relief line - draft evaluation process and criteria

RELIEF LINE PROJECT ASSESSMENT

Evaluation Process and Criteria

DRAFT

March 2015

RELIEF LINE PROJECT ASSESSMENT Evaluation Process and Criteria

March 2015 – DRAFT 2

Evaluation Process

The proposed evaluation process for the Relief Line Project Assessment has four main steps. First,

potential station area options will be identified. Next, potential station area options will be assessed

against evaluation criteria. Then, preliminary corridors for the Relief Line will be developed, connecting

the best-performing station areas. Finally, alignments and station locations within the preferred

corridor will be evaluated in greater detail and refined in order to identify a preferred alignment.

At all stages of the Relief Line Project Assessment Evaluation, potential stations and alignments will be

evaluated using the evaluation framework developed as part of the Review of the City's Official Plan

Transportation Policies ("Feeling Congested?") as summarized in Table 1. The evaluation framework

captures the many aspects of city-building, all of which are important to the future of Toronto.

The evaluation process and criteria will be refined and finali zed based on feedback received from

stakeholders and the public through Phase 1B/2 consultation.



Table 1 – Evaluation Framework *

Principles Objectives

Serving People Choice Develop an integrated network that connects different modes to provide for more travel options

Experience Capacity to ease crowding / congestion; reduce travel times; make travel more reliable, safe and enjoyable

Social Equity Do not favour any group or community over others; allow everyone good access to work, school and other activities

Strengthening Places

Shaping the City Use the transportation network as a tool to shape the residential development of the City

Healthy Neighbourhoods

Changes in the transportation network should strengthen and enhance existing neighbourhoods; promote safe walking and cycling within and between neighbourhoods

Public Health and Environment

Support and enhance natural areas; encourage people to reduce how far they drive; mitigate negative impacts

Supporting Prosperity

Affordability Improvements to the transportation system should be affordable to build, maintain and operate

Supports Growth Investment in public transportation should support economic development: allow workers to get to jobs more easily; allow goods to get to markets more efficiently

* Evaluation Framework developed as part of the review of the City's Official Plan Transportation Policies ("Feeling Congested?).

Evaluation Criteria

1. Identifying Potential Station Areas

A long list of potential station area options has been identified within the study area, with three areas of

focus: within downtown, along the Danforth, and key activity areas within the rest of the study area.

Primary considerations for potential station locations within downtown and along the Danforth are the

ability to support future connections of the Relief Line west and north and to provide connections to the

existing and planned transit system.

The full range of city building criteria were also taken into account, including the ability to support the

planning policy framework as set out in the City’s Official Plan, the potential to serve existing and future

population and employment, and consideration of opportunities for redevelopment and intensification.



2. Assessment of Potential Station Areas

Each of the potential station areas will be assessed for ability to meet evaluation criteria outlined in

Table 2. The results of this evaluation will inform the development of potential corridors.

Table 2 – Evaluation Criteria for Assessment of Potential Station Areas

Principles Evaluation Criteria

Choice Connectivity to surface transit routes Suitability of future extension to the north (Danforth) and to the west

(Downtown) Downtown pedestrian network impacts above and below grade

(Downtown) Directness of the transfer from the Bloor-Danforth subway line and Relief

Line (Danforth) Directness of the transfer from the Yonge-University-Spadina subway line

and Relief Line (Danforth)

Experience Proximity to key destinations including community services and facilities such as libraries, schools and community centres

Relief to Yonge Subway line and Yonge-Bloor Station (ability to divert riders) (Danforth, Downtown)

Relief to surface transit network (Inline)

Social Equity Improving service to Neighbourhood Improvement Areas

Shaping the City Serving areas of existing population Serving areas of planned population growth Supporting City-Building opportunities by enhancing sites with high

development potential

Healthy Neighbourhoods

Improving existing neighbourhoods and minimizing impacts on properties, local businesses, parks and facilities

Opportunities for context-sensitive integration of the station facilities with adjacent properties and surrounding neighbourhoods

Minimize property impacts Improve access to community services and facilities

Public Health and Environment

Improving the natural environment Ability to mitigate negative impacts

Affordability Cost and constructability of interchange stations Minimize property acquisition costs Ease of providing connection to storage facility (Danforth Stations)

Supports Growth Serving areas of existing employment Serving areas of planned employment growth



3. Developing and Evaluating Corridors and Stations

Following evaluation of potential station areas, potential corridors to connect the station areas having

the best overall potential to address the evaluation criteria will be identified. This will include

consideration of the ability to serve expansion of the Relief Line to the west and north in the future.

The potential station locations associated with each corridor will be analyzed based on the evaluation

criteria outline in Table 3. Additional considerations for the potential stations in downtown and along

the Danforth are outlined in Table 4.

As part of the evaluation, the potential corridors will be assessed in terms of potential transit ridership

and the ability to reduce crowding and congestion on the Yonge line, at the Bloor-Yonge Station and on

the surface transit routes. In addition, feasibility of options for crossing the Don River Valley will be

considered. The criteria for assessment of the potential corridors are outlined in Table 5.

4. Developing and Evaluating Alignments and Stations

Potential alignments and station locations within the preferred corridor will be developed to a finer level

of detail to consider both physical and operational constraints and/or features. The criteria in Tables 3,

4 and 5 will be used to guide evaluation of potential alignments and station locations.

The evaluation process will lead to a preferred alignment and stations for the Relief Line.




Table 3 – Evaluation Criteria for Station Locations

Principle Criteria Description Measure

Choice Connectivity to Surface Transit

Routes

What is the ability to connect to existing and

planned bus and streetcar routes?

Quantitative – number of connections to existing

and planned surface transit routes

Quantitative – number of people who use the

station to transfer to and from surface routes

where modeling results are available; where

modeling results are not available, number of

transit riders passing by the potential station

location

Connectivity to Walking and

Cycling Routes

What is the ability to connect to existing and

planned walking and cycling routes?

Qualitative – Describe opportunities to connect

with existing and planned walking and cycling

routes

Compatibility with Metrolinx

Rapid Transit Planning

What is the ability to serve or complement

Metrolinx planned rapid transit projects such as

Regional Express Rail?

Qualitative - potential for connectivity with

Metrolinx services

Experience Proximity to Key Destinations

including community services

and facilities such as libraries,

schools, community centres

and care facilities

What is the ability to provide transit service to key

destinations (hospitals, daycare centres, seniors/

retirement homes, other care facilities, education

facilities, libraries, community centres, recreation

centres, major employment centres, shopping

malls, attractions, government offices, social

service centres, transit hubs, etc.)?

Quantitative - Number of key destinations within

500 m radius of the station

List the key destinations served and describe their

scale

Social Equity Improving Service to

Neighbourhood Improvement

Areas

What is the ability to serve the City's

disadvantaged residents?

Quantitative –City of Toronto Neighbourhood

Equity Score





Draw Public and Private

Investment to Neighbourhood

Improvement Areas

What is the ability of the project to attract public

and private investment to Neighbourhood

Improvement Areas?

Qualitative – describe the likelihood of further

public or private investment to be attracted to

Neighbourhood Improvement Areas as a result of

the station's construction

Supporting Gender, Racial,

Class, Family Status, and Age

Equity

Does the option improve transit access and

support the transit needs of all genders, racial

groups, classes, family statuses and ages in

consideration of the objective to improve equity

for all groups?

Quantitative – demographic analysis comparing the

percentage of population in the station area fitting

each social variable (gender, race, class, family

status, age group) with the percentage of

population fitting the same variable in the study

area as a whole; including interrelations between

groups of social variables to identify populations or

communities such as caregivers

Qualitative – beyond the identification of

concentrations of social groups, describe how the

inclusion of a station at this location may support

greater equity in terms of gender, racial, class,

family status and age groups

Opportunities for Community

Benefits Agreements

Does the option create opportunities for

community benefits to disadvantaged residents?

Qualitative – describe the kinds of opportunities to

make short- and long-term commitments to local

community benefits such as employment that

construction and operation of a station at this

location may create for disadvantaged residents

living in the local station area

Shaping the City Serving Areas of Existing

Population

What is the ability to serve people within station

area?

Quantitative - number of people within 500 m

radius of each station (reflecting physical barriers)

Serving Areas of Planned

Population Growth

What is the ability to serve areas of planned

population growth?

Quantitative – forecast future number of people

within 500 m radius of each station (reflecting

physical barriers)





Compatibility with City

Planning Policies

Does the option support the city’s planning

policies?

Qualitative – Descriptive of whether the option

supports the growth intentions of the official plan

or relevant planning studies within the station area

(i.e. is the station located within the Downtown,

Central Waterfront, or a Centre, Avenue or

Employment District in the urban structure?)

Quantitative – percentage of land within 500 m

radius of stations designated as mixed-use area

Existing Physical Barriers Are there any physical barriers (such as highways,

valleys, rail corridors) that impact connectivity or

limit the future ability to implement transit-

oriented development around the station?

Qualitative – Discussion of potential barriers, % of

walk-up catchment area (i.e. 500 m radius of

stations) lost, barriers to station entrances from

people/jobs

Supporting City-Building

Opportunities

Does the option support new, planned or

proposed development or opportunities for place-

making?

Qualitative – Describe opportunities to support

development areas, improve connectivity or

enhance sense of place, with consideration for

built form and development potential, area of

potential opportunity sites

Healthy

Neighbourhoods

Compatibility with Existing

Neighbourhoods

Are there opportunities to enhance existing

neighbourhoods through improved connectivity or

place-making?

Are there potential impacts on existing

neighbourhoods?

Qualitative – Describe opportunities for

neighbourhood improvement within 500 m radius

of rapid transit station, with consideration for

transition areas and integration of the station

facilities with adjacent properties and surrounding

neighbourhoods.

List private residences potentially impacted by

construction and long-term operations





Improving Access to

Community Services and

Facilities

Does the option improve access to schools, places

of worship, and community service providers?

Does the option impact schools, places of worship

and other community service providers?

Qualitative – List the key institutions and services

to which access will be improved;

List the institutions and services potentially

impacted by the construction or long term

operations

Impacts on Cultural / Heritage

/ Archaeological Features

Are there cultural / heritage / archaeological

features that might be affected?

Qualitative – Describe the potential impacts or

benefits to cultural/ heritage or archaeological

features if any

Public Health

and

Environment

Compatibility with the

Natural Environment

Does the option create opportunities for

improvement to the natural environment?

Is there potential for temporary or permanent

impacts natural features?

Qualitative – list species (flora and fauna) that may

be affected by the option and opportunities for

environmental improvement

Compatibility with Parks and

Public Spaces

Does the option create an opportunity to enhance

parks and public spaces?


impacts to parks?

Qualitative – Describe the opportunities to

enhance parks and public spaces;

List parks potentially impacted by the construction

or long term operations

Affordability Engineering Feasibility Is the option possible to construct and how

difficult will it be in comparison to other options?

Qualitative - List key technical challenges

associated with station construction such as:

Geotechnical conditions / flooding characteristics

Compatibility with other major infrastructure

projects (i.e. Coxwell Bypass sewer, flood

protection landform at the West Donlands, etc.)

Availability of laydown / staging areas

Traffic and transit impacts during construction

Construction Cost How expensive will the option be? Qualitative – high level cost estimate (high /

medium / low) based on complexity





Utility Impacts Are there potential conflicts with existing utilities,

challenges in re-locating utilities (temporarily or

permanently) or scheduling constraints?

Qualitative – statement on extent of utility impacts

Minimize Property Acquisition

Costs

How many properties will be impacted or need to

be purchased to support the option?

Qualitative – General description of property

impacts (High / Medium / Low), with consideration

for platforms, primary and secondary

access/egress, vertical circulation elements (VCE’s),

and service rooms

Supports

Growth

Serving Areas of Existing

Employment

What is the ability to connect to employment

areas?

Quantitative – number of existing jobs within 500

m radius of station (reflecting physical barriers)

Serving Areas of Planned

Employment Growth

What is the ability for station to serve areas of

new, planned and proposed commercial and

employment development?

Quantitative – forecast number of potential jobs

within 500 m radius of station

Supporting and Strengthening

Existing Businesses and

Industry

Does the option support existing local businesses

and industry by improving accessibility?


impacts on businesses, such as displacement and

reductions in parking?

Qualitative – Describe the nature of businesses

within 500 m radius of rapid transit station;

List businesses potentially impacted by the

construction or long term operations




Table 4 – Additional Evaluation Criteria for Specific Locations


Danforth Station Locations

Choice

Flexibility for Future Northern

Extension to Don Mills

What is the future ability to serve customers and

key destinations such as Thorncliffe Park and

Flemingdon Park?

Qualitative – comment on the ability to provide

stations on the future alignment which would serve

people and destinations north of the Danforth,

based on population and employment

Directness of Transfer to the

Bloor/Danforth Subway

How direct is the connection to the

Bloor/Danforth Subway Line?

Quantitative – Approximate distance and journey

time between existing Bloor-Danforth subway

station and proposed new Relief Line station

Experience Relief to Existing Subway

Network

How much relief will the option provide to the

Yonge Subway Line, Yonge-Bloor Station and the

Bloor/Danforth subway, compared to other

options?

Qualitative - Proximity to Bloor-Yonge Station,

representing catchment area for diversion

Quantitative – Number of existing daily riders

entering the station

Affordability Ease of Providing Connection

to Storage Facility

How many properties will be affected to connect

to a storage facility?

Quantitative – Identify the approximate number of

properties affected

Qualitative – Comment on constructability and

impact to TTC operations from engineering

perspective

Ease of Constructing Future

Northern Extension

How possible will it be to cross the Don Valley to

the north in comparison to other options?

Qualitative – Comment on future potential

extension across the Don Valley from

constructability perspective, with consideration for

property impacts

Impact on Existing

DanforthSubway

How much disruption will the option cause to the

existing Danforth Subway?

Qualitative – comment on extent of disruption and

modifications that would be required to Danforth

subway stations and tunnels





Downtown Stations

Choice

Compatibility with the PATH

network

What is the ability to support the expansion

and/or integrate with the downtown PATH

network?

What is the ability to improve pedestrian flow

within the PATH network?

Qualitative – comment on connectivity to PATH

and potential for improved pedestrian flow

Downtown Pedestrian

Network Impacts

What is the ability to reduce pedestrian crowding

at existing downtown stations and at street level?

Qualitative – comment on connectivity and

potential for improved or worsened pedestrian

flow at existing downtown stations and at sidewalk

level

Flexibility for Future Western

Extension

What is the future ability to serve customers and

destinations west of the downtown such as

Liberty Village, Parkdale and Roncesvalles?

Qualitative – comment on the ability to provide

stations on the future alignment which would serve

people and destinations west of the downtown,

based on population and employment

Directness of Transfer to the

Yonge-University-Spadina

Subway

How direct is the connection to the Yonge-

University-Spadina Subway Line?

Quantitative – Approximate distance and journey

time between existing Yonge-University-Spadina

subway station and proposed new Relief Line

station

Experience Relief to Existing Subway

Network

How much relief will the option provide to the

Yonge Subway Line, Yonge-Bloor Station, Union

Station and the Bloor/Danforth subway,

compared to other options?

Qualitative – Proximity to the centroid of

employment density, representing ability to divert

trips from existing subway network

Quantitative – existing boardings and alightings at

downtown subway stations, serving as an indicator

of transit demand

Affordability Impact on Existing Downtown

Subway Stations

How much disruption will the option cause to

downtown stations?

Qualitative – comment on extent of modifications

that would be required to downtown subway

stations and the disruption of service that may

result





Ease of Constructing Future

Western Extension

Are there constructability constraints associated

with extending the Relief Line west of downtown?

Qualitative – comment on future potential

extension from constructability perspective, with

consideration for property impacts

Table 5 – Evaluation Criteria for Corridors/Alignments


Choice Rapid Transit Network

Connectivity and Flexibility

How good are the connections between

this alignment and the existing subway

lines?

How well will this alignment be able to

handle shutdowns of the

Bloor/Danforth or Yonge line?

Qualitative statement on the ability to connect to

the existing subway network and flexibility of the RL

to handle shutdowns of the BD subway and/or

Yonge subway.

Experience Travel Time How long will it take to get from the

Danforth to the downtown?

Quantitative – Estimated travel time from Danforth

to Downtown, which will vary based on distance,

number of stations and alignment

Relief to Yonge Subway Line How much relief will the alignment

provide to the Yonge Subway line?

Quantitative - Reduction in AM peak hour ridership

southbound on Yonge Subway south of Bloor

Relief to Yonge-Bloor Station How much relief will the alignment

provide to the Bloor/Yonge Station?

Quantitative - Reduction in passengers transferring

in AM peak hour between BD Subway (westbound)

and Yonge Subway (southbound)

Relief to Union Station

How much relief will the alignment

provide to Union Station?

Quantitative - Reduction in passengers using Union

Station in AM peak hour

Relief to Bloor-Danforth Subway

Line

How much relief will the alignment

provide to the Bloor/Danforth line?

Quantitative - Reduction in AM peak hour ridership

westbound on BD Subway west of Sherbourne





Relief to Surface Transit Routes How much relief will the option provide

to surface routes?

Quantitative – Improvement to surface routes with

capacity deficiencies (measured by improvement to

volume-to-capacity ratios for routes with capacity

deficiencies)

Relief Line Ridership

How much ridership will this alignment

attract?

Quantitative - AM peak period total boardings on

the Relief Line

Total Transit Ridership How much total ridership can be

expected on transit routes with this

alignment?

Quantitative - Total transit ridership within model

area during the AM Peak Period

Healthy

Neighbourhoods

Compatibility with Existing

Neighbourhoods

What are the opportunities and impacts

on the neighbourhood arising from

infrastructure required for the tunnels

(launch and extraction shafts,

emergency exit buildings, etc.)?

Qualitative – List residential properties impacted by

the construction area

Improving Access to Institutions

and Services

What are the opportunities for and

impacts on institutions and services

arising from infrastructure required for

the tunnels (launch and extraction

shafts, emergency exit buildings, etc.)?

Qualitative – List institutions and services impacted

by the construction area

Impacts on Cultural / Heritage /

Archaeological Features


impacts on cultural / heritage /

archaeological features arising from




Qualitative – Descriptive analysis of potential

impacts

Eliminating Barriers within

Neighbourhoods

Will the alignment eliminate existing or

result in new barriers in existing

neighbourhoods?

Qualitative - Discuss potential barriers or additional

permeability created by alignment





Public Health and

Environment

Compatibility With the Natural

Environment

Does the alignment create

opportunities for improvement to the

natural environment?

Is there potential for temporary or

permanent impacts natural features?

Qualitative – list species (flora and fauna) that may

be affected, and opportunities for improvement

Compatibility with Parks and

Public Spaces


impacts on parks arising from




Qualitative - List parks impacted by the construction

area

Encouraging People to use

Public Transit and Drive Less

How much less will people drive as a

result of this alignment?

Quantitative – reduction in total vehicle kilometres

travelled during the AM Peak Period

Quantitative – reduction in auto mode share

Affordability Engineering Feasibility Is the option possible to construct and

how difficult will it be in comparison to

other options?

Qualitative - List key technical challenges associated

with tunnel construction such as:

Geotechnical conditions / flooding

characteristics

Compatibility with other major infrastructure

projects (i.e. Coxwell Bypass sewer, flood

protection landform at the West Donlands, etc.)

Availability of laydown / staging areas

Traffic and transit impacts during construction

Construction Cost

How much will it cost?

Qualitative – high level cost estimate

Track Alignment Does the alignment conform with TTC

Design Standards?

Qualitative – statement on conformity with TTC

Design Standards (i.e. radii for horizontal curves,

tangent distances, etc.)





Utility Impacts Are there any potential conflicts with

existing utilities, challenges for re-

locating utilities (temporarily or

permanently) or scheduling constraints?

Qualitative – statement on extent of utility impacts

Minimize Property Acquisition

Costs

What are the property impacts

associated with this alignment?

Quantitative –General description of property

impacts (High / Medium / Low), required for tunnel

and associated infrastructure (launch and extraction

shafts, emergency exit buildings, etc.), number of

property acquisitions required or cost of

acquisitions

Connecting to the Storage

Facility

How easy will it be to connect to a

storage facility?

Quantitative – General description of property

requirements and construction complexity for

providing connection to a Storage Facility, beyond

those established in the evaluation of the

Bloor/Danforth Station location

Supports Growth Supporting and Strengthening

Existing Businesses and Industry


impacts on businesses arising from




Qualitative – List businesses impacted by the

construction area

relief line - draft evaluation process and criteria

Government & Nonprofit

evaluation framework

evaluation processthe

evaluation criteria1

potential station locations

transportation network

public transportation

relief line west

transportation system