RELIEF LINE PRELIMINARY BENEFITS CASE ANALYSIS - November 2012
←
→
Page content transcription
If your browser does not render page correctly, please read the page content below
RELIEF LINE PRELIMINARY BENEFITS CASE ANALYSIS November 2012
Relief Line Preliminary Benefits Case Analysis Final Report November 2012
Relief Line Preliminary Benefits Case Analysis
CONTENTS
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .............................................................................................................. 3
PART A PROJECT RATIONALE ............................................................................................... 10
CONTEXT AND NEED .......................................................................................................................... 10
STUDY BACKGROUND ......................................................................................................................... 13
Reported Capacity Constraints ................................................................................................. 14
Additional Considerations......................................................................................................... 19
Project Objectives ..................................................................................................................... 19
Project Timeline ........................................................................................................................ 20
PART B PROJECT CONCEPTS ................................................................................................ 22
INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................................. 22
REFERENCE CASES ............................................................................................................................. 23
Reference Case 1 – Business As Usual ...................................................................................... 23
Reference Case 2 – Business As Usual with Metrolinx Priority Projects ................................... 23
PROJECT CONCEPTS ........................................................................................................................... 24
Project Concept 1 – Incremental Improvements ...................................................................... 24
Project Concept 2 – DRTES Options .......................................................................................... 24
Project Concept 3 – Union 2031 Options .................................................................................. 28
Project Concept 4 – Additional Options .................................................................................... 29
PART C ASSESSMENT .......................................................................................................... 31
EVALUATION FRAMEWORK ................................................................................................................. 31
CRITERIA-BASED ASSESSMENT ............................................................................................................. 32
Summary of Criteria-Based Assessment ................................................................................... 33
EARLY PERFORMANCE SUMMARY......................................................................................................... 34
MULTIPLE ACCOUNT EVALUATION ....................................................................................................... 38
Preview of Future BCA – Quantitative Analysis ........................................................................ 39
Preview of Future BCA – Additional Benefits to be Calculated ................................................. 40
Preview of Future BCA – Complete view of Costs and Benefits ................................................ 43
PART D CONCLUSIONS ........................................................................................................ 44
APPENDIX A LIST OF PREVIOUS STUDY GOALS AND EVALUATION CRITERIA.......................... 46
A.1 DRTES STUDY GOALS ................................................................................................................. 46
A.2 UNION STATION 2031 STUDY GOALS ............................................................................................ 46
A.3 DRTES EVALUATION CRITERIA...................................................................................................... 47
A.4 UNION STATION 2031 EVALUATION CRITERIA ................................................................................. 48
APPENDIX B ADDITIONAL CONSIDERATIONS ....................................................................... 50
B.1 NETWORK CONSIDERATIONS ........................................................................................................ 50
1
Relief Line Preliminary Benefits Case Analysis
B.2 POTENTIAL STATION LOCATIONS ................................................................................................... 51
B.3 OTHER LOW-COST POLICY ALTERNATIVES ....................................................................................... 51
Land Use and Transit Oriented Development (TOD) Strategies ............................................... 52
Parking Policies ......................................................................................................................... 52
Multi-modal Strategies ............................................................................................................. 53
Travel Demand Management (TDM) Measures ....................................................................... 53
B.3 OTHER CAPITAL PROJECT CONSIDERATIONS .................................................................................... 54
TABLES
Table 1: Summary of Assessment of Primary Criteria ......................................................................................... 8
Table 2: Project Concept 2 - Travel Times and Speeds ...................................................................................... 25
Table 3: Project Concept 3-1 – Travel Times and Speeds .................................................................................. 29
Table 4: Summary of Assessment of Primary Criteria ....................................................................................... 33
Table 5: Performance Statistics for options presented in DRTES and Union 2031 ............................................ 36
Table 6: Multiple Account Evaluation Framework ............................................................................................ 39
FIGURES
Figure 1: DRTES Options Corridor and GO Current Rail Network ........................................................................ 5
Figure 2: Project Timeline Overview .................................................................................................................... 6
Figure 3: Yonge North Subway Extension ......................................................................................................... 13
Figure 4: RL Preliminary BCA and related Project Elements .............................................................................. 14
Figure 5: Existing Inbound Peak Hour Rapid Transit Capacity Deficiencies ...................................................... 15
Figure 6: 2031 Inbound Peak Hour Rapid Transit capacity Deficiencies ........................................................... 16
Figure 7: 2031 Inbound Peak Hour Rapid Transit capacity Deficiencies with yonge subway extension ........... 17
Figure 8: YUS Station Boardings – 2001 and 2031, AM Peak............................................................................ 18
Figure 9: YUS Station Alightings – 2001 and 2031 AM Peak ............................................................................ 18
Figure 10: GO Union Station Alightings – 2006 and 2031 AM Peak ................................................................ 19
Figure 11: Project Timeline Overview ................................................................................................................ 21
Figure 12: Estimated Travel Times for Project Concept 2 ................................................................................. 25
Figure 13: 2031 Ridership and Costs of Option 2-1 and other Subway Projects ............................................... 34
Figure 14: Capacity Improvements on Yonge of OPTION 2-1 and other Subway Projects ................................ 35
Figure 15: Recent Network Peak Hour Boardings vs. Projected 2031 DRTES RL Peak Hour Boardings ............ 37
Figure 16: Increase In Rapid Transit Ridership For Option 2-2 (Pape-Dundas West) ........................................ 37
Figure 17: Effect of Project Concept 2 on Yonge Capacity ................................................................................ 38
Figure 18: Transit Travel Time Benefits By Location for Option 2-2 .................................................................. 40
Figure 19: Summary of Benefits from UK's High Speed Rail 2 ........................................................................... 41
Figure 20: Alternatives Evaluation Table from DRTES ...................................................................................... 48
Figure 21: Options Evaluation Table from Union 2031 Study ........................................................................... 49
Figure 22: Mobility Hubs in the Relief Area ....................................................................................................... 51
2
Relief Line Preliminary Benefits Case Analysis
Executive Summary
Overview and Conclusions
The Relief Line Preliminary Benefits Case Analysis (BCA) provides a summary and presentation of
previous relevant work. Main points are as follows:
Capacity constraints on the Yonge Subway line south of Bloor and at Yonge-Bloor station will
limit our ability to expand the GTHA rapid transit system, risking the successful delivery of
Metrolinx’s priority projects. A criteria-based assessment summarizing analysis from studies
done by the TTC and Metrolinx indicate a major transport capacity solution in downtown
Toronto is required before 2031 in order to complete Metrolinx priority projects. As a result,
this preliminary BCA supports advancing a Relief Line concept from The Big Move’s 25-year
plan to the 15-year plan.
The TTC has proposed a traditional subway solution (named Downtown Relief Line or DRL)
to relieve the downtown transit capacity problem. The TTC has also recommended that
Metrolinx assess regional rail alternatives that will help alleviate future downtown transit
capacity constraints. Metrolinx work in 2011 on Union Station capacity anticipates that
significant investment (likely tunnel) is needed in the long term.
This Preliminary BCA summarizes broad concept options as a basis for refined options to be
developed and evaluated through further regional-level planning (network analysis) work
including collaboration between Metrolinx, Toronto and York Region. Preferred concepts
from the network analysis will be fully considered by a complete BCA. BCA results will then
be inputted to the Metrolinx Prioritization Framework for investment consideration, pending
an Investment Strategy.
A full description of the conclusions from this report is provided in Part D.
Study Background and Motivation
In 2006 the Province of Ontario created the Greater Toronto Transportation Authority, renamed
Metrolinx in 2007. The organization’s mission is to champion, develop and implement an integrated
transportation system for our region that enhances prosperity, sustainability and quality of life. A core
component of Metrolinx’s mandate and one of Metrolinx’s first deliverables was the development of
The Big Move, a Regional Transportation Plan that presents a 25-year vision for improved mobility in
the GTHA. A vital component of The Big Move is to complete a Benefits Case Analysis for each
proposed rapid transit project.
Metrolinx has completed Benefits Case Analyses (BCAs) on over a dozen corridors, successfully
informing billions of dollars of investment. The technical methodology is aligned with international
3
Relief Line Preliminary Benefits Case Analysis
best practices on alternatives analysis and project evaluation and is regularly updated to address
expanded impacts. The BCA employs a robust multiple account evaluation where financial,
economic, environmental and social needs are taken into account to guide optimal investment
decisions. This Relief Line Preliminary BCA is a precursor to a full Metrolinx BCA, laying the
groundwork for comparative analysis. More information on options needs to be developed before a
full BCA can be completed. The information on options to be taken forward to a full BCA will come
out of a future network analysis.
The Big Move represents the Relief Line in the 25-year plan as “Downtown Core” (Schedule A).
Considerable work has been completed since the release of The Big Move and it has been identified
that the Relief Line warrants a broader assessment.
This report is motivated by the following studies and their conclusions:
Interim Yonge North Subway BCA [Metrolinx, 2009]
o Assessed the potential options for a Yonge subway extension beyond Finch.
o Conclusions included that the increased downstream demand on the Yonge Subway
(at Bloor) would exacerbate the already capacity-constrained system.
Downtown Rapid Transit Expansion Study: Phase 1 Strategic Plan (DRTES) [Toronto Transit
Commission, October 2012]
o Issue Studied: Existing and future rapid transit capacity deficiencies into Toronto’s
downtown.
o Advanced specific subway options for further evaluation, named Downtown Relief
Line (DRL). Evaluation will be part of the proposed Phase 2 study.
o Recommends Metrolinx explore alternatives that utilize existing rail corridors that will
help alleviate anticipated future capacity constraints.
Union Station 2031: Opportunities and Demands Study (Union 2031) [Metrolinx, 2011]
o Issue Studied: Future capacity constraints expected at Union Station.
o Confirmed and refined the capacity forecasts at Union Station.
o Evaluated potential options to address the resulting capacity constraints and
recommended advancing options for further scoping and evaluation. Other findings
reported the importance of fare integration, and location of GO stations close to
employment.
Union Station and USRC Capacity Study [Metrolinx, 2011]
o Issue Studied: Future track capacity constraints for passenger rail services at Union
Station.
o Found that capacity was sufficient in the short-term but deficient for long-term
service expansion plans.
o Identified double-berthing and infrastructure modifications as interim solutions, with
long-term solutions requiring “vertical expansion” (i.e. downtown tunnel).
4
Relief Line Preliminary Benefits Case Analysis
Union Station Pedestrian Movements Study [Metrolinx, on-going]
o Issue Studied: Impacts of future ARL and GO service on Union Station passenger
flow.
o Identified some crowding/capacity challenges at platforms and stairways.
There is considerable overlap in the multi-billion dollar options identified in the DRTES and Union
2031 studies despite addressing different problems. The Relief Line project options identified in both
reports cover a large geographic area and a range of technologies. These include services to areas
immediately east and west of downtown, as well as further east, west, and north, connecting to
existing and planned rapid transit corridors (see Figure 1). Options considered enable the existing
rapid transit network to maintain functionality by relieving lines currently under stress due to capacity
constraints. With so large a scope, the Relief Line will have substantial regional implications on the
location of future population growth and the evolving shape of the transportation network.
FIGURE 1: DRTES OPTIONS CORRIDOR AND GO CURRENT RAIL NETWORK
As the GTHA’s Regional Transportation Authority, Metrolinx has the responsibility to undertake a
comparative analysis, applying a broader lens to a highly complex opportunity. This Preliminary
Benefits Case Analysis presents previous study results through a regional lens and sets up the next
stages of work required to advance a Relief Line investment. The need to increase transportation
access into the Toronto region’s core by advancing the Relief Line from the 25-year to the 15-year
time horizon is supported.
5
Relief Line Preliminary Benefits Case Analysis
FIGURE 2: PROJECT TIMELINE OVERVIEW
Regular prioritization updates to Board anticipated
PDE: Planning, Design, and Engineering
As shown in Figure 2, the Relief Line Preliminary BCA is part of the larger process of project
development. This report builds on the extensive amount of previous work completed for this project.
It consolidates information and advances the established Metrolinx BCA MAE Framework to be used
in later stages of the project.
Following this Preliminary BCA, a network analysis study is needed in order to properly consider the
many potential subway and rail alternatives, and identify preferred options for detailed investment
consideration in a full BCA. Other related work planned to proceed in parallel to Relief Line work is
described above:
TTC is proceeding with DRTES Phase 2, establishing preferred alignment, station locations,
real estate purchase recommendations, and technology choice for traditional subway
options.
6
Relief Line Preliminary Benefits Case Analysis
Metrolinx’s Big Move Update and consultation in late 2012 and early 2013.
City of Toronto’s Official Plan review, scheduled to conclude in April 2013. The City’s Official
Plan currently does not include any Relief Line concepts, including the RL.
Work on the Yonge North subway extension continues to advance, in combination with the
Yonge North BCA Update, as well as the Yonge North Land Value Capture Study.
On-going updates to the Prioritization Framework will occur as more knowledge on respective Big
Move projects is gained.
A full description of the background and motivation of this report is provided in Part A – Project
Rationale.
Project Concepts
Four Project Concepts are presented, representing the options considered by prior studies and for
consideration by future network analysis and subsequent full BCA. The Project Concepts are:
Project Concept 1 – Incremental Improvements, of relatively incremental cost;
Project Concept 2 – DRTES Options: Subway Expansion, TTC-proposed multi-billion
dollar subway;
Project Concept 3 – Union 2031 Options: Regional/Urban Rail Service, Union 2031
study advanced multi-billion dollar options;
Project Concept 4 – Additional Options, covering any other concepts that have not been
studied to date, including multi-billion dollar regional rail solutions
The four Project Concepts are compared to the two Reference Cases below:
Reference Case 1 – Current Commitments: Existing and committed transit network
Reference Case 2 – Current Commitments with completion of Metrolinx Priority
Projects: Existing and committed transit network and remaining unfunded Big Move 15-year
plan Priority Projects.
A full BCA cannot be undertaken at this time because not enough is known to derive specific inputs
for Project Concepts. Future network analysis will identify a narrowed list of project options that will
inform a subsequent full BCA.
A full description of the Project Concepts presented in this report is provided in Part B.
7
Relief Line Preliminary Benefits Case Analysis
Project Concepts Preliminary Assessment
Part C provides a preliminary assessment of the Project Concepts identified in Part B. The Project
Concepts are evaluated in the Preliminary BCA using the following approach:
Project Concepts and Reference Cases are advanced through a criteria-based assessment,
summarizing from conclusions of previous studies to identify the size of solution that may be
needed.
Project Concepts with known performance characteristics are compared to projects of similar
transformative scale. A summary of performance results from previous studies is presented.
An overview and preview of Metrolinx’s full BCA Multiple Accounts Evaluation (MAE) is
presented, including early quantitative results on one of the DRTES options.
The Criteria-Based assessment (Table 1) shows that all project concepts require further study and
anticipates that major investment is needed. Completing the Metrolinx Priority Projects including the
Yonge North Subway extension (Reference Case 2) causes a worsening in the already capacity
constrained transit system.
1
TABLE 1: SUMMARY OF ASSESSMENT OF PRIMARY CRITERIA
Not acceptable in the long term -- No Change to BAU
Acceptable in the long term Negative Impact
Positive Impact
1 Summary of results drawing directly from or extrapolated from DRTES and Union Station 2031 analysis
8Relief Line Preliminary Benefits Case Analysis
Incremental solutions (Project Concept 1) have not been reported to provide adequate capacity relief,
suggesting that major investment is needed. Despite not expecting to meet ultimate capacity
requirements, it should be noted that Project Concept 1 options may be attractive investments.
Further and refined analysis may show they can be of good value on their own, as interim measures,
in addition to their potential benefit of delaying the need for significant investment projected to be
ultimately required.
Three of the Project Concepts (2, 3, and 4) are expected to meet the primary criteria for long-term
transit capacity needs.
Preliminary ridership estimates for the south-east section of the DRTES subway concept are higher
than the Spadina subway extension, which is similar in cost and length. The ability of the south-east
section of the DRTES subway concept to off-load Yonge subway south of Bloor is almost twice as
high as the additional demand created by the Yonge North subway extension, and five times more
effective at reducing Yonge subway demand than the Spadina subway extension.
Performance of rail-based options needs to be determined by future network analysis; it should be
possible to meet many, or all of the project needs with a multi-billion dollar solution.
A full description of the Preliminary Project Concepts Assessment is provided in Part C. This
assessment is a preliminary stage of the full BCA MAE evaluation, which will occur after the
proposed network analysis.
Report Structure
This report is structured as follows:
Part A - Project Rationale: This section describes the policy context, the broader regional
and project objectives, the characteristics of the corridor and the issues and opportunities to
be addressed by the proposed project;
Part B – Project Concepts: This section describes the options that are evaluated; and
Part C – Preliminary Project Concept Assessment: This section will describe the
evaluation approach and summary of previous assessment.
Part D – Conclusions: This section describes the results of the evaluation and suggested
next steps.
9Relief Line Preliminary Benefits Case Analysis
Part A Project Rationale
Context and Need
The City Toronto is the largest municipality in Canada with a population of nearly 2.7 million and is at
the heart of the Greater Toronto and Hamilton Region. Regional population growth and recent
downtown development unmatched anywhere in North America or Europe is contributing to transit
ridership. Investment is required to effectively meet the short and long term needs posed by growing
transit demand into the downtown core. As a result, in tandem with advancing projects through a
rigorous assessment process, Metrolinx is moving forward an investment strategy to implement
remaining unfunded projects in the regional transportation plan, The Big Move.
Expanding rapid transit into and through Toronto’s downtown has been an interest of the City of
Toronto’s dating back to the early 20th century. More recently, two studies have shed light on current
and projected constraints facing increased transit access into the region’s core: Metrolinx’s Union
Station 2031: Opportunities and Demands Study (Union 2031) from Fall 2011 and the Toronto Transit
Commission’s Downtown Rapid Transit Expansion Study: Phase 1 Strategic Plan (DRTES) from
October 2012. Both reports highlight how, despite ongoing and future investments in service
upgrades, transit services on the Yonge Subway line, the King Streetcar Line, and select GO Train
lines will be unable to keep pace with growing travel demands into downtown Toronto.
As the Region’s financial and business services hub, land use is heavily commercial office at the
southern portion of the Yonge Subway anchored by Union Station. In recent years, significant office
development and high density residential development has occurred in the downtown core,
contributing to increased demand on transit services. Of particular note:
In October 2012, there were 183 high rise buildings under construction in Toronto, the
majority of which are downtown2
New high rise commercial development has focused around Union Station, including seven
new office towers south of Union Station
North America’s largest waterfront brownfield redevelopment is underway
The transformation of King West, Liberty Village, Fort York and Queen West/Dufferin
neighbourhoods along the rail corridor into high density mixed use districts
Land use varies to a considerable degree east, west and north of the core, which features a mix of
medium to high density housing, retail, office and institutional uses. Downtown areas identified
already display high transit use, which would be augmented by enhanced rapid transit service.
Union Station is Canada’s busiest transportation hub and underpins the Greater Toronto and
Hamilton Area’s largest commercial office concentration. Provincial planning policies outlined in the
2 City of Toronto Economic Development Committee
10Relief Line Preliminary Benefits Case Analysis
Places to Grow Act, 2005 aim to build on Union Station’s strengths by encouraging intensification of
commercial office and residential development in the downtown core. The City of Toronto and
Regional Municipality of York Official Plans and supporting documents will be required to continue to
align with Provincial policies. The City of Toronto estimates that by 2031 between 20 and 40 million
square feet of new office development will be needed based on emerging growth drivers in Toronto.3
Expanding transit capacity is cited as a key to retaining the attractiveness of the downtown core and
shoulder areas for future businesses. In York Region, planning policies anticipate investment in
higher order transit along Yonge Street to Richmond Hill by supporting higher density development
along the corridor and complementary local and express bus rapid transit service.
Surface transit ridership on connecting services to the Yonge and Bloor-Danforth Subways as well as
on Commuter train lines into the downtown have seen significant recent increases.4
Total system ridership on York Region Transit, which offers many connecting express bus
services to Finch and Don Mills Subway Stations, increased by 26% between 2005 and 2011
with daily ridership averaging 84,500 in March, 2012.
Between 2005 and 2011, average daily bus ridership on six major Scarborough bus lines
(Finch East, Don Mills, Steeles East, Lawrence East, Sheppard East and Morningside Drive)
grew by over 23,000 riders, a 14% increase.
Inbound (southbound) Yonge Subway line is operating at 9% over capacity during the AM
peak hour.
The Barrie-Bradford, Stouffville, Lakeshore East and Lakeshore West GO Train lines are
currently operating over capacity.
Even with existing and planned investments, by 2031 there will be five GO Train Lines -
Barrie-Brantford, Stouffville, Georgetown, Milton and Lakeshore East – operating over
capacity.
The eastbound King Streetcar into the downtown core is also facing operational concerns
due to ridership growth and surface congestion.
In total, transit ridership into Toronto’s downtown is expected to grow by 51% by 2031,5 with the
number of trips originating from the north and east exceeding existing and planned capacity.
Similarly, Metrolinx’s Union 2031 study projects a doubling of ridership into Union Station, reaching
191,000 daily boardings in 2031 (2.2 times the 2009 number of boardings).6
3 “Staff report for action on Planning for a Strong and Diverse Economy.” City of Toronto, 2012. Accessed at
http://www.toronto.ca/legdocs/mmis/2012/pg/bgrd/backgroundfile-51493.pdf
4 Downtown Rapid Transit Expansion Study: Phase 1 Strategic Plan
5 Downtown Rapid Transit Expansion Study: Phase 1 Strategic Plan
6 Union Station 2031: Opportunities and Demands Study
11Relief Line Preliminary Benefits Case Analysis
Metrolinx has already made significant investments to expand transit capacity into the downtown core
where demand has demonstrated a need for improved service. These investments are already well
on their way to completion and represent some of the largest transit investments in the City of
Toronto in over a generation. They have been funded with the support of the Provincial government
as well as other government partners and include:
Automatic Train Control (TTC Subway Improvements)
o Allows trains to operate with a headway of 105 seconds rather than every 150 seconds
o Improves capacity of subway trains by 30-35%
o Implementation: 2008-2015
New TTC Vehicles
o Toronto Rocket Train Sets improve capacity by 10% over the previous T1 trains
o New Bombardier Flexity Outlook streetcars will improve capacity by 90% over CLRV’s
and 22% over ALRV’s, assuming an equal headway
o Implementation: 2011-2014 (subway); 2014-2018 (streetcars)
Metrolinx Union Station and USRC Improvements
o New trackage and signal improvements allow twice as many trains than previously
o Improved access to platforms, a new more spacious concourse, and a new glass atrium
will increase passenger comfort and help speed train boardings and alightings
o Implementation: 2014
TTC Union Station Improvements
o A new south platform and a rebuilt concourse will improve passenger flow and allow
additional capacity at Union Station
o Implementation: 2015
Toronto-York Spadina Subway Extension
o The extension to Highway 7 is expected to divert riders off the existing Yonge line,
resulting in a 4% capacity improvement on Yonge
o Implementation: 2016
TTC Subway Crossovers between King and Queen Stations (Metrolinx “Quick Win”)
o Re-installing crossovers between King and Queen stations increases subway system
flexibility and resilience, improving recovery and allowing partial service during a system
failure or delay
o Implementation: Completed.
Despite the increased capacity these investments entail, transit lines into the downtown core will
remain constrained, with ridership demand on streetcar, subway and GO Train lines still approaching
or exceeding their capacity by 2031. The Big Move Regional Transportation Plan (RTP) assumptions
show continued and growing population and employment forecasts in the downtown core.
12Relief Line Preliminary Benefits Case Analysis
Furthermore, DRTES and Union Station 2031 forecasts show a significant rise in the number of trips
into the downtown core originating from inner suburban areas of Toronto as well as the municipalities
beyond the City of Toronto’s borders.
FIGURE 3: YONGE NORTH SUBWAY EXTENSION
As the epicentre of the GTHA’s
transit network, constrained transit
capacity in Toronto’s downtown has
regional implications for the Metrolinx
Priority Projects listed in The Big
Move, particularly the Yonge North
Subway Extension (Figure 3).7
As a result, examining the need for
improved access into the downtown
core has become necessary.
Study Background
As identified above, Metrolinx, the
City of Toronto, the Toronto Transit
Commission and York Region have
undertaken significant work
examining the problems facing
transportation access to Toronto’s
downtown.
This Relief Line Preliminary BCA
draws primarily from information contained in the TTC’s Downtown Rapid Transit Expansion Study:
Phase 1 Strategic Plan and Metrolinx’s Union Station 2031: Opportunities and Demands Study. In
addition to these, there is a considerable body of knowledge related to this topic, including Union
Station and USRC Capacity Study, Union Station Pedestrian Flow Study, TTC Yonge-Bloor Study,
Interim Yonge North BCA, GO Electrification Study, GO Rail BCAs, Lakeshore Express Rail BCA,
TTC Railway Yards Needs Study, and many other reports.
These reports include information on:
Transit service operating details;
Transit line passenger count data;
Transit investment proposals; and
Land use proposals.
7 Yonge Subway Extension Design – Demand Forecasting Report
13Relief Line Preliminary Benefits Case Analysis
This Preliminary BCA summarizes and consolidates this previous research, and sets up further
regional-level planning and technical evaluation including collaboration between Metrolinx, the City of
Toronto and York Region.
Figure 4 shows where the Relief Line Preliminary BCA fits within the many stages of project
development.
FIGURE 4: RL PRELIMINARY BCA AND RELATED PROJECT ELEMENTS
Reported Capacity Constraints
Previous studies have provided considerable information on existing ridership levels as well as
boardings and alightings information on transit lines into the downtown core. TTC’s DRTES
presented existing and projected capacity deficiencies during the inbound AM peak into the
downtown core (Figure 5, Figure 6, and Figure 7):
14Relief Line Preliminary Benefits Case Analysis
8
FIGURE 5: EXISTING INBOUND PEAK HOUR RAPID TRANSIT CAPACITY DEFICIENCIES
Figure 5 demonstrates that there are significant capacity issues currently facing the regional transit
network during the inbound peak hour in the downtown. There are presently more passengers
heading south on the Yonge Subway during the peak morning rush hour than the existing line is
designed for, producing significant crowding. In addition, four GO Train corridors are also operating
over capacity, with the Richmond Hill and Milton GO Train lines also approaching their limits. Transit
riders on the Bloor-Danforth subway heading towards the downtown from east of Sherbourne station
are also experiencing the limits of the line’s operating capacity.
Together, these capacity constraints demonstrate that today’s travel demands into the downtown
particularly from the north and the east are not properly accommodated by the existing transit
network.
This reality is what has prompted significant infrastructure investment currently underway (see list in
previous section).
8 Downtown Rapid Transit Expansion Study: Phase 1 Strategic Plan, p.19
15Relief Line Preliminary Benefits Case Analysis
9
FIGURE 6: 2031 INBOUND PEAK HOUR RAPID TRANSIT CAPACITY DEFICIENCIES
Figure 6 and Figure 7 demonstrate that despite improvements currently underway (Toronto Rocket
trains, Automatic Train Control, Union Station and USRC improvements, etc.), there will still be
inadequate capacity accommodate travel demands into the downtown core.
The Yonge North subway extension further exacerbates these existing constraints by adding
additional ridership in key areas. Although the subway extension is forecasted to increase demand
beyond capacity on the Yonge Subway line by 2031 (Figure 7), the regional transit network as a
whole will be facing significant pressure as system ridership increases due to transit expansion,
population and employment growth.
9 Downtown Rapid Transit Expansion Study: Phase 1 Strategic Plan, p.20
16Relief Line Preliminary Benefits Case Analysis
FIGURE 7: 2031 INBOUND PEAK HOUR RAPID TRANSIT CAPACITY DEFICIENCIES WITH YONGE
10
SUBWAY EXTENSION
Passenger crowding at specific subway stations is a related but separate issue that must be relieved
if the current subway network is to continue to effectively serve transit riders throughout the region.
The boarding and alighting pattern for the Yonge-University-Spadina Subway corridor south of Bloor
is shown in Figure 8 and Figure 9, projected out to 2031.
10 Downtown Rapid Transit Expansion Study: Phase 1 Strategic Plan, p.21
17Relief Line Preliminary Benefits Case Analysis
12
11 FIGURE 9: YUS STATION ALIGHTINGS – 2001 AND 2031 AM PEAK
FIGURE 8: YUS STATION BOARDINGS – 2001 AND 2031, AM PEAK
11 Downtown Rapid Transit Expansion Study: Phase 1 Strategic Plan 12 Downtown Rapid Transit Expansion Study: Phase 1 Strategic Plan
18Relief Line Preliminary Benefits Case Analysis
Metrolinx’s Union Station 2031 study projects a doubling of ridership into Union Station, reaching
191,000 daily boardings in 2031 (2.2 times the 2009 number of boardings).13
GO Transit track capacity studies suggest that current investments will satisfy demand in the short
term, however additional investments, including double-berthing and other measures will likely be
required in the long term.14 Furthermore, although significant work is underway at TTC’s Union
Station, projected ridership demands are expected to near or exceed station capacities in future peak
periods.15
16
FIGURE 10: GO UNION STATION ALIGHTINGS – 2006 AND 2031 AM PEAK
Additional Considerations
There are many additional considerations that should be accounted for in the determination of the
preferred project scope. Some of these have been identified in Appendix B, including network
considerations, potential station locations, policy alternatives and capital project considerations.
Project Objectives
The purpose of this Preliminary BCA is to summarize and tie together previous analyses of various
downtown rapid transit options under a regional framework or lens to present the broader
opportunities and requirements and to set the stage for necessary further network planning analysis.
13 Union Station 2031: Opportunities and Demands Study
14 Union Station 2031: Opportunities and Demands Study
15 Downtown Rapid Transit Expansion Study: Phase 1 Strategic Plan, page iv
16 Union Station 2031: Opportunities and Demands Study, page 67
19Relief Line Preliminary Benefits Case Analysis
Recent transportation studies in the project area have identified project objectives specific to the
purpose of the study. For example, the main focus of DRTES was the relief of the subway capacity
issues, and the main focus of the Union 2031 study was the relief of Union station capacity issues.
A project as significant and expensive as the Relief Line should make every attempt possible to
maximize utilization of infrastructure, maximize return on investment, and address multiple objectives.
This effort has begun in this Relief Line Preliminary BCA with the following consolidated list of
objectives from DRTES, Union 2031, and The Big Move, presented below. 17
Increase transportation capacity to the downtown core
Relieve capacity constraints on the TTC subway system
Relieve capacity constraints at Union Station
Enable the construction of the Yonge North Subway
Improve the transit mode share within the Greater Toronto and Hamilton Area
Support the land use planning goals of the representative governments involved, including
the Official Plans of the City of Toronto, the Regional Municipality of York and the
Government of Ontario’s Provincial Policy Statements/Places to Grow Act, 2005
Ensure strong network connectivity with other regional investments, in particular the
Metrolinx Priority Projects
Achieve a reasonable and highest possible broad benefits per dollar of investment
Project Timeline
A timeline of the project-analysis component of a Relief Line is visualized in Figure 11. It includes
prior studies recently completed related to downtown transit capacity relief as well as future Planning,
Design and Engineering (PDE) for a Relief Line project. Figure 11 also identifies parallel processes
that could impact the timing of both project analysis and implementation work of a Relief Line project
such as the results of on-going work on the Yonge North project, updates made to The Big Move and
any future updates to the Metrolinx Prioritization Framework.
At this time, it is assumed that future Network Analysis – a vital input to a full BCA – could be
completed by 2013 or early 2014 and a subsequent full Relief Line BCA could be finalized six months
following the Network Analysis. These products would provide inputs for the Metrolinx Prioritization
Framework that would guide the start date for planning, design and engineering work.
17 For a list of previous study goals, see Appendix A List of Previous Study Goals and Evaluation Criteria.
20Relief Line Preliminary Benefits Case Analysis
FIGURE 11: PROJECT TIMELINE OVERVIEW
Regular prioritization updates to Board anticipated
PDE: Planning, Design, and Engineering
21Relief Line Preliminary Benefits Case Analysis
Part B Project Concepts
Introduction
The location of this project, combined with the project objectives, lead to a relatively broad set of
project concepts that should be considered. These concepts are identified in the Preliminary BCA
and will be further scoped in future network analysis.
Four Project Concepts are presented, representing the options considered by prior studies and for
consideration by future network analysis. The Project Concepts are:
Project Concept 1 – Incremental Improvements, of relatively incremental cost;
Project Concept 2 – DRTES Options: Subway Expansion, TTC-proposed multi-billion
dollar subway;
o Option 2-1: Subway connecting Pape to St. Andrew Station (DRTES: 1a)
o Option 2-2: Subway connecting Pape to Dundas West Station (DRTES: 2a)
o Option 2-3: Subway connecting Eglinton to St. Andrew Station (DRTES: 2b)
o Option 2-4: Subway connecting Eglinton to Dundas West Station (DRTES: 3)
Project Concept 3 – Union 2031 Options: Regional/Urban Rail Service, Union 2031
study advanced options;
o Option 3-1: Subway connecting Pape to Exhibition Station (Union 2031: 4b)
o Option 3-2: New downtown tunnel for Lakeshore GO lines with a second Union
Station (Union 2031: 6b)
Project Concept 4 – Additional Options, covering any other concepts that have not been
studied to date, including regional rail solutions18
The four Project Concepts are compared to the two Reference Cases below:
Reference Case 1 – Current Commitments: Existing and committed transit network
Reference Case 2 – Current Commitments with completion of Metrolinx Priority
Projects: Existing and committed transit network and remaining unfunded The Big Move 15-
year plan Priority Projects.
18 There are many combinations of rail service that could be provided on expanded infrastructure in the downtown, and regionally.
Electrification study, Regional Expressrail study, are sources for ideas, as are existing assets that Metrolinx owns and are un-
utilized – the Don Branch GO line could carry riders from Eglinton and Don Mills to downtown Toronto, for example. This option
has not been studied in detail but should be as part of the network study.
22Relief Line Preliminary Benefits Case Analysis
A full BCA cannot be undertaken at this time because not enough is known to derive specific inputs
for the Project Concepts. A future Network Analysis will identify a narrowed list of project options that
will inform a subsequent full BCA.
Reference Cases
Two reference cases are presented for consideration in this report. The two cases are necessary to
indicate the current “business as usual” scenario, as well as the impacts of building the Metrolinx
Priority Projects.
Reference Case 1 – Business As Usual
Over and above the existing transit services there are a number of committed projects underway
within the GTHA. These projects include “Quick Wins” and funded Metrolinx Priority Projects being
delivered by both Metrolinx and the municipalities. Reference Case 1 is defined as a network
consisting of existing transit service plus:
The TTC subway extension to Vaughan Metropolitan Centre;
York Region VIVA BRT;
Committed Brampton Züm network;
Mississauga Transitway;
Eglinton Crosstown LRT;
Scarborough RT replacement with LRT;
Finch LRT;
Sheppard LRT; and
Automated Train Operation (ATO) implementation on the Yonge-University-Spadina line
(providing 105sec headways to Finch Station).
Reference Case 2 – Business As Usual with Metrolinx Priority Projects
This reference case builds on Reference Case 1, adding the Metrolinx Priority Projects. These
projects are:
Brampton Züm expansion
Dundas BRT
Durham BRT
Hamilton LRT
Hurontario LRT
Yonge North Subway extension
GO Service Improvements (including 2-Way All-Day service)
23Relief Line Preliminary Benefits Case Analysis
Project Concepts
Four project concepts have been identified for the Relief Line Preliminary BCA and a summary
description of each is provided below. Project Concepts defined in this report are preliminary and are
not as detailed as standard Metrolinx BCA options. Further scoping of these concepts will occur in
subsequent analysis.
Project Concept 1 – Incremental Improvements
The DRTES outlined several alternatives to significant capital investment by maximizing the use of
existing infrastructure through supportive policies and low-cost projects. A selection of these is
included below along with additional measures that could be taken to improve transit access to
downtown:
Improved cycling infrastructure within the downtown core and shoulder areas;
Improved transit signal priority in the downtown core and shoulder areas;
Optimized on-street parking and turn restrictions;
Improved connectivity and signage between GO Transit and TTC Subway Stations;
Fare restructuring that promotes a shift to off-peak travel;
Express bus service from Broadview or Castle Frank station to the Downtown Core;
Improved GO Transit rail capacity and potentially service speeds on the Lakeshore East and
Stouffville corridors, using available and potential Union Station capacity; and
Improved pedestrian connection between the TTC’s Main Street Station on the Bloor-
Danforth Line and GO Transit’s Danforth Station on the Lakeshore East line to facilitate
transfers.
These improvements have the potential to increase service speed and reliability along with system
capacity at a relatively low cost of implementation compared to entirely new subway or rail
infrastructure. These improvements have a shorter implementation timeframe, and could be
considered in conjunction with subsequent options presented.
Project Concept 2 – DRTES Options
TTC’s DRTES proposed several new subway line options which have been grouped under one
Project Concept for the purposes of preliminary summary presentation and assessment. This report
uses the project name “Relief Line” (RL). The concept consists of a new underground subway
connection between Pape Station and the downtown core with possible western extension to Dundas
West Station and northern extension to Don Mills and Eglinton Ave.
While this Project Concept is based around subway options, this does not preclude similar
technology choices such as underground LRT or driverless metro. The purpose of this concept is to
have a high capacity technology with a grade separated right-of-way. The specific technology choice
24Relief Line Preliminary Benefits Case Analysis
can be determined in future study. Traditional TTC subway with Toronto Rocket trains was assumed
in the DRTES. Estimated travel times for different sections of the project concept are listed below:
19
FIGURE 12: ESTIMATED TRAVEL TIMES FOR PROJECT CONCEPT 2
20
TABLE 2: PROJECT CONCEPT 2 - TRAVEL TIMES AND SPEEDS
Average
Route Section Distance Travel Time
Speed
Eglinton/Don Mills to Pape 5.8 km 34 kph 10 min
Pape to King 5.6 km 34 kph 10 min
King to St. Andrew 0.6 km 18 kph 2 min
St. Andrew to Dundas West 7.2 km 33 kph 13 min
TOTAL ROUTE 19 km 32 kph 35 min
NOTE: Totals may not sum due to rounding
The DRTES scope proposes connections with rapid transit could occur at Pape, King, and St.
Andrew stations and at new proposed GO Transit stations at Gerrard (Lakeshore East/Stouffville)
and at River Street (Richmond Hill).
19 Travel times derived from DRTES distance and travel time information
20 Travel times derived from DRTES distance and travel time information
25Relief Line Preliminary Benefits Case Analysis
Option 2-1 – Subway connecting Pape Station to St. Andrew Station (DRTES Option 1)
Option 1 of the DRTES, this subway
line is approximately 6.2 km, with
stations every 500-1500 metres. The
approximate route is underground
south from Pape Station to Queen
Street, west on Queen Street to King
Street, then West on King Street to
St. Andrew Station.
Connections with rapid transit are
proposed at Pape, King, and St.
Andrew Stations for the subway, and
at new proposed GO stations at Gerrard (Lakeshore East /Stouffville), and at River Street (Richmond
Hill).
The estimated travel time from end to end of the subway line is 12 minutes.
Option 2-2 – Subway connecting Pape Station to Dundas West Station (DRTES Option 2a)
Option 2a of the DRTES, this
subway line is approximately 13.3
km, with stations every 500-1500
metres. The approximate route is
underground south from Pape
station to Queen Street, west on
Queen Street to King Street, west on
King Street curving up to Queen
Street at roughly Dufferin, west on
Queen Street to Roncesvalles, and
north on Roncesvalles to Dundas
West Station.
Connections with rapid transit are proposed at Pape, King, and St. Andrew, and Dundas West
stations for the subway, and at new proposed GO stations at Gerrard (Lakeshore East/Stouffville),
and at River Street (Richmond Hill), Roncesvalles (Lakeshore West), and Dufferin
(Milton/Kitchener/Barrie).
The estimated travel time from end to end of the subway line is 25 minutes.
26Relief Line Preliminary Benefits Case Analysis
Option 2-3 – Subway connecting Eglinton/Don Mills to St. Andrew Station
Option 2b of the DRTES, this
subway line is approximately 11.9
km, with stations every 500-1500
metres. The approximate route is
underground south from Eglinton
and Don Mills to Pape, south on
Pape to Queen Street, west on
Queen Street to King Street, and
west on King Street to St. Andrew
Station.
Connections with rapid transit are
proposed at Don Mills/Eglinton for
the Eglinton LRT, Pape, King, and St. Andrew stations for the subway, at new proposed GO stations
at Gerrard (Lakeshore East/Stouffville), and at River Street (Richmond Hill).
The estimated travel time from end to end of the subway line is 22 minutes.
Option 2-4 – Subway connecting Eglinton/Don Mills to Dundas West Station
Option 3 of the DRTES, this subway
line is approximately 19 km, with
stations every 500-1500 metres. The
approximate route is underground
south from Eglinton and Don Mills to
Pape station, then south to Queen
Street, west on Queen Street to King
Street, west on King Street curving up
to Queen Street at roughly Dufferin,
west on Queen Street to Roncesvalles,
and north on Roncesvalles to Dundas
West Station.
Connections with rapid transit are
proposed at Don Mills/Eglinton for the Eglinton LRT, Pape, King, St. Andrew, and Dundas West
stations for the subway, and at new proposed GO stations at Gerrard (Lakeshore/Stouffville), and at
River Street (Richmond Hill), Roncesvalles (Lakeshore West), and Dufferin (Milton/Kitchener/Barrie).
The estimated travel time from end to end of the subway line is 35 minutes.
27Relief Line Preliminary Benefits Case Analysis
Project Concept 3 – Union 2031 Options
Metrolinx’s Union Station 2031 Opportunities and Demands Study highlighted several rail corridors
where new higher frequency urban rail service could be introduced into the downtown via an
underground tunnel. This Project Concept requires the construction of new track, stations, and a new
downtown tunnel relieving Union Station. The primary purpose of these options is to offload demand
from Union Station. The report identified a variety of tunnel options to be considered for further
study.
Options 4B and 6B were presented for further consideration by the Union 2031 study presentation
material, and are carried forward for consideration in this report. The report identified that a variety of
tunnel options beyond the presented 4B and 6B options should be considered; important reference
for the future network analysis.
Option 3-1 – Subway connecting Pape to Exhibition GO Station
Option 4B of the Union 2031 study,
this subway line is approximately 9.4
km, with stations every 500-1500
metres. The approximate route is
underground south from Pape station
to Queen Street, west on Queen
Street to slightly west of University,
southwest to Front and Spadina, and
then west to Exhibition GO Station.
This Option proposes Queen Street as
the downtown east-west corridor,
which is different than the DRTES proposed options. Both studies indicate that the preferred corridor
is not yet determined and that the one identified is for analysis purposes.
GO trains on the Barrie and Kitchener lines would terminate at a new GO station at the Bathurst
North yard, which would connect to the subway line to allow passengers to continue their trips east.
Connections with rapid transit would occur at Pape, King, and St. Andrew stations for the subway,
and at new and current GO Stations at River Street (Richmond Hill), Exhibition (Lakeshore West),
and Bathurst North (Kitchener/Barrie).
The estimated travel time from end to end of the subway line is 18.5 minutes.
28Relief Line Preliminary Benefits Case Analysis
21
TABLE 3: PROJECT CONCEPT 3-1 – TRAVEL TIMES AND SPEEDS
Average
Route Section Distance Travel Time
Speed
Pape to King 5.6 km 34 kph 10 min
King to St. Andrew 0.6 km 18 kph 2 min
St. Andrew to Exhibition 3 km 30 kph 6 min
TOTAL ROUTE 9.2 km 31 kph 18 min
NOTE: Totals may not sum due to rounding
Option 3-2 – New Downtown Tunnel for Lakeshore GO Lines with a Second Union Station
Option 6B of the Union 2031 study, this
option requires a new tunnel to be built
under the existing rail corridor. This
tunnel would be used by both the
Lakeshore East and Lakeshore West
GO trains, stopping at a new
underground “second Union Station” at
Yonge Street.
This option introduces no new corridor,
and is specifically focused on Union
Station operations.
Project Concept 4 – Additional Options
Project Concept 4 represents any major investment options that had not been fully scoped in either
the DRTES or Union 2031 reports. Some potential options for study could include, but are not limited
to:
“Urban Regional Rail” utilizing GO corridors and an east-west tunnel running through
downtown under any potential east-west route;
21 Speeds taken from similar DRTES routings; travel times calculated from speeds.
29Relief Line Preliminary Benefits Case Analysis
Lakeshore Rapid Transit (as
suggested in DRTES)
New service making use of
the GO Transit-owned Don
sub
Use of the CP main line
through midtown Toronto
Improved usage of rail in the
Don Valley
30Relief Line Preliminary Benefits Case Analysis
Part C Assessment
Evaluation Framework
The Relief Line Preliminary BCA presents a three-stage approach for summarizing the assessment of
the alternatives in advance of more detailed study to be done in a Network Analysis and subsequent
full BCA.
First is a criteria-based assessment, which synthesizes the assessment criteria from previous studies
to achieve a regional view of the Project Concepts. This assessment tests if the Project Concepts
satisfy the project objectives defined in Part A of this report.
Second is an Early Performance Summary to indicate whether the performance of the Project
Concepts perform at a reasonable level. This Early Performance Summary uses existing and
available analysis, using reasonable comparisons in some cases, to achieve a coarse performance
assessment. This assessment is intended to be the best possible in the absence of detailed analysis
that would be part of a standard Multiple Account Evaluation (MAE), which would include a cost-
benefit ratio of all alternatives, among other measures.
Thirdly, a preview of the Multiple Account Evaluation (MAE) is presented, with full results expected in
a future full BCA. Metrolinx’s MAE follows international best practices for project evaluation, covering
the project’s fiscal impact, transportation user benefits, and incorporating Metrolinx’s three pillars:
Economic, Environmental, and Social sustainability.
Criteria Based Early Performance Multiple Account
Assessment Summary Evaluation Preview
•Criteria are summarized •Comparative evaluation to •Overview and preview of
•Reference Cases and other transformational elements of the full MAE
Project Concepts are regional projects •MAE will be populated by
tested to meet the •Summary of performance inputs from future
primary criteria results from DRTES network study
For the Preliminary-BCA, an overview and preview of these accounts is presented. A full quantitative
Multiple Account Evaluation will take place in a full BCA, after detailed analysis inputs are available
from a network study, which has not yet begun.
31You can also read
