Bond Street.

4 Lanes (20 m ROW) 4 Lanes (20 m ROW)

Source: Existing – Google Maps; Demonstration Concept – streetmix.net


January 2018 47

Exhibit 6.7: Proposed Highway 2 Corridor Cross-sections beyond 2031

Limits Description Existing Demonstration Concept 1 Simcoe

Street – Harmony Road

Maintain existing configuration with High Frequency Bus service operating with mixed traffic. Protect for future widening and Rapid Transit Service east of Simcoe Street.

4 Lanes (36 m ROW)

4 Lanes (36 m ROW) Mixed Traffic

2 Harmony Road – Highway 418

Maintain existing configuration with High Frequency Bus service operating with mixed traffic. Protect for future widening and Rapid Transit Service between Simcoe Street and Highway 418

4/5 Lanes (36 m ROW)

4/5 Lanes (36 m ROW) Mixed Traffic

Source: Existing – Google Maps; Demonstration Concept – streetmix.net


January 2018 48

6.2.2 Simcoe Street

Existing and Future Conditions Simcoe Street is an ideal corridor for rapid transit based on its access to major generators of transit trips including UOIT/Durham College, Downtown Oshawa, Lakeridge Health Oshawa, the future Central Oshawa GO Station (designated as a Mobility Hub by Metrolinx), and the Windfields Regional Centre in north Oshawa. There are mixed land uses along the 9.5 km corridor and significant potential for new development.

The roadway includes several sections with narrow ROWs where widening would be a challenge and a one-way section between Olive Avenue and Elgin Street that accommodates northbound travel only (with the corresponding southbound travel on the parallel Centre Street) and on-street parking between Elm Street and Colborne Street.

A Municipal Class Environmental Assessment was completed in 2014 for Simcoe Street between Conlin Road and Winchester Road. The recommended solution was for an ultimate 6-lane cross-section with a raised median which could also accommodate rapid transit in exclusive lanes. The currently planned road widening for the section between Conlin Road and Winchester Road is for a 5-lane cross-section with pedestrian improvements and a multi-use path.

The LTTS envisioned LRT in an exclusive ROW along Simcoe Street between the future Central Oshawa GO Station and Highway 407. Reconfiguring Simcoe Street to accommodate dedicated rapid transit lanes will be challenging due to the limited ROW through several portions of the corridor in central Oshawa. The overall benefits of improving the corridor’s streetscape, increasing person-carrying capacity and providing improved connections to major trip generators are needed to support overall growth in Durham.

Simcoe Street is an attractive regional corridor for rapid transit based on opportunities such as:

Access to UOIT/Durham College, Oshawa central business district, Central Oshawa GO Station/Metrolinx Mobility Hub, Future North Oshawa Urban Growth Centre

Mix of land uses along corridor

Development potential along corridor Simcoe Street has several constraints that make it a challenging corridor to incorporate rapid transit, namely;

Limited ROW available for dedicated transit facilities (i.e. stations; shelters)

Narrow 20 m ROW between Olive Avenue and Adelaide Avenue


January 2018 49

One-way street (northbound) operation between Olive Avenue and Elgin Street (with the parallel Centre Street carrying one-way southbound traffic)

On-street parking between Elm Street and Colborne Street

Alternatives Considered The TMP examined several alternatives for Simcoe Street including transit in mixed traffic lanes, widening for median or curbside transit-only lanes, and an alternative that would convert existing traffic lanes to transit-only lanes through constrained sections. The analysis demonstrated that an option that provides for dedicated rapid transit lanes, even with the corresponding capacity for private vehicles reduced to two lanes plus left turn lanes, would provide significantly greater person carrying capacity than the existing configuration. Projected ridership for transit in the transit-only lane (approx. 1,200 passenger/hr) would exceed the typical volume that is accommodated in a general purpose traffic lane.

Proposed Solution The TMP proposes Simcoe Street as a rapid transit corridor with exclusive lanes between Olive Avenue (future Central Oshawa GO station) and Highway 407, with potential for a northerly extension to connect to the Future North Oshawa Growth Centre. Exhibit 6.8 summarizes key features and travel characteristics for Simcoe Street.

Exhibit 6.8: Simcoe Street Corridor Features

Transit Type Rapid Transit (exclusive ROW)

Corridor Limits Olive Avenue – Highway 407

Length 9.5 km


2031 Base: 1200 2031 Enhanced: 1300 2031 Proposed: 1300


Subject to confirmation through a future EA study, Simcoe Street will be widened, where possible, to a maximum of 5 lanes with 2 lanes dedicated to transit. The right-of-way challenges at ‘pinch-points’ in central Oshawa resulted in the decision to convert an existing general purpose lane to a reserved bus-only rapid transit lane. From Olive Avenue to Adelaide Avenue, in the one-way section, one lane of parking will be converted to a curbside reserved bus lane. North of Adelaide Avenue, in sections where Simcoe Street already has a 5-lane cross-section, an existing general purpose lane will be converted to a reserved bus-only lane. Where Simcoe Street currently has a 4-lane cross-section, it will be widened to accommodate five lanes with two of those lanes reserved for buses.


January 2018 50

Although vehicle capacity on Simcoe Street will be somewhat reduced, ridership on the Simcoe transit route is one of the highest in Durham, and the peak hour ridership would exceed the typical person-carrying capacity of a general purpose lane. Additionally, increased north-south vehicle capacity is proposed on parallel arterials on sections of Stevenson Road, Ritson Road and Harmony Road which would help to offset the reduced vehicle capacity on Simcoe Street.

Reconfiguring Simcoe Street to accommodate dedicated rapid transit lanes will be a major transformation of the corridor and significant benefits to the overall street environment and pedestrian realm could be realized.

Vehicle technology is subject to further assessment through more detailed ridership analysis; however, a phased implementation approach is suggested, with buses operating in reserved bus lanes until at least 2031 (appropriate based on projected peak ridership of 1,200 passengers in the peak hour). Ultimately, the Region could create additional transit capacity, if needed, by converting the corridor to LRT.

Taking into consideration the opportunities and constraints noted above, the proposed vision for Simcoe Street is shown conceptually in Exhibit 6.9. The final configuration of the corridor will be determined through a future EA study.


January 2018 51

Exhibit 6.9: Proposed Simcoe Street Corridor Cross-Sections

Limits Description Existing Demonstration Concept 1 Olive

Avenue – Adelaide Avenue

For the one-way section, convert one lane of parking to a curbside reserved rapid transit lane. Maintain 3 travel lanes during peak periods, and 2 travel lanes plus 1 parking lane during off peak periods. In addition, pedestrian realm improvements will be made to support rapid transit facilities. Rapid transit will operate in a uni-directional (northbound) configuration in the one-way section with the southbound rapid transit operating along the parallel one-way section of Centre Street with one lane converted to a reserved rapid transit lane.

4 Lanes One-Way (20 m ROW)

4 Lanes One-Way (20 m ROW)

2 Adelaide Avenue – Beatrice Street

Widen to 5 lanes with 2 curbside rapid transit lanes, 2 general purpose travel lanes, and 1 median turning lane.

5 Lanes (33 m ROW)


January 2018 52

Limits Description Existing Demonstration Concept 4 Lanes (20 m ROW)

3 Beatrice Street – Taunton Road

Convert two curbside general purpose travel lanes to curbside reserved rapid transit lanes. This will leave 2 travel lanes for general purpose travel and 1 median turning lane.

5 Lanes (26 m ROW)

5 Lanes (33 m ROW) 4 Taunton

Road – Oshawa Creek

Widen to 5 lanes with 2 curbside reserved rapid transit lanes, 2 general purpose travel lanes, and 1 median turning lane. A multi-use path will also be accommodated in the boulevard.

4 Lanes (33 m ROW)

5 Lanes (33 ROW)

5 Oshawa Creek – Conlin Road

Convert two curbside general purpose travel lanes to curbside reserved rapid transit lanes. A multi-use path will also be accommodated in the boulevard.

5 Lanes (33 m ROW)

5 Lanes (33 m ROW)


January 2018 53

Limits Description Existing Demonstration Concept 6 Conlin Road

– Winchester Road

Widen to 5 lanes with 2 curbside reserved rapid transit lanes, 2 general purpose travel lanes, and 1 median turning lane. A boulevard multi-use path will also be accommodated within the right-of-way. Ultimately, widen to 6 lanes with a raised median, including 2 reserved rapid transit lanes.

2 Lanes (40-45 m ROW)

5 Lanes (40-45 m ROW)


January 2018 54

6.2.3 Taunton Road

Existing and Future Conditions Taunton Road is one of the major east-west arterial corridors in south Durham, currently consisting of 4/5 lanes from York-Durham Line to Townline Road. Roadway expansion to 6/7 lanes with a multi-use path is recommended from York-Durham Line to Simcoe Street. The proposed cross-section will consist of 2 HOV lanes, 4 general purpose travel lanes, and, where possible, 1 median turning lane. The HOV lanes will be available to transit vehicles and private vehicles with 2 or more passengers.

The LTTS envisioned BRT in exclusive lanes on Taunton Road between York-Durham Line and Whites Road and LRT in exclusive lanes between Whites Road and Simcoe Street. Current projections for transit ridership in 2031 do not meet the thresholds for rapid transit.

Taunton Road is an attractive regional corridor for higher-order transit based on opportunities such as:

Continuous east-west corridor connecting multiple municipalities, growth centres, and providing access to York Region

High travel demands on the corridor

Planned development in north urban areas of Pickering, Ajax, Whitby and Oshawa

Taunton Road also has several constraints that make it a challenging corridor to incorporate higher-order transit:

Physical constraints and narrow ROW between Oshawa Creek and Simcoe Street

Railway overpass widening required at Harwood Avenue

Limited density or intensification potential along corridor with major open space area and designated greenbelt on the north side of the corridor between Brock Road and Lake Ridge Road

Alternatives Considered The TMP examined several alternatives for Taunton Road including transit in mixed traffic lanes, transit in HOV lanes, and transit in median or curbside transit-only lanes.

Proposed Solution Taunton Road is proposed to be a High Frequency Transit corridor where transit is accommodated in designated HOV/transit lanes from York-Durham Line to Simcoe Street, with opportunities for improving pedestrian conditions and transit stop amenities in the shorter term. Future higher-order transit service east of Simcoe Street to Townline Road is proposed for beyond 2031 and ROW should


January 2018 55

be protected for future expansion. Exhibit 6.10 summarizes key project features and travel characteristics for Taunton Road.

Exhibit 6.10: Taunton Road Corridor Features

Transit Type High Frequency Bus Service in HOV Lane

Corridor Limits York-Durham Line to Simcoe Street

Length 25.5 km




A phased approach is recommended. As capacity improvements are required, the HOV lane can be converted from HOV2+ to HOV3+ (i.e. for vehicles with 3 or more passengers only) or, ultimately, to a reserved bus-only lane for rapid transit.

Taking into consideration the opportunities and constraints, the proposed vision for Taunton Road is described in Exhibit 6.11.

Exhibit 6.11: Proposed Taunton Road Corridor Cross-sections

Limits Description 1 York Durham Line –

Thickson Road Widen to 6/7 lanes with 2 curbside HOV lanes, 4 general purpose travel lanes, and 1 median lane. A multi-use path will also be accommodated in the boulevard.

2 Thickson Road – Oshawa Creek

Widen to 6/7 lanes with 2 curbside HOV lanes, 4 general purpose travel lanes, and 1 median lane. A multi-use path will also be accommodated in the boulevard.

3 Oshawa Creek – Simcoe Street

Maintain existing configuration (4 general purpose lanes and 1 median lane except across bridge). Buses will operate in mixed traffic over bridge which is constrained by a 30 m ROW. A multi-use path will also be accommodated in the boulevard.

4 Simcoe Street – Townline Road

Protect for future widening to 6/7 lanes with 2 curbside HOV lanes, 4 general purpose travel lanes, and 1 median lane. A multi-use path will also be accommodated in the boulevard.


January 2018 56

6.2.4 Whites Road

Existing and Future Conditions Whites Road is a major 4/5 lane arterial south of Finch Avenue. North of Finch Avenue, Whites Road is a 2-lane rural road that ends at Taunton Road. With the development of Central Pickering (Seaton), Whites Road will be realigned and extended northerly as an urban arterial road to Highway 7.

The LTTS envisioned transit on Whites Road as BRT in an exclusive ROW between Bayly Street and Highway 7.

Within the 2031 planning horizon, Whites Road is planned to be widened to include designated lanes for HOVs and buses. If additional person-carrying capacity is required, the HOV lane can be converted to an HOV3+ (i.e. 3 or more passengers only) and ultimately to a reserved bus-only lane.

Whites Road is an attractive regional corridor for higher-order transit based on opportunities such as:

Supports development of north urban area of Pickering and the future Pickering International Airport

Addresses projected capacity deficiencies in Pickering north-south sub-area

Sufficient ROW to accommodate HOV/bus lanes Whites Road also has constraints that make it a challenging corridor to incorporate higher-order transit:

Limited intensification or development potential in already built up neighbourhoods

Low to modest projected ridership

Alternatives Considered The TMP examined several alternatives for Whites Road including transit in mixed traffic lanes, transit in HOV lanes, and transit in median or curbside transit-only lanes.

Proposed Solution Whites Road is proposed as a transit corridor with continuous curbside HOV lanes from Bayly Street to Highway 7. Dedicated HOV/transit lanes will enable reliable, higher-frequency transit service on the corridor. This is in keeping with the recommended configuration for Whites Road in the Central Pickering Development Plan (CPDP) Class EA study for a 6-lane cross-section with dedicated transit lanes (which were defined as reserved bus lanes or HOV lanes in the EA). Exhibit 6.12 summarizes key project features and travel characteristics for Whites Road.


January 2018 57

Exhibit 6.12: Whites Road Corridor Features

Transit Type High Frequency Bus in HOV Lane

Corridor Limits Bayly Street to Highway 7

Length 11.2 km




The proposed vision for Whites Road is presented in Exhibit 6.13.

Exhibit 6.13: Proposed Whites Road Corridor Cross-sections

Limits Description 1 Kingston Road –

Finch Avenue Widen from 5 to 6/7 lanes with 2 curbside HOV lanes and 4 general purpose travel lanes. A multi-use path will also be accommodated in the boulevard.

2 Finch Avenue – 3rd Concession Road

Widen from 2 to 6 lanes with 2 curbside HOV lanes and 4 general purpose travel lanes. A multi-use path will also be accommodated in the boulevard.

3 3rd Concession Road – Taunton Road

Construct new alignment of Whites Road to 6 lanes with 2 curbside HOV lanes and 4 general purpose travel lanes. A multi-use path will also be accommodated in the boulevard.

4 Taunton Road – Highway 7

Construct new alignment of Whites Road to 6 lanes with 2 curbside HOV lanes and 4 general purpose travel lanes. Buffered cycle lanes will be accommodated within the pavement width.

6.2.5 Brock Road

Existing and Future Conditions Brock Road is a north-south arterial roadway connecting the area around downtown Pickering to the northern rural areas. Brock Road changes from a 5-lane roadway south of Concession Road 3 to a 2-lane roadway north of Concession Road 3. With the recent extension of Hwy 407 East, Brock Road north of Whitevale Road has been widened to 4 lanes and a Brougham by-pass has been constructed.

The Brock Road corridor connects two future transit stations – a future Seaton GO Rail station at Brock Road and Taunton Road and a future Highway 407 Transitway station at the intersection of Brock Road and Highway 407. As Seaton develops as a transit-supportive community, Brock Road will be the main


January 2018 58

transit corridor connecting development to the new transit stations, downtown Pickering, Hwy 2 rapid transit and Pickering GO station.

Expansion of Brock Road has been identified for an ultimate 6-lane cross section providing connectivity from Downtown Pickering to Central Pickering and Highway 407. This widening will accommodate the introduction of HOV lanes in the short term with the potential to convert to reserved bus lanes in the longer term. The LTTS envisioned BRT in an exclusive ROW from Bayly Street to Highway 407 and protection for future higher-order transit from Highway 407 to 7th Concession Road.

Brock Road is an attractive regional corridor that will accommodate High Frequency Bus services in HOV Lane based on opportunities such as:

Supports development of north urban area of Pickering and the future Pickering International Airport

Addresses projected capacity deficiencies in Pickering north-south sub-area

Wide ROW Brock Road also has several constraints that make it a challenging corridor to incorporate rapid transit:

Limited intensification or development potential in already built up neighbourhoods

Low to modest projected ridership

Alternatives Considered The TMP examined several alternatives for Brock Road including transit in mixed traffic lanes, transit in HOV lanes, and transit in median or curbside transit-only lanes.

Proposed Solution Brock Road is recommended as a higher-order transit spine with continuous curbside HOV lanes between Bayly Street and Highway 7. As per the recommendations for all Type A arterials in the CPDP study area, Brock Road will include two curbside HOV/transit lanes (defined as reserved bus lanes or HOV lanes in the EA) within a 6 lane cross-section. Exhibit 6.14summarizes key project features and travel characteristics for Brock Road.


January 2018 59

Exhibit 6.14: Brock Road Corridor Features

Transit Type High Frequency Bus in HOV Lane

Corridor Limits Bayly Street to Highway 7

Length 10.5 km




Brock Road will undergo a phased execution with the first phase requiring widening along its existing alignment to 4 lanes. The ultimate 6-lane cross section, with HOV/transit lanes, will accommodate long-term transportation needs in Seaton’s employment and residential lands.

The proposed vision for Brock Road is summarized in Exhibit 6.15.

Exhibit 6.15: Proposed Brock Road Corridor Cross-sections

Limits Description 1 Bayly Street – Kingston

Road (Hwy 2) Widen from 5 to 6/7 lanes with 2 curbside HOV lanes and 4 general purpose travel lanes.

2 Kingston Road (Hwy 2) – Rossland Road

Widen from 5 to 6/7 lanes with 2 curbside HOV lanes and 4 general purpose travel lanes.

3 Rossland Road – Taunton Road


4 Taunton Road – Highway 407


5 Highway 407 – Highway 7


6.2.6 Westney Road

Existing and Future Conditions Westney Road is a four lane north-south arterial road between Highway 2 (Kingston Road) and Bayly Street with an underpass of Highway 401 and CN Rail. The Westney Road corridor provides access to the Ajax GO station. The LTTS envisioned Westney Road to have enhanced conventional transit with transit priority and frequent service. The Highway 2 BRT Environmental Assessment also defined Westney Road as part of a major transit priority opportunity area.

Expansion to a 6/7 lane cross-section with HOV lanes is recommended in the TMP to support growth and address capacity deficiencies in south Ajax.


January 2018 60

Alternatives Considered The TMP examined several alternatives for Westney Road including transit in mixed traffic lanes, transit in HOV lanes, and transit in median or curbside transit-only lanes.

Proposed Solution Providing frequent access to the Ajax GO Station, the recommended alternative for Westney Road is for frequent bus service in HOV/transit lanes between Bayly Street and Highway 2. High frequency bus service in mixed traffic will be implemented north of Highway 2 to Taunton Road. Exhibit 6.16 summarizes key corridor features and travel characteristics for Westney Road.

Exhibit 6.16: Westney Road Corridor Features

Transit Type High Frequency Bus in HOV Lane; High Frequency Bus in Shared Lane

Corridor Limits Bayly Street to Highway 2 (HOV Lane) Highway 2 to Taunton Road (Shared Lane)

Length 6.2 km




The proposed vision for Westney Road is summarized in Exhibit 6.17.

Exhibit 6.17: Proposed Westney Road Corridor Cross-sections

Limits Description 1 Bayly Street – Kingston

Road (Hwy 2) Widen from 5 to 6/7 lanes with 2 curbside HOV lanes, 4 general purpose travel lanes, and 1 turning lane. A multi-use path will also be accommodated in the boulevard.

2 Kingston Road (Hwy 2) – Delaney Drive

No widening required; maintain 4 general purpose lanes with 2 lanes servicing High Frequency Bus in Shared Lane.

3 Delaney Drive – Taunton Road

Widen from 2 to 5 lanes with 4 general purpose lanes, 2 lanes servicing High Frequency Bus in Shared Lane.


January 2018 61

6.2.7 Bayly Street / Victoria Street / Bloor Street

Existing and Future Conditions Bayly Street / Victoria Street / Bloor Street is the only major east-west arterial south of Highway 401. The 4/5 lane corridor connects Pickering GO Station, Downtown Ajax, Whitby GO Station and Oshawa GO Station.

Expansion to a 6/7 lane cross-section with HOV/transit lanes is proposed from Liverpool Road to Salem Road. Through Ajax and Whitby, the corridor mainly has a 4/5 lane cross-section, with the section from east of Brock Street to Stevenson Road planned for expansion to 4/5 lanes including a realignment west of Thickson Road.

The LTTS envisioned an enhanced conventional transit service on Bayly Street / Victoria Street / Bloor Street with BRT between Whites Road and Brock Road (serving the Pickering GO Station) and protection for future BRT on the section east of Brock Road to Courtice Road.

Bayly Street / Victoria Street / Bloor Street is an attractive regional corridor for rapid transit based on opportunities such as:

Connections to Pickering, Ajax, Whitby and Oshawa GO Stations

High east-west travel demands

Supports development in south Pickering, Ajax Downtown Regional Centre, south Whitby and south Oshawa

Alternatives Considered The TMP examined several alternatives for Bayly Street / Victoria Street / Bloor Street including transit in mixed traffic lanes, transit in HOV lanes, and median or curbside transit-only lanes.

Proposed Solution Higher-order regional transit service of varying degrees is proposed for the Bayly Street / Victoria Street / Bloor Street corridor. This includes High-Frequency Bus service in mixed traffic between Whites Road and Liverpool Road; High-Frequency Bus Service in HOV/transit lanes between Liverpool Road and Salem Road; and High-Frequency Bus service in mixed traffic east of Salem Road to Harmony Road. Protection for long-term implementation of future rapid transit service in exclusive transit lanes is recommended between Brock Road and the Pickering GO Station to accommodate future growth and development in the Pickering Urban Growth Centre.

Exhibit 6.18 summarizes key project features and travel characteristics for Bayly Street / Victoria Street / Bloor Street.


January 2018 62

Exhibit 6.18: Bayly Street / Victoria Street / Bloor Street Corridor Features

Transit Type High Frequency Bus in HOV Lane; High Frequency Bus in Shared Lane

Corridor Limits Whites Road to Liverpool Road (Shared Lane) Liverpool Road to Salem Road (HOV Lane) Salem Road to Harmony Road (Shared Lane)

Length 25 km




The proposed transit service provides a high level of connectivity and access to Pickering and Ajax GO, the Downtown Ajax, and employment lands in south Pickering and Ajax, as well as Whitby GO, Oshawa GO, and a major employment area in south Whitby/Oshawa.

Taking into consideration the opportunities and constraints, the proposed vision for Bayly Street / Victoria Street / Bloor Street is shown in Exhibit 6.19.

Exhibit 6.19: Proposed Bayly Street-Victoria Street-Bloor Street Corridor Cross-sections

Limits Description 1 Whites Road – Pickering GO

Station 4 general purpose lanes with High Frequency bus service in shared curbside lane.

3 Pickering GO Station – Brock Road

Widen to 6/7 lanes with High Frequency bus service in curbside HOV lane. Protect for rapid transit (exclusive ROW) beyond 2031.

4 Brock Road – Salem Road Widen to 6/7 lanes with High Frequency bus service in curbside HOV lane.

5 Salem Road – Harmony Road 4/5 general purpose lanes with High Frequency bus service in shared curbside lane.


January 2018 63

6.2.8 Other High Frequency Corridors

Rossland Road As a minor transit corridor, Rossland Road will include High Frequency Bus service in mixed traffic and utilize transit-focused techniques such as Transit Signal Priority measures and queue-jump lanes. The new alignment for Rossland Road through the Seaton community will transform the roadway into a north-south 4 lane arterial road, including 2 lanes per direction for general purpose traffic with mixed-traffic transit operations. The Rossland Road extension will also provide better connectivity with other high-order transit routes including: Highway 407 Transitway, Taunton Road, Brock Road and Westney Road.

Exhibit 6.20 summarizes key project features and travel characteristics for Rossland Road.

Exhibit 6.20: Rossland Road Corridor Features

Transit Type High Frequency Bus in Shared Lane

Corridor Limits Highway 7 to Harmony Road

Length 28 km




Harwood Avenue The LTTS envisioned BRT on Harwood Avenue in an exclusive ROW between Westney Road and Taunton Road with a mix of conventional and priority transit north of Taunton Road to the North East Pickering Future Growth Area.

Harwood Avenue has several constraints that make it a challenging corridor to incorporate rapid transit:

Low projected ridership

Existing mature trees and landscaping in median boulevard

Limited development and intensification potential along corridor

Alignment of rapid transit between Kingston Road and Rossland Road uncertain

The proposed solution is for High Frequency Bus service on Harwood Avenue between Bayly Street and Kingston Road to serve the Ajax Downtown and Ajax Midtown Regional Centres, with Westney Road becoming the main transit corridor that will be used to service North East Pickering Future Growth Area and Ajax GO Station. This recommendation is in accordance with DRT’s Five


January 2018 64

Year Strategy to include Harwood Avenue as part of the Region’s High Frequency Network. The Highway 2 BRT Environmental Assessment includes Harwood Avenue as part of one of the Region’s major priority transit opportunity areas.

Exhibit 6.21 summarizes key project features and travel characteristics for Harwood Avenue.

Exhibit 6.21: Harwood Avenue Corridor Features


Corridor Limits Bayly Street – Highway 2

Length 2 km




Brock Street / Baldwin Street Brock Street/Baldwin Street is the primary north-south corridor in Whitby, connecting three Regional Centres (Whitby GO Station, downtown Whitby, Brooklin) and designated employment areas. Between Highway 401 and Rossland Road, Brock Street is under the jurisdiction of the Town of Whitby. From Rossland Road to the south limit of Highway 407, Brock Street/Baldwin Street is under Regional jurisdiction, and from there northerly, it is under Provincial jurisdiction as Highway 12, then 7/12 north of Winchester Road/Highway 7. In Downtown Whitby, Brock Street is physically constrained with historic buildings abutting both sides of the 20 m ROW and operationally limited by on-street parking.

The LTTS envisioned BRT operating in exclusive lanes on Brock Street / Baldwin Street between Whitby GO Station and Highway 7. The current analysis indicates that a High Frequency Bus corridor in shared lanes is more appropriate within the 2031 planning horizon, reflecting current growth and ridership projections. However, downtown Whitby presents a pinch point for reliable high-frequency transit service and the Town will need to consider operational or physical options through this location to improve service reliability if transit delays become excessive.

Exhibit 6.22 summarizes key projected features and travel characteristics for Brock Street/ Baldwin Street.


January 2018 65

Exhibit 6.22: Brock Street/Baldwin Street Corridor Features


Corridor Limits Whitby GO Station – Thickson Road / Brawley Road

Length 15 km




Thornton Road High Frequency Bus Service operated in mixed traffic lanes has been proposed for Thornton Road between the future Thornton’s Corners GO Station at the Consumers Drive extension and Taunton Road.

The LTTS did not envision higher-order transit along Thornton Road, as it recommended enhanced transit service on the adjacent Stevenson Road corridor instead. Thornton Road is proposed as an alternative to the route on Stevenson Road as it provides a better link to the future Thornton’s Corners GO station, Trent University campus, UOIT/Durham College campus and related employment lands north of Taunton. The corridor also provides a better link to Durham College Whitby campus and related employment lands in the south, while avoiding the road network discontinuity due to the Oshawa Airport.

Exhibit 6.23 summarizes key projected features and travel characteristics for Thornton Road.

Exhibit 6.23: Thornton Road Corridor Features


Corridor Limits Thornton’s Corner GO Station to Taunton Road

Length 5.2 km




January 2018 66

Harmony Road Harmony Road is proposed for High Frequency Bus service operated in mixed traffic lanes between Bloor Street and Highway 407. The service provides a connection between residential areas in north and central Oshawa, commercial areas, and employment areas in south Oshawa with the potential to connect to the potential future East Oshawa GO station on Bloor Street east of Harmony Road.

Exhibit 6.24 summarizes key projected features and travel characteristics for Harmony Road.

Exhibit 6.24: Harmony Road Corridor Features


Corridor Limits Bloor Street to Highway 407

Length 11 km



Highway 7 / Winchester Road The LTTS envisioned Highway 7 (York-Durham Line to Brock Road) and Winchester Road (Baldwin Street to Simcoe Street) as bus rapid transit corridors, with protection for future rapid transit to connect between Brock Road and Baldwin Street.

High Frequency Bus service in shared lanes is proposed for Highway 7 (York-Durham Line to Brock Road) connecting York Region, development in Central Pickering, and connecting to High Frequency Bus service on Whites Road and Brock Road. Highway 7 is under the jurisdiction of the Province.

High Frequency Bus service in shared lanes is also proposed for Winchester Road (from Baldwin Street to Simcoe Street) providing connections to planned development in north Whitby and Oshawa, and connecting to the proposed rapid transit corridor on Simcoe Street.

Exhibit 6.25 summarizes key projected features and travel characteristics for Highway 7 and Winchester Road.


January 2018 67

Exhibit 6.25: Highway 7/Winchester Road Corridor Features


Corridor Limits Highway 7 - York Durham Line to Brock Road; Winchester Road - Baldwin Street to Simcoe Street

Length 12.5 km



6.3 GO Transit GO Transit’s rail service will continue to play a major role in serving mobility needs in Durham, particularly as congestion on Highway 401 to/from Toronto increases. There are also opportunities for GO Rail to provide improved transit options for trips within Durham Region through service and infrastructure upgrades on the Lakeshore East Corridor and potential new GO Rail lines.

In 2011, GO Rail accounted for 44% of all Durham transit boardings in the morning peak period and over 80% of morning peak transit trips destined to Downtown Toronto. Exhibit 6.26 illustrates GO Rail passenger volumes for the four current stations in Durham and the other five Toronto stations on the Lakeshore East Line. Over the 5 year period from 2008 to 2013, ridership increased significantly at the Oshawa, Whitby and Ajax GO Stations. This growth was the result of service improvements, the construction of new parking garages at Whitby and Ajax and overall population growth. Increasing congestion on Highway 401 likely also induced some of the ridership increases.

This section provides an assessment of existing and potential GO Rail corridors and analysis to support Durham’s recommended position on GO Rail network and service improvements.


January 2018 68

Exhibit 6.26: Daily GO Rail Boardings by Station on Lakeshore East Line

Source: GO Rail Cordon Counts, 2008 and 2013

6.3.1 Lakeshore East Corridor The extension of GO Rail to Central Oshawa and further east to Bowmanville has significant transportation and mobility benefits. Currently, GO Rail’s Lakeshore East line terminates at Oshawa GO Station on Bloor Street at Thornton Road. The Big Move (2008) identified the potential easterly extension of the Lakeshore East line to Bowmanville in the 15-year plan. In June 2016, the Province announced funding to expand GO Rail service to Bowmanville on the CP rail line by 2024 with four new stations: Thornton’s Corners, Central Oshawa, Courtice and Bowmanville.

The 2011 Environmental Assessment and Preliminary Design Study for the expansion of GO Rail to Bowmanville included one potential additional station: Oshawa East on Bloor Street west of Grandview Street. This additional station was included in the Regional Official Plan, but is not part of the initial Lakeshore East extension as the 2011 EA study concluded that it is not currently feasible due to floodplain issues.

In 2015 the Province announced the introduction of Regional Express Rail (RER). RER will implement 15-minute two-way all day service on the Lakeshore East GO line from Union Station to Oshawa within ten years. Current plans are to electrify the Lakeshore East corridor as far as the existing Oshawa GO station, which will continue to receive GO Rail service after the introduction of service to Bowmanville on the CP line. Ideally, electrified service would extend to the proposed Central Oshawa Station and perhaps further east; however at present CP Rail does not permit electrified service on its corridors. This will be a significant increase in GO Rail service in the off-peak periods (evenings, midday and weekends) but is similar to current service levels in the weekday rush hour

0

2000

4000

6000

8000

10000

12000

14000

Dai

ly V

olum

es (o

ns +

offs

)

2008 2013


January 2018 69

periods (current train frequency between 15-20 minutes). For the assessment of the peak period demands, the impact of RER will be limited.

To assess the benefits of the GO Rail extension, a series of network alternatives were tested. Given the complexities of the transit network in the Durham Model, the three alternative networks were modelled as variations of the 2031 Enhanced Network which included an extension of GO Rail to Bowmanville as per the 2011 EA.

Option 1: Lakeshore East terminates at existing Oshawa Station (Do Nothing)

Option 2: Extension of Lakeshore East to Bowmanville via Oshawa Downtown (equivalent of 2031 Enhanced Network)

Option 3: Extension of Lakeshore East to Oshawa Downtown only A summary of the ridership impacts are presented in Exhibit 6.27. As expected, the full extension of the line to Bowmanville via Central Oshawa results in the highest ridership increases. This extension would result in 1,700 more riders on GO Rail, an increase of 7.5% over the base case. While some of these riders would shift over from GO bus, modelling shows that a large majority would be new riders transferring from automobiles.

Exhibit 6.27: GO Rail Trips from Durham during AM Peak Period

Extension Scenario

GO Rail Trips From Durham (AM Peak Period) Change in Trips

Existing 20,700 2031 Base 22,900 Full Extension to Bowmanville via Oshawa Downtown 24,600 +1,700 +7.5% Extension to Oshawa Downtown only 23,625 +725 +3%

Source: DRTPM

6.3.2 Seaton GO Rail The Metrolinx Regional Transportation Plan identifies a new GO Rail extension to Seaton in the 15 year plan (see Exhibit 6.28). This service would essentially be a new service starting out in Downtown Toronto and extending east into Durham on the CP Belleville Subdivision. One of the key challenges with this service is that it runs through CP’s Agincourt rail yard, one of the busier rail yards in the GTHA with limited capacity.

Extension of GO Rail to Seaton is a high priority for Durham given its ability to provide transit alternatives for an ultimate population up to 70,000 and 35,000 jobs.


January 2018 70

A potential emerging opportunity to enable the Seaton GO Rail service is the “Missing Link” rail corridor. The Missing Link is a new rail corridor linking the CN bypass line at Bramalea with the CP through route near the Milton-Mississauga border. Although the Missing Link is in the west end of the GTHA, it has potential widespread implications for existing and future GO Rail corridors. By consolidating CN and CP mainline corridors on the York Subdivision, it reduces a number of bottlenecks in CP’s system that exist in Toronto. It also frees up the CP line through east Toronto making it easier to provide GO Rail service. Potential implications of the Missing Link are shown in Exhibit 6.29.

At this point the Missing Link is a concept being studied by the Provincial and Federal Governments.

Exhibit 6.28: Metrolinx 15 Year Plan and Seaton GO Rail


January 2018 71

Exhibit 6.29: Future Rail Lines Enabled by the “Missing Link”

Map Source: Feasibility Study and Business Case of Constructing the Missing Link, IBI Group, August 2015.

6.3.3 GO Rail Extension to Uxbridge GO Rail service on the Stouffville line is currently provided to Lincolnville Station, which is just north of Stouffville. This rail line continues northeasterly through Goodwood and ultimately to Uxbridge but is not currently in active service. Extension of the Stouffville GO service to Uxbridge has been identified as a potential option, but would require major upgrades to the track infrastructure. As such it is considered as a very long term option. One of the challenges with this line is that there are no major communities between Stouffville and Uxbridge that would generate ridership, and growth in Uxbridge is constrained by servicing and the Greenbelt.

6.3.4 Future Service on the Havelock Subdivision Plans for the introduction of service on the CP Havelock Subdivision, which would serve the future Pickering Airport and northern areas of Whitby, Oshawa and Clarlington, have not been included in The Big Move 25 year plan. Major constraints include the Greenbelt and Oak Ridges Moraine protection that prevents development in the lands around the rail corridor, the need for major capital investments for corridor upgrades, and current track speeds cannot handle passenger rail requirements. It is recommended that the corridor be protected for future implementation of passenger service, serving growth in the


January 2018 72

northern parts of the Pickering, Whitby, Oshawa, Clarington, Port Perry and, ultimately, City of Peterborough.

6.3.5 Future Protection for High Speed Rail The introduction of High Speed Rail service in the Quebec City-Windsor corridor has been considered for many years but never implemented. VIA Rail is currently examining the possibility of providing high-speed rail service on CP’s Havelock subdivision which traverses through northern Pickering, Whitby, and Oshawa. VIA Rail currently provides service to Durham through the shared GO / VIA station in south Oshawa.


January 2018 73

7 Transit Needs Beyond 2031 7.1 Population and Employment Forecasts The current Regional Official Plan allocates growth to 2031. In order to establish network needs beyond 2031, a preliminary forecast of the “full build-out” of anticipated development areas was developed by Region staff. This scenario is indicative of growth to 2056. It is noted that it does not include detailed allocation of population and employment due to intensification of existing areas. The resultant forecasts are shown in Exhibit 7.1.

Exhibit 7.1: Population and Employment Growth Beyond 2031

Population 2031

Employment 2031

Future Growth Areas Population 2056

Future Growth Areas Employment 2056

Population 2056

Employment 2056

Pickering 188,600 80,780 61,250 19,790 249,840 100,560 Ajax 137,290 44,590 - - 137,290 44,590 Whitby 191,890 71,350 19,330 5,620 211,210 76,970 Oshawa 195,130 85,370 19,830 11,220 214,960 96,590 Clarington 139,630 36,220 128,780 19,650 268,410 55,860 Scugog 22,140 8,900 - - 22,140 8,900 Uxbridge 23,520 8,930 - - 23,520 8,930 Brock 13,770 4,410 - - 13,770 4,410 DURHAM 911,950 340,540 229,190 56,270 1,141,140 396,810 Growth +25% +17%

The forecasts include 2056 population and employment in the Future Growth Areas including the urban expansion areas of northeast Pickering and parts of north Oshawa, Whitby and Courtice that were included in the Council-adopted ROPA 128 but were ultimately not included in the OMB approved ROPA 128 in January 2013.

Outside of Durham, the 2041 municipal totals from the Provincial Growth Plan were used to factor up population and employment for the municipalities within the GTHA. Outside of the GTHA, the growth between 2031 and 2041 for the “Outer Ring” municipalities was used to factor up population and employment for the external zones in the model.


January 2018 74

7.2 Transportation Demand and Network Implications The beyond 2031 population and employment forecasts and the 2031 proposed road and transit network were used to develop travel demand for the Beyond 2031 scenario. Region-wide, travel demand will increase by 25% as shown in Exhibit 7.2.

Exhibit 7.2: Beyond 2031 Travel Demand (AM Peak Period)

Metric 2031 Base Beyond 2031 Demand % Diff

Auto Trips (Origins in Durham)

338,040 423,500 +25%

Transit Trips (Origins in Durham)

41,230 52,300 +27%

Total Trips (Origins in Durham)

379,270 475,800 +25%

Transit share 10.9% 11.0% +2%

7.3 Recommendations Beyond 2031 Transit recommendations beyond 2031 build on alternatives presented in the LTTS of converting high frequency transit service to rapid transit as required by projected ridership. In addition, existing urban corridors that might not benefit from high-frequency service in the shorter term, could have the potential for substantial growth in the longer-term.

To support the proposed Higher-Order Network Transit Network in 2031, the following corridors have been recommended for protection of future higher-order transit service anticipated beyond 2031.

Rapid Transit (Exclusive ROW) – Highway 2 between Simcoe Street and Highway 418 – Bayly Street between Pickering GO Station and Brock Road

High Frequency Bus in HOV Lane – Taunton Road between Simcoe Street and Townline Road

Other inter-regional transit services that are beyond 2031 include:

Highway 407/412/418 Transitway

GO Rail to Seaton

GO Rail to Uxbridge

GO Rail to City of Peterborough


January 2018 75

8 Rapid Transit Costs 8.1 Capital Cost Capital costs were estimated for the two rapid transit corridors – Highway 2 and Simcoe Street. These costs include BRT runningway, road widening if and where required, BRT transit stations, streetscaping, and major structures.

The capital cost estimate includes allowances for the following:

Traffic Control cost of 5% Utility Relocation cost of 15% Engineering cost of 15% Contingencies of 25% Miscellaneous, contract administration and quality control costs

totalling 17% A summary of the rapid transit costs are presented in Exhibit 8.1 and subtotal by phase is presented in Exhibit 8.2. Note that these costs are based on a representative concept for BRT, which will be further refined as part of subsequent Transit Project Assessments Processes (TPAPs) or Environmental Assessment (EA) studies. Similarly, the phasing is approximate subject to funding.

The average per km cost for Highway 2 is just under $20 M/km and the average per km cost for Simcoe Street is just over $10 M/km. The Simcoe Street corridor is anticipated to have lower capital costs as much of the corridor will comprise of converting existing parking or general purpose lanes, only one major structure (at Oshawa Creek) will require improvement, and the limited right-of-way along most of the corridor will require less streetscaping and more compact stops/stations.


January 2018 76

Exhibit 8.1: Rapid Transit Capital Costs

Rapid Transit Corridor Cost Phasing Notes Highway 2 BRT Durham boundary to Notion Road

$192,543,000 2017-2021 Median BRT

Notion Road to Westney Road

$10,178,000 2022-2026 Transition to mixed traffic operations

Westney Road to Hwy 412 $109,071,000 2022-2026 Median BRT Hwy 412 to Simcoe Street $170,402,000 2027-2031 Median BRT with

mixed traffic sections Subtotal Highway 2 $482,194,000 Simcoe Street BRT Olive Avenue (GO Station) to Adelaide Avenue

$17,983,000 2022-2026 Curbside BRT

Adelaide Avenue to Highway 407

$84,552,000 2027-2031 Curbside BRT

Subtotal Simcoe Street $102,535,000

Total Rapid Transit Corridors

$584,729,000

Exhibit 8.2: Transit Capital by Phase

Timing Cost 2017-2021 $192,543,000 2022-2026 $137,232,000 2027-2031 $254,954,000 Total Cost $584,729,000

Documents

Durham Region TMP Higher-Order Transit Strategy ......Durham Region TMP Higher -Order Transit STRATEGY DEVELOPMENT REPORT Prepared for The Regional Municipality of Durham Table of