Yonge Subway Extension Finch Station to Richmond Hill Centre

Yonge Subway Extension

Finch Station to Richmond Hill Centre

Conceptual Design and Functional Planning

Technical Report

Richmond Hill Centre Alignment Alternatives

January 2009

Yonge Subway Extension – Finch Station to Richmond Hill Centre


Technical Report


1.

2.

3.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

PREFACE.......................................................................................................................................1

4.

5.

INTRODUCTION..............................................................................................................2

OPPORTUNITIES AND CONSTRAINTS.....................................................................5

RICHMOND HILL CENTRE ALTERNATIVES .........................................................8

3.1 Generation of Route Alternatives ........................................................................... 8

3.2 Development of Alignment Alternatives ................................................................ 9

ASSESSMENT AND EVALUATION OF LONG-LIST OF ALTERNATIVES ......13

4.1 Methodology ......................................................................................................... 13

4.2 Screening of Alignment Alternatives.................................................................... 13

4.2.1 Geometric Alignment Constraints ............................................................ 13

4.2.2 Langstaff / Longbridge and Richmond Hill Centre Couplet .................... 14

4.3 General Assessment of Alternatives 1-5............................................................... 15

4.4 Highway 407 / Highway 7 Corridor Subway Station Alternatives....................... 18

4.4.1 Alternatives B1 and C1............................................................................. 18

4.4.2 Alternatives B2 and C2............................................................................. 19

4.4.3 Alternative D............................................................................................. 20

4.5 Other Factors......................................................................................................... 24

4.5.1 Future Yonge Subway Extension.............................................................. 24

4.5.2 Highway 407 Transitway.......................................................................... 25

ASSESSMENT AND EVALUATION OF SHORT-LIST OF ALTERNATIVES ....26

5.1 Evaluation Methodology....................................................................................... 26

5.2 Station Layout Concepts and Surface Integration ................................................ 26

5.3 Assessment of Alignment Alternatives A, B and C.............................................. 38

5.4 Selection of a Preferred Alternative...................................................................... 38

6.

REFINEMENTS SUGGESTED DURING CONSULTATION ..................................40

6.1 Refinements Suggested During Consultation ....................................................... 40

6.2 Consultation on the Preferred Alternative ............................................................ 41

7.

CONSTRUCTION STAGING .......................................................................................42

7.1 Stage 1 – Tunnel Drives........................................................................................ 42

7.2 Stage 2 – Station Construction.............................................................................. 43

7.3 Stage 3 - Systems Installation ............................................................................... 43

APPENDICES

Appendix 1 - Assessment of Richmond Hill Centre Alignment Alternatives

Appendix 2 - Evaluation of Richmond Hill Centre Alignment Alternatives

York Region Rapid Transit Corporation January 28, 2009 Page i



Technical Report


PREFACE

The Regional Municipality of York, City of Toronto and the Toronto

Transit Commission (TTC), in partnership with York Region Rapid

Transit Corporation, have completed a Conceptual Design and

Functional Planning Study for a proposed extension of the Yonge

Street Subway. The intent of the study was to undertake preliminary planning in preparation for a Transit Project Assessment for the proposed subway extension.

On June 15, 2007, the Province of Ontario announced $17.5 billion in funding for transit projects for the Greater Toronto Area and

Hamilton. Named ‘MoveOntario 2020’, the provincial transit plan includes funding for an extension of the Yonge Street Subway from its current terminus at Finch Station in the City of Toronto to

Highway 7 (Richmond Hill Centre) in the Town of Richmond Hill.

As a result, on June 21 2007, York Region Council authorized commencement of a Conceptual Planning and Functional Design

Study in coordination with the City of Toronto for the timely extension of the subway.

The scope of Conceptual Design and Functional Planning was to examine and evaluate possible vertical and horizontal alignment alternatives, station locations, and associated surface facilities along the corridor in consultation with public and government stakeholders. The goal was to develop a technically feasible solution and the results would serve as the basis that defines the

Transit Project. As part of the Transit Project Assessment process, an Environmental Project Report is being prepared. It is intended that the Environmental Project Report will be completed and formally submitted to the province in February 2009.

This technical report is one of a series of reports prepared for discussion purposes. The reports are as follows:

• Station Location Analysis

• East Don River Crossing Alternatives

• Richmond Hill Centre Alignment Alternatives

• Station Layout Concepts

York Region Rapid Transit Corporation January 28, 2009 Page 1



Technical Report


1. INTRODUCTION

The York Region Official Plan outlines a regional structure and growth management approach that establishes a system of centres and corridors that provide a focus for residential and commercial development. The four Regional Centres identified in the

York Region Official Plan, shown in Figure 1-1 are the Region's "downtowns."

Figure 1-1 Map 5 of the York Region Official Plan showing the Richmond Hill Centre

Strategically located in Newmarket, Vaughan, Richmond Hill and Markham, Regional

Centres are planned to become hubs of business, cultural, government, and social activity. Regional Centres will mature to contain the highest concentration and greatest mix of uses in the Region, including a range of employment and housing opportunities.

Development will be in a compact, well-designed form that contributes to an urban fabric that is vibrant, safe, attractive, pedestrian-friendly and transit-supportive. Strategic investments in rapid and conventional public transit, and other infrastructure by the public and private sectors, will ensure the long-term vitality of Regional Centres, making them desirable and efficient places to live, work, play and learn.

York Region’s approach to growth is consistent with the Province of Ontario’s Places to

Grow Plan (2008) , which identifies the Richmond Hill/Langstaff Gateway shown in

Figure 1-2 as one of the four urban growth centres in York Region. The Places to Grow

Plan encourages the Towns of Richmond Hill and Markham to urbanize the Richmond




Technical Report


Figure 1-2 Richmond Hill / Langstaff Urban Growth Centre

Hill Centre’s existing built environment through intensification, transit investments and a more walkable / pedestrian-friendly built form. In order to achieve these goals, the

Places to Grow Plan identifies a target of 200 jobs and residents per hectare compared to




Technical Report

Richmond Hill Centre Alignment Alternatives an estimated 15 jobs and residents per hectare (Statistics Canada 2001 data). The

Richmond Hill/Langstaff Gateway occupies 175 hectares indicating a potential target of

35,000 jobs and residents for the urban growth centre. The Town of Markham estimates upwards of 17,500 jobs and residents for the Langstaff development south of Highway

407.

Proposed new development at Langstaff combined with local and regional transit services, showcases the potential for the Richmond Hill Centre to be a world class intermodal passenger hub (mobility hub) with adjacent transit-supportive development, acting as the southern-central transit gateway in York Region. The Yonge Street subway,

GO Transit rail, CN rail, GO Transit 407 services (ultimately the 407 Transitway), Viva rapid transit and YRT conventional services will all connect at the Richmond Hill Centre.

Physical constraints in the area collectively present a unique set of conditions for generating the best terminal arrangements for all of these services.




Technical Report


2. OPPORTUNITIES AND CONSTRAINTS

Today, the core of the Richmond Hill Centre area features the Viva bus terminal, the

Viva / GO pedestrian bridge, a large theatre complex, two restaurants and a book store on property owned by one private landowner, and a woodlot owned by the Town of

Richmond Hill, as shown in Figure 2-1 . The Viva bus terminal connects the existing

Yonge Street and Highway 7 surface rapid transit network with GO rail passengers, the latter via a pedestrian bridge crossing over the Richmond Hill GO Line to the GO rail and bus station (see Figures 2-2, 2-3, and 2-4 ). The site is also constrained by the major east west Hydro One corridor in the southern portion of the property, and immediately north of the Hydro One corridor by the Ontario Realty Corporation east-west surface and below-grade utility easement.

Figure 2-1 Existing Richmond Hill Centre Core




Technical Report


To the east, the site is constrained by the CN Bala Subdivision rail line (Richmond Hill

GO Line), which runs north-south on the east side of the existing Viva bus terminal. The recently completed Viva / GO pedestrian bridge has been designed for future extension to connect to future, transit-oriented development and / or expansion into a completely new intermodal terminal that will be developed on the site.

To the west, existing residential development west of Yonge Street limits the available right-of-way for locating a station and a terminal. The Town of Richmond Hill woodlot at the southeast corner of the Yonge Street / High Tech Road intersection presents a natural environment constraint.

To the north, High Tech Road rises in elevation from Yonge Street to the bridge crossing over the CN rail tracks, creating a physical barrier. An existing opening under the High

Tech Road Bridge provides some additional north / south access across the barrier. North of High Tech Road, commercial and residential land uses are constraints to be considered in providing for future extension of the Yonge subway alignment north of the Richmond

Hill Centre in the Yonge corridor.

To the south, the site is constrained physically by a major storm water management pond, the 500 kV Hydro One transmission lines and towers and rising grades to Highway 7 and

Highway 407. South of Highway 407 and the Langstaff lands, the Holy Cross Catholic

Cemetery is a potential constraint for the southern approach of the subway alignment to the Richmond Hill Centre as the result of the need to meet TTC subway design standards.

Major development proposals have been received by the Town of Markham for the

Langstaff development lands south of Highway 407. With Highway 407 posing a physical barrier that bisects the Richmond Hill Centre / Langstaff Gateway Urban

Growth Centre, integration of the north and south components of the Urban Growth

Centre will need to be carefully examined. Potential exists for the CN right-of-way under

Highway 407 and Highway 7 to be developed to include a pedestrian or local transit connector linking the two planning areas of the Urban Growth Centre together.

A portion of the Hydro One corridor crossing the site is asphalted to provide parking for the theatre complex. On the east side of the CN rail tracks, GO Transit commuters park in the Langstaff area south of Highway 407 and under the Hydro One transmission lines north of Highway 7. The GO rail platform extends between these areas, under the

Highway 7 / Highway 407 bridges.

Further commuter parking and drop-off facilities will be required to support the

Richmond Hill Centre / Langstaff Gateway and will be part of the comprehensive planning of the intermodal hub east and west of the CN tracks. The 3300 parking spaces at the existing Finch Station cannot meet the present parking demand and plans are also being considered that will reduce the available spaces in order to support a ring road on the west side of Yonge Street. TTC studies show that the origin of approximately 1900 current parking users at Finch Station is from areas northwest of Highway 7 and Yonge

Street and accordingly, commuter parking must be provided for the Yonge Subway

Extension as far north as possible to intercept this demand. Opportunities for commuter parking have been identified south of Highway 407 and west of Yonge Street in the City of Vaughan, in the Hydro One corridor, adjacent to and served by the proposed Langstaff




Technical Report


/ Longbridge subway station. This location is currently the only significant new park and ride opportunity in the study area north of Finch Station and is important for the development of an intermodal hub servicing the Richmond Hill Centre / Langstaff

Gateway. The transfer of approximately 2000 commuter parking spaces from Finch

Station to the Hydro One corridor, adjacent the proposed Langstaff / Longbridge subway station would save commuters approximately 5.7 million vehicle-km per year and provide corresponding environmental benefits. Accordingly, the proposed Langstaff /

Longbridge subway station and the Richmond Hill Centre subway station are proposed as complementary elements delivering the full set of transit services within an intermodal hub operating couplet.

Figure 2-2 Richmond Hill Centre Terminal – Looking South

Figure 2-3 Richmond Hill Centre Terminal – Looking North

Figure 2-4 Langstaff GO Station




Technical Report


3. RICHMOND HILL CENTRE ALTERNATIVES

The generation of route and alignment alternatives for the subway in the Richmond Hill

Centre area was undertaken based on a number of guiding principles, including:

• Maximize connectivity (minimize walking distances) between multiple intermodal services including the subway, YRT / Viva and GO bus, the 407 Transitway and the

GO Train;

• Maximize opportunity for transit-oriented development at the Richmond Hill \

Langstaff Gateway, including but not limited to: generating alignment alternatives parallel to Yonge Street to best accommodate the architectural arrangement of future development;

• Maintain consistency with TTC subway design and operations standards;

• Ensure feasibility of the extension of the Yonge subway alignment north of the

Richmond Hill Centre in the Yonge corridor;

• Avoid as many of the identified constraints as possible, including the Holy Cross

Catholic Cemetery;

• Minimize construction and long-term impacts on the environment, for example impacts resulting from the requirement for a long open-cut tangent section in the station area to accommodate the cross-over track, station and tail track.

3.1 Generation of Route Alternatives

Two primary route alternatives were identified for the Yonge / Highway 407 to

Richmond Hill Centre section as shown in Figure 3-1 .

Figure 3-1 Two Primary Route Alternatives




Technical Report


Yonge Street Route Alternative

With reference to Figure 3-1 , the Yonge Street route (yellow) continues north on Yonge

Street, crossing under Highway 407 / Highway 7 and would place the Richmond Hill

Centre Subway Station on Yonge Street adjacent to the existing large theatre/restaurant block, creating a considerable (over 500 metre) walking distance to transfer to the rail/bus intermodal facility adjacent to the rail tracks at the existing Richmond Hill Centre Bus

Terminal / GO Station and future 407 Transit Terminal. A range of horizontal alignments between Yonge Street and the storm water retention pond north of Highway 7 were explored for the Yonge Street route.

Langstaff Route Alternative

With reference to Figure 3-1 , the Langstaff route (blue) swings easterly from the Yonge

Street right-of-way on the south side of Highway 407, travels under the Langstaff lands and crosses under Highway 407 / Highway 7 to a central location in the Richmond Hill

Centre lands. A range of horizontal alignments were explored for the Langstaff route, which would place the Richmond Hill Centre Subway Station centrally in the Richmond

Hill Centre lands within proximity of the planned interface between the Richmond Hill

Centre bus terminal, Langstaff GO Station, and the future Highway 407 Transitway.

3.2 Development of Alignment Alternatives

Numerous alignments were generated for initial consideration, including those alignments described in Section 4.4 of this report. After giving due consideration to constraints, in particular the constraint of the Holy Cross Catholic Cemetery in the south and opportunities for future extension of the Yonge Subway beyond the Richmond Hill

Centre to the north, five alignment alternatives as shown in Figure 3-2 , were selected by the technical team for further assessment.

Figure 3-2 Five Alignment Alternatives




Technical Report


Holy Cross Catholic Cemetery Constraint

An alignment was generated to accommodate placement of the Richmond Hill Centre subway station in the vicinity of the existing Viva bus terminal and GO Train facilities.

However, in order to achieve a minimum subway design speed of 80km/hr it was necessary for the alignment to traverse under the Holy Cross Catholic Cemetery in the process of reconnecting with Yonge Street to the south.

Due to the uniqueness and corresponding sensitivities associated with the Holy Cross

Catholic Cemetery, a large (145 acres) and well-established (50 years) land use, the study team took a precautionary approach to developing alignment alternatives that impacted the cemetery. Aside from respecting the sensitivity of the public, owner, religious organizations and others, there were operational and technical reasons which led the team to eliminate traversing under the Holy Cross Catholic Cemetery as a feasible alternative, specifically;

• The location of a subway station on Yonge St at Langstaff/Longbridge would not be feasible for Langstaff Route alignment alternatives since the subway alignment geometric design constraints (minimum subway design speed of 80km/hr, minimum track curve radii and minimum tangent lengths for station areas) would require that the subway rejoin Yonge Street further south. Besides serving the west part of the future Langstaff Gateway developments and the residential community west of

Yonge Street, the Langstaff/Longbridge subway station is required to support the only significant potential park and ride opportunity north of Finch Station (under the

Hydro Corridor);

• Although the use of modern design minimizes aspects such as vibration; the impacts of potential disturbance during construction would have to be considered;

• Although tunnel boring techniques minimize the loss of materials and/or soil failure, the impacts of potential effects during construction would have to be considered;

• Potential future requirements for additional vent shafts and maintenance accesses would be limited

Accordingly, alternatives which impacted the Holy Cross Catholic Cemetery were eliminated from further consideration.

Alternative 1 – Yonge Street Only

This alternative was considered with the objective of utilizing the existing Yonge Street right-of-way to the greatest extent possible. The subway alignment would continue north on Yonge Street, crossing under Highway 407 / Highway 7, placing the Richmond Hill

Centre subway station on Yonge Street south of High Tech Road, adjacent to the protected woodlot owned by the Town of Richmond Hill.




Technical Report


Alternative 2 – Yonge \ Central RHC \ Bantry Ave Connection

This alternative was considered with the objective of locating the Richmond Hill Centre subway station centrally on the Richmond Hill Centre site and returning the alignment to

Yonge Street as soon as possible north of the Richmond Hill Centre, while maximizing the opportunity for an alignment parallel to Yonge Street to best accommodate the architectural arrangement of future transit-oriented development.

North of the Holy Cross Catholic Cemetery, the subway alignment would swing gently eastwards, crossing the northwest corner of the Langstaff development lands, turning northwards under the Highway 407 / Highway 7 bridges and running parallel to Yonge

Street, under the Hydro One transmission towers and the western edge of the stormwater management pond, to a subway station on the east side of the protected woodlot owned by the Town of Richmond Hill. North of the subway station, the alignment would swing westwards and reconnect to Yonge Street on the south side of Bantry Ave.

Alternative 3 – Yonge \ Central RHC \ Beresford Drive Connection

This alternative was considered with the objective of locating the Richmond Hill Centre subway station centrally on the Richmond Hill Centre site and returning the alignment to

Yonge Street as soon as possible north of the Richmond Hill Centre, while minimizing impacts on residential properties on the north side of Beresford Drive.

North of the Holy Cross Catholic Cemetery, the subway alignment would swing gently eastwards, crossing the northwest corner of the Langstaff development lands. The alignment would turn northwards under Highway 407 / Highway 7, avoiding the Hydro

One transmission towers and running to the east of the stormwater management pond.

The alignment would swing westwards to a subway station on the east side of the protected woodlot owned by the Town of Richmond Hill. North of the subway station, the alignment continues westwards to reconnect to Yonge Street on the south side of

Beresford Drive.

Alternative 4 – Yonge \ Central RHC \ CN Bala Richmond Hill GO Line

This alternative was considered with the objective of locating the Richmond Hill Centre subway station centrally on the Richmond Hill Centre site and utilizing the existing transit corridor on the west side of the CN Bala Richmond Hill GO Line before reconnecting to Yonge Street north of the Richmond Hill Centre.

North of the Holy Cross Catholic Cemetery, the subway alignment would swing gently eastwards, crossing the northwest corner of the Langstaff development lands on the same alignment as Alternative 3. The alignment would turn northwards under Highway 407 /

Highway 7, avoiding the Hydro One transmission towers and running to the east of the stormwater management pond to a subway station at the existing cinema / theatre complex. North of the subway station, the alignment terminates at the end of subway tail tracks in the transit corridor on the west side of the CN Bala Richmond Hill GO Line.

Opportunities for future northerly subway extension beyond the existing study area include swinging the alignment westwards to reconnect to Yonge Street south of or in the vicinity of 16th Avenue.




Technical Report


Alternative 5 – Yonge \ East RHC \ CN Bala Richmond Hill GO Line

This alternative was considered with the objective of locating the Richmond Hill Centre subway station as close as possible to the existing Viva bus terminal and GO Train facilities (i.e. as far east as practicable on the Richmond Hill Centre site but west of the

CN railway).

North of the Holy Cross Catholic Cemetery, the subway alignment would swing sharply eastwards and cross further eastward under the Langstaff development lands. The alignment would turn northwards and run on the west side of the Hydro One transmission towers adjacent to the CN railway to a subway station on the west side of the existing

Richmond Hill Centre bus terminal. North of the subway station the alignment terminates at the end of subway tail tracks in the transit corridor on the west side of the

CN Bala Richmond Hill GO Line. Opportunities for future northerly subway extension beyond the existing study area include swinging the alignment westwards to reconnect to

Yonge Street south of or in the vicinity of 16th Avenue.




Technical Report


4. ASSESSMENT AND EVALUATION OF LONG-LIST OF

ALTERNATIVES

4.1 Methodology

The assessment and evaluation of alternatives was conducted in two stages. The first stage, that analyzed and evaluated alignment alternatives, was intended to screen out poor alternatives and identify those that merited further analysis. In the second stage, the best alternative from those carried forward was determined.

The initial set of alternatives was screened by undertaking a general assessment of each alternative based on a set of evaluation criteria established by the Yonge Subway study team. Once the short-list of alternatives was identified, a formal methodology was developed to compare the alternatives and the chosen alternatives were refined to a level that would allow the comparison to include all features of the alternative.

4.2 Screening of Alignment Alternatives

The first stage screening of the five alternative alignments is summarized in Figure 4.3-1.

In assessing the alternatives, three evaluation criteria were deemed to be of prime importance i.e. “Integrate with Potential TOD (East of Yonge Street)”, “Maintaining TTC

Standard Design Speed (80kph)” and “Minimize walking distance from the other transit agencies facilities (MTO 407 Transitway; GO Transit; YRT)”.

These criteria underpin the vision for the Richmond Hill Centre to be a world class intermodal passenger hub acting as the southern-central transit gateway to York Region, fully integrated with a major transit-oriented development plan. The criterion

“Maintaining TTC Standard Design Speed (80kph)” introduces practical constraints for the horizontal and vertical alignments of the alternatives as elaborated below.

4.2.1 Geometric Alignment Constraints

Operational planning for the proposed Yonge Subway Extension indicates that a crossover track is required on the south side of the Richmond Hill Centre terminal subway station and a tail track is required on the north side for train storage. The required length of tangential track for this configuration is therefore approximately 580m made up of

180m for the cross-over track, 150m for the station platform, 10m at each of the two platform ends for mechanical equipment and signals, and 230m for a tail track.

Good operational planning requires that track curves accommodate full subway operating speeds, including at curved approaches to subway stations, where it is important for subway vehicles to have the ability to achieve maximum speed as quickly as possible after leaving the station. Accordingly a minimum horizontal track radius should be used in conceptual design in order to accommodate a subway design speed of 80km/hr.In addition, a spiral section of track, typically 25m long, is required to transition from a tangential to a superelevated, curved section of track, potentially limiting the geometry of some subway alignment alternatives.




Technical Report


Conceptual design of the subway vertical alignment provided for a track gradient of 2.5% combined with a vertical sag curve on the south side of the Richmond Hill Centre subway station. This practice creates favourable subway operating conditions as it accommodates acceleration and deceleration of subway vehicles as they leave or approach the subway station, respectively.

Tangent length, spiral length and curve radii requirements were key constraints for defining the geometric alignment of the subway line between the Langstaff / Longbridge subway station and the Richmond Hill Centre subway station.

4.2.2 Langstaff / Longbridge and Richmond Hill Centre Couplet

The Langstaff / Longbridge and Richmond Hill Centre Subway stations are proposed as an operating couplet. Together, both stations deliver the full functions of a multimodal hub and terminal arrangement including:

• Ease of movement for passengers between the various transit modes including: subway, Viva bus rapid transit along Highway 7 and Yonge Street, GO rail services, the future 407 Transitway, and commuter parking;

• Pedestrian access to the subway system from the Richmond Hill / Langstaff

Gateway;

• Commuter parking to relocate the majority of parking and transit users now parking at the Finch Station commuter parking lot.

Commuter Parking

The existing Finch Station commuter parking facilities includes 3300 parking spaces, which is insufficient to meet the present commuter parking demand. Plans are also being considered that will reduce the available spaces at Finch Station in order to support a ring road on the west side of Yonge Street. TTC studies show that the origin of approximately 1900 current parking users at Finch Station is from areas northwest of

Highway 7 and Yonge Street and therefore commuter parking must be provided for the

Yonge Subway Extension as far north as possible to intercept this demand.

The Yonge Subway Extension study area, including the Richmond Hill Centre, was reviewed for commuter parking opportunities. The review indicated there were limited opportunities at the Richmond Hill Centre to satisfy commuter parking requirements within practical walking distances of potential station locations and without significant impacts on the immediate local road network. Furthermore, the land within the

Richmond Hill Centre has been designated for higher order use that conflicts with surface parking uses, and the majority of the land is privately owned. The only feasible location in the study area for a significant commuter parking lot was identified to be within the

Hydro One corridor west of, and adjacent to the Longbridge/Langstaff intersection with

Yonge Street. The transfer of 1900 commuter parking spaces from Finch Station to the

Hydro One corridor, adjacent the proposed Langstaff / Longbridge subway station would




Technical Report

Richmond Hill Centre Alignment Alternatives save commuters approximately 5.7 million vehicle-km per year and provide corresponding environmental benefits.

Pedestrian Access

The proposed Richmond Hill / Langstaff Gateway is split east west by Highway 407,

Highway 7 and the Hydro One corridor. The main connection between the future

Langstaff and Richmond Hill Centre developments will be via Red Cedar Avenue, east of the CN rail line, under both the Highway 407 and Highway 7 bridges. A pedestrian corridor also exists running along the west side of the CN Rail line that would connect the western portion of the Langstaff development with the Richmond Hill Centre.

Pedestrian walking distances were examined within the Langstaff area, and it was found that for the residents or businesses to the west of the CN Rail line the walking distances would be considerably shorter to a station at Langstaff / Longbridge compared to distances via the pedestrian corridor to the proposed subway station location at the

Richmond Hill Centre.

The possibility of locating the Richmond Hill Centre station further south to improve pedestrian access was considered. However, in the case of the Langstaff Route alternatives, which place the Richmond Hill Centre between the CN tracks and Yonge

Street, the need to avoid a subway alignment under the Holy Cross Catholic Cemetery requires that the Langstaff / Longbridge subway station be at its most northerly possible position, but south of the physical constraints posed by Highway 7 / Highway 407, the

Hydro One corridor, etc (see Section 2). In turn, the geometric design constraints associated with the subway alignment north of the Langstaff / Longbridge Station requires that the Richmond Hill Centre station is located further north, across High Tech

Road.

Summary

In order to fully support the functions required for a multimodal hub and terminal arrangement, including commuter parking, a two station arrangement is proposed. The location of the Langstaff / Longbridge station would best serve the western edge of the

Langstaff lands, the residential community west of Yonge Street and the only significant potential park and ride opportunity north of Finch Station. The Richmond Hill Centre station would serve the remainder of the Urban Growth Centre. Collectively the two stations maximize intermodal connectivity and opportunity for transit-oriented development at the Richmond Hill Centre / Langstaff gateway.

4.3 General Assessment of Alternatives 1-5

Figure 4-1 summarizes the assessment of the advantages and disadvantages of

Alternatives 1 to 5 with respect to the listed evaluation criteria.




Technical Report


Figure 4-1 Screening of Alternative Alignments - General Assessment

Alternative 1 Alternative 2 Alternative 3 Alternative 4 Alternative 5

Yonge Street Only

Yonge \ Central RHC \

Bantry Ave Connection

Evaluation Criteria

Maintain TTC standard design speed (80 Maintains 80 KPH design

KPH) speed

Design speed reduced to

70 KPH north of the

Station


Beresford Drive

Connection


CN Bala Richmond Hill

GO Line

Yonge \ East RHC \ CN

Bala Richmond Hill GO

Line

Maintains 80 KPH design speed

Maintains 80 KPH design speed

Design speed reduced to

70 KPH south of the

Station

Avoid impact on Holy Cross Cemetery Avoids impact Avoids impact Avoids impact Avoids impact Avoids impact

Avoid impact on existing bridge foundations

Integrate with potential TOD (East of

Yonge Street)

Avoids impact Tunnel under Highway

407 and Hwy 7 bridges.

Foundation dwgs. to be reviewed.

Avoids impact Avoids impact Avoids impact

Least potential for redevelopment within the station zone of influence

Greater potential for redevelopment within the station zone of influence as half the zone is west of as the entire zone is

Yonge Street, outside the potential redevelopment of the Richmond Hill

Centre area within the potential redevelopment of the

Greater potential for redevelopment within the station zone of influence as the entire zone is within the potential redevelopment of the

Greater potential for redevelopment within the station zone of influence as the entire zone is within the potential redevelopment of the

Less potential for redevelopment within the station zone of influence as the zone does not extend all the way to

Yonge Street, capturing

Richmond Hill Centre area Richmond Hill Centre area Richmond Hill Centre area less of the potential redevelopment of the

Richmond Hill Centre area

Avoid impact on Hydro Towers Avoids impact Potential impact on one of Avoids impact the Towers. Foundation dwgs, to be reviewed.

Avoids impact Avoids impact

Avoid Impact to Storm Water

Management Pond

Avoids impact

Avoid impact on private property Avoids impact

Avoid impact on Woodland (south of

High Tech Road)

Avoids impact

Cut & cover construction affects approximately

750m

2

of the pond

Very minor effect during construction

Very minor effect during construction

Avoids impact

Moderate impact to

Cinema and commercial

Minor impact to Cinema and commercial

Major impact to Cinema and minor impact to YRT development north of High development north of High and Restaurant's parking

Tech Road during cut & Tech Road during cut & lot during cut & cover cover construction. cover construction. construction.

Moderate impact to

Cinema and minor impact to YRT and Restaurant's parking lots during cut & cover construction.

Potential north future Potential north future extension alignment under extension alignment under commercial development south and north of 16th

Avenue. commercial development south and north of 16th

Avenue.

Cut & cover construction Cut & cover construction affects corner of woodland affects corner of woodland

Avoids impact

(minimum impact) (minimum impact)

Avoids impact

Avoid impact on existing utilities Relocation required.

Requires easement under Requires easement under Requires easement under Requires easement under

Utility Corridor Utility Corridor Utility Corridor Utility Corridor

Minimize walking distance from the other transit

MTO 407

Transitway

Agencies facilities (MTO

407 Transitway; GO Transit;

GO Transit

YRT) YRT

On-line Station: 480 m

Off-line Station:

480 m

Maintain alignment parallel to Yonge

Street


Off-line Station:

320 m


Off-line Station:

320 m


Off-line Station:

180 m


Off-line Station:

70 m

TBD based on preliminary TBD based on preliminary TBD based on preliminary TBD based on preliminary TBD based on preliminary facilities layout but facilities layout but facilities layout but facilities layout but facilities layout but potentially further than

Alts. 2-5 potentially closer than Alt. potentially closer than Alt. potentially closer than Alt. potentially closer than Alt.

1 1 1 1

Alignment along Yonge

Street

Alignment parallel to

Yonge Street

20 degree angled Alignment parallel to

Yonge Street

15 degree angled

Advantage

Disadvantage




Technical Report


The first stage screening indicated that Alternatives 1, 3 and 4 merited further consideration. They were developed in further detail and evolved into Alternatives A, B and C respectively as shown in Figure 4-2 .

Figure 4-2 Richmond Hill Centre Alignment Alternatives A, B, C

Alternative A – Yonge Street Only

Alternative B – Yonge \ Central RHC \ Beresford Drive Connection

Alternative C – Yonge \ Central RHC \ CN Bala Richmond Hill GO Line

Alternative 2 – Yonge \ Central RHC \ Bantry Ave Connection

Alternative 2 was removed from further consideration for the following primary reasons:

• Positioning of the cross-over track and subway station (which require cut-andcover construction) to minimize impacts to the stormwater management pond, the

Hydro One transmission towers and residential properties to the north, resulted in an alignment north of the Richmond Hill Centre which could not accommodate the TTC Standard Design Speed (80kph).

• Tunnel construction beneath the foundations of a Hydro One transmission tower and the foundations of Highway 407 / Highway 7 bridges would be problematic and unacceptable to the corresponding stakeholders.




Technical Report


Alternative 5 – Yonge \ East RHC \ CN Bala Richmond Hill GO Line

Alternative 5 was removed from further consideration for the following primary reasons:

• Given the southern constraint of the Holy Cross Cemetery and the objective of positioning the subway station adjacent to the existing Viva bus terminal and GO

Train facilities, it was not possible to create a horizontal alignment which avoided the Holy Cross Cemetery and satisfied the minimum curve radii requirements associated with the TTC Standard Design Speed (80kph).

Alternative 4 – Yonge \ Central RHC \ CN Bala Richmond Hill GO Line

It is noted that Alternative 4 terminates at the end of the subway tail tracks in the transit corridor on the west side of the CN Bala Richmond Hill GO Line. Future northerly extension of the subway beyond the existing study area could include alignment alternatives which swing westwards immediately north of the Richmond Hill Centre subway station, or in the vicinity of 16 th

Avenue, or at some point in between, in order to reconnect to Yonge Street. Such future alignment alternatives that reconnect to Yonge

Street south of 16 th

Avenue have not been precluded but would have greater impacts on private residential properties than alignment alternatives that reconnect to Yonge Street immediately north of 16 th

Avenue.

4.4 Highway 407 / Highway 7 Corridor Subway Station Alternatives

Alignment alternatives that would accommodate a Richmond Hill Centre subway station under or near the Highway 407 / Highway 7 corridor, between the Langstaff lands and the Richmond Hill Centre lands, were generated by the technical team early during development of alignment alternatives. In reviewing these initial alignment alternatives the technical team recognized the constraints described below and eliminated these alternatives prior to selection of Alternatives 1 – 5 for further assessment. Subsequent to the initial screening the Town of Markham requested a meeting to discuss alternatives for locating a Richmond Hill Centre subway station under or near the Highway 407 /

Highway 7 corridor, between the Langstaff lands and the Richmond Hill Centre lands.

Accordingly, Alternatives B1, C1, B2, C2 and D shown in Figures 4-3 to 4-5 were presented for discussion at a workshop with stakeholders on September 22, 2008. The alternatives and the rationale for removing them from further consideration are described below.

4.4.1 Alternatives B1 and C1

These alternatives examine the impact of moving the subway station approximately 70m south and 120m south respectively for B1 and C1 toward the Hydro One corridor while maintaining the standard station configuration, providing for a cross-over track on the south side and a tail track on the north side of the station. The Highway 407 Transitway station is located within the Highway 407 corridor. The alignment does not impact

Highway 407 bridge abutments / structures.

Disadvantages of Alternative B1 include:




Technical Report


• The alignment would require the relocation of the 230kv Hydro One power line and one hydro tower as well as the installation of one new hydro tower

• The alignment would cross the protected woodlot owned by the Town of

Richmond Hill

Disadvantages of Alternative C1 include:


• The alignment would cross the existing stormwater management pond and would require relocation of the stormwater management pond as it would not be desirable to restore the stormwater management pond to its original location above a cut-and-cover subway box

• The alignment would require cut-and-cover construction under the 500kv Hydro

One power line in order to construct the cross-over track on the south side of the station

4.4.2 Alternatives B2 and C2

These alternatives examine the impact of locating the subway station in the Hydro One corridor while making provision for both the cross-over track and the tail track on the north side of the station. The Highway 407 Transitway station is located within the

Highway 407 corridor. The alignment does not impact Highway 407 bridge abutments / structures.

Disadvantages of Alternative B2 include:


• The alignment would cross the protected woodlot owned by the Town of

Richmond Hill

• Situation of the cross-over track operation on the north side of the station would not be technically feasible or operationally desirable

• Pedestrian connections to the subway station would be isolated from other land use activities

Disadvantages of Alternative C2 include:


• Situation of the cross-over track operation on the north side of the station would not be technically feasible or operationally desirable

• The alignment would cross the existing stormwater management pond and would require relocation of the stormwater management pond as it would not be




Technical Report

Richmond Hill Centre Alignment Alternatives desirable to restore the stormwater management pond to its original location above a cut-and-cover subway box

4.4.3 Alternative D

This alternative examines the impact of locating the subway station within the Highway

407 / Highway 7 corridor while maintaining the standard station configuration, providing for a cross-over track on the south side and a tail track on the north side of the station.

The Highway 407 Transitway station is located within the Highway 407 corridor. The alignment does not impact Highway 407 bridge abutments / structures.

Disadvantages of Alternative D include:

• The Langstaff / Longbridge subway station would be too close to the Richmond

Hill Centre subway station and would be relocated to Bunker / Helen Avenue approximately 800 - 1000 metres to the south. Consequently, the Royal Orchard subway station would be eliminated due to alignment/station spacing constraints.

• The walking distance from the subway station to the commuter parking area would be increased

• Pedestrian connections to the subway station would be isolated from other land use activities

• Tunnel construction operations would be less efficient as they would be managed from the north end of the tail track requiring materials and equipment to be transported through the 580m tail track, subway station and cross-over track areas before reaching the tunnel. In addition, the subway station, cross-over track and tail track areas could not be built out prior to completing the tunnel construction operations.

• Special construction techniques with significant risks would be required to construct the cross-over track (normally a cut-and-cover construction operation) under Highway 407

• The alignment would require cut-and-cover construction under the 500kv Hydro

One power line in order to construct the tail track on the north side of the station

As a result of screening out Options B1, B2, C1, C2 and D, the remaining evaluation focused on selecting the preferred alignment from among the short-listed Options A, B and C.




Figure 4-3 Richmond Hill Centre Alignment Alternatives B1 and C1

Technical Report





Figure 4-4 Richmond Hill Centre Alignment Alternatives B2 and C2

Technical Report





Figure 4-5 Richmond Hill Centre Alignment Alternative D

Technical Report





Technical Report


4.5 Other Factors

4.5.1 Future Yonge Subway Extension

As indicated in Figure 4-6 , Alternatives A, B and C all preserve the opportunity for a further northerly extension beyond the existing study area with the alignment able to resume its course along Yonge Street. Alternative B reconnects with Yonge Street just north of the study area in the vicinity of Beresford Drive. Alternative C potentially follows the CN Bala Richmond Hill GO Line rail corridor and can reconnect with Yonge

Street, either north or south of 16th Avenue, and would be studied, if carried forward as the preferred alignment, as part of any future environmental assessment for the extension of the Yonge Subway north of the Richmond Hill Centre site. The Councils of Richmond

Hill, Markham and Vaughan have all formally endorsed alignment Option ‘C’ as the preferred alignment into the Richmond Hill Centre.

Figure 4-6 Alternative Alignments & Potential Future Yonge Subway Extension

Separate form the Yonge Subway Extension project, the TTC is undertaking a Subway

Rail Yard Needs Study (SRYNS). The purpose of the study is to develop a strategy to store and maintain the subway car fleet to 2031, including the additional vehicles required for the Yonge Subway Extension to Richmond Hill Center. One of the options for storage and maintenance of subway trains would involve the construction of additional storage facilities at the north end of the extension. This could involve prebuilding the running tracks for the future extension of the subway beyond Richmond Hill

Center to 16th Avenue, as well as using these tracks for storage of trains until such time as the line is extended to that location in the future. If this strategy is preferred, it will be necessary to determine the preferred alignment of the subway north of Richmond Hill

Center. It would be desirable for the future 16th Ave extension storage tracks to be on a tangent track and consequently the alignment that follows the Richmond Hill G0 tracks to

16th Avenue would be preferred from this perspective.




Technical Report


4.5.2 Highway 407 Transitway

The MTO is currently engaged in planning and preliminary design of the Highway 407

Transitway (Central Section) from east of Highway 400 to Kennedy Road. The Highway

407 Transitway is expected to comprise an exclusive grade-separated right-of-way generally running parallel to Highway 407, designed for bus rapid transit operations but not precluding light rail transit operations. Preliminary Highway 407 Transitway ridership forecasts indicate that there will be a significant amount of transfers between the transitway and other transit services at Richmond Hill Centre. The largest percentage of passenger movements is likely to occur between the transitway and the subway. The

MTO and its stakeholders are studying alternatives to optimize the integration of the

Highway 407 Transitway with the future intermodal hub and transit-oriented development at the Richmond Hill Centre / Langstaff gateway. Potential Highway 407

Transitway alignments and station locations illustrated in this report are conceptual in nature and subject to the finalization of MTO’s Highway 407 Transitway study, currently scheduled for completion by the end of 2009.




Technical Report


5. ASSESSMENT AND EVALUATION OF SHORT-LIST OF

ALTERNATIVES

Alignment Alternatives A, B and C were subjected to a comprehensive evaluation which was used for public and stakeholder consultation.

5.1 Evaluation Methodology

In order to select the preferred alternative the following methodology was adopted:

• Each alternative was developed fully so that all effects could be determined;

• Evaluation “Categories” were identified comprising Social-Economic Considerations,

Transportation Opportunities, Technical / Constructability, Cultural Environment, and

Natural Environment;

• For each category, “Factors” were developed that were considered important in choosing between alternatives;

• For each factor, quantifiable “Indicators” and corresponding “Measures” were selected;

• The evaluation Categories, Factors, Indicators and Measures were distributed to the project team and comments were received to ensure that they were appropriate. The input of discipline subconsultants was of paramount importance to ensure that the indicators reflected the effects of the alternatives as they relate to the discipline;

• A qualitative evaluation was conducted by the project team; and

• A preferred alternative was selected.

5.2 Station Layout Concepts and Surface Integration

Alternatives A, B and C were examined for the opportunities they offered with respect to transit facilities layout and integration with transit-oriented development at the Richmond

Hill Centre. Consideration was given to the Yonge Subway Extension project design principles and Town of Richmond Hill and Town of Markham draft design principles for the development of the Richmond Hill Centre / Langstaff Gateway, illustrated in Figure

5.2-1. The Town of Richmond Hill and Town of Markham draft design principles were provided by the respective municipalities in response to York Region Rapid Transit

Corporation’s invitation to key stakeholders to submit design principles to assist in the review of the Yonge Subway Extension alignment and station location alternatives at the

Richmond Hill Centre / Langstaff Gateway. The table in Figure 5.2-1 was used to facilitate discussion with key stakeholders, including the Town of Richmond Hill and

Town of Markham, at a stakeholder workshop on September 22, 2008.




Technical Report


Key considerations for the development of the Richmond Hill Centre include:

• Recognition that the Richmond Hill Regional Centre Land Use and Design Study underway at the time of the Yonge Subway study would influence the surface layout and integration of transit with development at the Richmond Hill Centre,

• The requirement for multiple intermodal interfaces between the subway, YRT / Viva and GO Bus, 407 Transitway and the GO Train, and

• Specification of the footprint of surface facilities associated with the subway station, in particular a 28-bay bus terminal; a passenger-pick-up-and-drop-off (PPUDO), pedestrian entrances, a substation, and vent shafts.

Accordingly, the Yonge Subway study team prepared draft preliminary facilities layouts to review transit service connectivity and the footprint requirements for a “Stacked Bus

Terminal” layout and an “At-Grade Bus Terminal” for each of Alternatives A, B and C, as shown in Figures 5-1 to 5-7 . The “Average Transfer Walking Distance Between

Centres of Platforms/Areas” is shown in Figure 5-8 for each of the preliminary facilities layouts.

Figure 5-9 shows the results of a conceptual master planning study of the future

Richmond Hill Centre and the potential transit context undertaken by Metrolinx.

The Metrolinx concept for an integrated transit hub at the Richmond Hill Centre, linked to transit-oriented development, includes a subway alignment similar to the Alternative C alignment/surface transit concept, and is supportive of the screening process utilized by the Yonge Subway Study team.




Technical Report


Figure 5-1 Richmond Hill Centre – Conceptual Design Principles

Project Design

Principles

Closest possible proximity for intermodal connections

Respect for access / connectivity to and integration with Transit-

Oriented

Development

(TOD)

Richmond Hill Principles Markham Principles

A – Optimize function of the system as a whole – long-term

1.

The system (all elements) must work to everyone’s collective best interest

2.

The Longbridge/Langstaff (formerly Bunker) station connection addresses the public commuter parking challenge without hampering TOD opportunities – maximizing use of land and existing public infrastructure

3.

The location of the Regional Centre should be at the centre of the urban Growth Centre

4.

Should have convenient and attractive relationship to the larger urban context

5.

Should maximize convenience, comfort, and enjoyment of transit experience

B – Maximize TOD intensity and extent

1.

For intensity of built form and public spaces to occur immediate to the hub, substantial land area is required

2.

The location of a mobility hub should offer maximum potential to create a strong defining place, a sense of place, with multiple destinations

3.

Should minimize unattractive and inconvenient pedestrian and cycling experience within and to the mobility hub

4.

Should have seamless connections between transit modes including cycling and walking

5.

Should ensure public safety

6.

Should have convenient and attractive relationship to the larger urban context

7.

Should maximize convenience, comfort, and enjoyment of transit experience

C – Optimize Mode Integration (shortest distance for the most passengers)

1.

Seamless connection and transfer between transit modes

2.

Minimize walking distances

3.

Optimized integration through compact built form and design of a transit facility that incorporates stacking

D – Develop a system design that optimizes public investment

1.

Minimize unnecessary infrastructure

2.

Design a system that provides maximum public presence,

1.

Langstaff / Longbridge Station to be located on Yonge St for best pedestrian connectivity to Langstaff site

2.

Hub station to be located as close as possible to Highways 407 and 7 to maximize intermodal connectivity

3.

Hub station to be considered in context of Metrolinx Mobility Hub Analysis

4.

Hub station location and configuration to minimize walking distances

5.

Intermodal transit concourse

1.

Hub station located as close as possible to Langstaff

2.

Hub station to be considered in context of both RHC Design and Land Use

Study, and Langstaff Gateway Master

Planning

3.

Hub station location and configuration to minimize walking distances

4.

Station Hub central to Richmond Hill and Langstaff

5.

Intermodal Transit Concourse

Comments




Technical Report


Project Design

Principles

Respect for system operational and design criteria

(TTC, 407, Viva and MTO)

Respect for cultural and environment impacts

Respect for major utility corridors

Respect for major transit corridors

Richmond Hill Principles accessibility and enjoyment

E – Build upon existing investments

1.

Transit planning should respect approved plans and public investment in infrastructure

2.

Transit planning should recognize existing high density development

Respect for future expansion

F – Optimize function of the system as a whole – long-term

1.

Design of the system must consider future expansion

2.

The long-term station location at 16 th

and Yonge should be a key criteria in the alignment consideration

Markham Principles

1.

2.

Curve radii to be optimized

Cross-over tracks south of hub station to be evaluated

Comments e.g. Curve radii, cross-over locations.

Cross-over limited to rear of station not feasible from an operational perspective e.g. Holy Cross

Cemetery and

Yonge St. wood lot, storm water ponds

230/500 kV Hydro

Corridor

Highway 407 and

CN Corridor e.g. subway extension north of

Richmond Hill up

Yonge St, conversion of BRT to LRT and 407

Transitway growth

1.

Station location to be a consensus between key stakeholders

2.

407 Transitway and Hwy 7 vivastations to remain in corridor rights-of-way and vertically integrated with transit concourse




Figure 5-2 Richmond Hill Centre – Preliminary Facilities Layout – Alternative A – Stacked Bus Terminal

Technical Report





Figure 5-3 Richmond Hill Centre – Preliminary Facilities Layout – Alternative A – At-Grade Bus Terminal

Technical Report





Figure 5-4 Richmond Hill Centre – Preliminary Facilities Layout – Alternative B – Stacked Bus Terminal

Technical Report





Figure 5-5 Richmond Hill Centre – Preliminary Facilities Layout – Alternative B – At-Grade Bus Terminal

Technical Report





Figure 5-6 Richmond Hill Centre – Preliminary Facilities Layout – Alternative C – Stacked Bus Terminal

Technical Report





Figure 5-7 Richmond Hill Centre – Preliminary Facilities Layout – Alternative C – At-Grade Bus Terminal

Technical Report





Technical Report


Figure 5-8 Richmond Hill Centre – Pedestrian Connectivity between Transit Services – Walking Distance Comparison

Average transfer walking distance between centres of platforms / areas

Alignment A

Stacked

Alignment A

At-Grade

Alignment B

Stacked

Alignment B

At-Grade

Alignment C

Stacked

Alignment C

At-Grade

Subway to 407 Transitway

Subway to Bus Terminal

Subway to GO Platform

407 Transitway to Bus Terminal

407 Transitway to GO Platform

Bus Terminal to GO Platform

Subway to Langstaff Road and GO

180m

150m

780m

60m

600m

630m

840m

180m

230m

780m

90m

600m

600m

160m

150m

750m

50m

560m

560m

160m

210m

750m

90m

560m

530m

830m

70m

80m

550m

25m

500m

450m

670m

70m

100m

550m

80m

500m

520m

670m

York Region Rapid Transit Corporation

840m

January 28, 2009

830m

Page 36



Technical Report


Figure 5-9 Richmond Hill Centre – Conceptual Master Plan Study Showing Transit Connectivity

York Region Rapid Transit Corporation

(Courtesy of Metrolinx)

January 28, 2009 Page 37



Technical Report


5.3 Assessment of Alignment Alternatives A, B and C

The study team undertook a detailed technical assessment of Alternatives A, B and C based on the Factors / Indicators / Measures identified for the Categories of Social-

Economic Considerations, Transportation Opportunities, Technical / Constructability,

Cultural Environment and Natural Environment.

The results of the technical assessment are summarized in Appendix 1, which shows the key decision relevant factors as well as other factors (greyed out) which had no impact on the selection of a preferred alternative from the three alternatives. Appendix 1 was presented for comment at the second public workshop on August 26, 2008.

5.4 Selection of a Preferred Alternative

The Richmond Hill Centre is subject to several constraints. These include operational constraints of the subway system (e.g. tunnel alignment and track geometry), the Hydro

One corridor, including several major transmission towers with deep foundations, adjacent land uses and storm water management ponds.

With up to 80,000 passengers per day by year 2031 and beyond passing through the

Richmond Hill Centre, it is important that the station be closely integrated with the future bus terminal(s), the future Highway 407 Transitway, GO Transit, and other transit modes.

This integration will facilitate ease of transfer between modes and pedestrian and commuter connectivity with planned transit-oriented developments in this important regional growth centre. Passenger behaviour and rider attitude surveys have shown that the time it takes to transfer between transit modes, the number of transfers and the quality of the transfer environment are important factors in whether people choose transit in comparison to private automobile travel.

Alignments also need to be consistent with the Richmond Hill Regional Centre Land Use and Design Study for the Richmond Hill Centre and be designed to facilitate future northerly extensions of the subway in the Yonge Street corridor.

The evaluation (see Appendix 2) indicates that subway alignment Alternative C – Yonge

\ Central RHC \ CN Bala Richmond Hill GO Line is the Preferred Alternative for the following reasons:

• Provides the most compact integrated intermodal transportation hub connecting the subway, the bus terminal (YRT, Viva, GO Bus), the GO Train and the 407

Transitway and therefore achieves the shortest walking distances between all transit modes. As noted above, this is a significant factor in influencing transit use.

• Provides for larger land parcels with frontage on Yonge Street for redevelopment than

Alternative B.

• Provides better opportunities for transit-supportive development north and south and west of the Richmond Hill Centre station. Optimizes development potential both east and west of the CN rail corridor as the station catchment area extends to the east side of the corridor.




Technical Report


• Minimizes construction impacts to Yonge Street and the adjacent stable residential low-density neighborhood, similar to Alternative B

• Farthest away from the protected woodlot at Yonge Street and High Tech Road with minimal impact.

• Does not preclude future extension along Yonge St. right-of-way.

Figure 5-10 Richmond Hill Centre – Advantages of Alternative C

Alternative C has significant advantages, as depicted in Figure 5-10 and the Councils of

Richmond Hill, Markham and Vaughan have all endorsed alignment Option ‘C’ as the preferred alignment into the Richmond Hill Centre.

Accordingly, at this time it is recommended that Alternative C be carried forward as the

Preferred Alternative.




Technical Report


6. REFINEMENTS SUGGESTED DURING CONSULTATION

6.1 Refinements Suggested During Consultation

Preliminary concepts of Richmond Hill Centre alignment Alternatives A, B and C were presented at the June 17 & 18, 2008, Public Consultation Centre, where participants advised the three most important criteria for planning the Richmond Hill Centre terminal were: close links to all other transit services (GO, Viva, YRT); convenient pedestrian access; and year-round protection from the weather.

At the public workshop on July 31, 2008, participants were divided into 4 groups that worked independently on the entire subway extension to identify their preferred subway extension concept. Three groups were split between Alternative B and Alternative C and one group was split between Alternative A and Alternative B, balancing the need for optimal integration between transit modes with potential future alignments back to Yonge

Street and the location of a future potential station in the vicinity of 16th Avenue.

The detailed technical assessment of the Richmond Hill Centre Alignment Alternatives

A, B and C was presented at the second public workshop on August 26, 2008, along with an emerging preferred alignment Alternative C, based on stakeholder, public, and technical input. Presentations addressed proposed modifications to the northerly limits of the Langstaff / Longbridge station and Richmond Hill Centre station resulting from consultation with the Town of Markham based on their Calthorpe master planning exercise for the Langstaff lands, as well as an alternative for termination at the future potential 16th Avenue subway station. The majority of participants supported the notion of an off Yonge Street subway station location. Participants raised concerns regarding reconnecting to Yonge St at 16 th

Avenue and supported the importance of pedestrian access, comfort and convenient intermodal connections.

In September 2008, the Yonge Subway Study team continued discussions with municipal, provincial and private stakeholders regarding alignment alternatives, which included a stakeholder’s workshop on September 22, 2008, to review a Town of

Markham request for further consideration of alternatives for locating the Richmond Hill

Centre subway station under or near the Highway 407 / Highway 7 corridor, between the

Langstaff lands and the Richmond Hill Centre lands. The emerging Preferred Alternative

C and supporting rationale was presented at the September 25, 2008, Public Consultation

Centre, where approximately 200 participants, both on-site and on the internet, were given an opportunity to comment interactively and indicate preferences with respect to the Richmond Hill Centre subway alignment. Through interactive questioning participants indicated their preference that “All of the transit modes are as close together as possible” supporting the selection of an alignment east of Yonge Street that would integrate with the Richmond Hill GO line.




Technical Report


6.2 Consultation on the Preferred Alternative

Since the September 25, 2008, Public Consultation Centre the Yonge Subway Study team has been involved in discussions with the Town of Richmond Hill, the Town of

Markham, the property owner, the MTO, and other stakeholders regarding the alignment alternatives. The Councils of Richmond Hill, Markham and Vaughan have all endorsed alignment Option ‘C’ as the preferred alignment into Richmond Hill Centre.

The MTO’s work on the Highway 407 bus rapid transit (BRT) / light rail transit (LRT) alignments is progressing and further work on their alignments into Richmond Hill

Centre is being examined in conjunction with alignment Alternative C.

The Yonge Subway Study team has continued with consultation on Alternative C with affected landowners and municipal stakeholders. Details of the final recommendation will be documented in the Environmental Project Report.




Technical Report


7. CONSTRUCTION STAGING

The following describes the potential sequence and timing for the construction of the

Richmond Hill Centre Subway Station and corresponds to a preliminary facilities layout, which includes a stacked bus terminal and assumed potential location for the future

Highway 407 Transitway station facility currently being studied by MTO. The construction staging is generally applicable to Alignment Alternatives A, B and C, with exceptions as noted. Three construction stages are identified and summarized, comprising the Tunnel Drives, Station Construction and Systems Installation, and illustrated in

Figures 7-1 to 7-9 . At this time, only the staging for the subway station is shown in this report. The eventual construction approach will be integrated at least with the final configuration of the bus terminal and documented in the Environment Project Report.

While accommodation has been made for a possible Highway 407 Transitway Station, this is the subject of a separate study.

7.1 Stage 1 – Tunnel Drives

• The stage includes a tunnel mining operation for twin subway tunnels commencing at the south end of the Richmond Hill Centre Station and moving southwards to the endpoint on the north side of the East Don River Valley.

• In the case of Alternatives B and C, a Temporary Access Road is constructed to provide continuous access for Viva, YRT and GO Transit vehicles to the existing

Richmond Hill Centre bus terminal. Fencing is erected for the Tunnel Construction

Site and Tunnel Liner Storage Areas.

• The Tunnel Construction Site provides an area for the mining shaft, stockpiling of excavated materials, loading and removal of excavated materials, construction offices, change rooms, power distribution facilities, mechanical and electrical equipment, etc.

• The Tunnel Liner Storage Area is an area for storage of precast concrete tunnel liners and other construction materials. The area is located near or under the Hydro One transmission lines where activities are limited to storage.

• Excavations within the site area are limited to the mining shaft. The underground tunnel boring operation commences in a southerly direction utilizing two tunnel boring machines.

• The stage will take approximately two years to complete.




Technical Report


7.2 Stage 2 – Station Construction

• The stage includes the construction of the cross-over track structure, the station platforms and concourse, and the tail track structure, using a cut-and-cover excavation / construction methodology. Ideally this stage would correspond with construction of the underground 407 Transitway station which is not part of the

Yonge Subway Extension project.

• The Station Construction Site provides an area for the loading and removal of excavated materials, receipt and storage of construction materials, construction offices, change rooms, power distribution facilities, mechanical and electrical equipment, etc.

• The stage will take approximately two to three years to complete, commencing after

Stage 1.

7.3 Stage 3 - Systems Installation

• The stage includes the installation, staging, testing and commissioning of subway systems.

• The stage will take more than one year to complete, generally commencing after

Stage 2 but some overlap with Stage 2 is possible.




Figure 7-1 Richmond Hill Centre Station – Alternative A – Construction Stage 1 – Tunnel Drives

Technical Report





Technical Report


Figure 7-2 Richmond Hill Centre Station – Alternative A – Construction Stage 2 – Station Construction




Figure 7-3 Richmond Hill Centre Station – Alternative A - Construction Stage 3 – Systems Installation

Technical Report





Technical Report


Figure 7-4 Richmond Hill Centre Station – Alternative B – Construction Stage 1 – Tunnel Drives




Technical Report


Figure 7-5 Richmond Hill Centre Station – Alternative B – Construction Stage 2 – Station Construction




Technical Report


Figure 7-6 Richmond Hill Centre Station – Alternative B - Construction Stage 3 – Systems Installation




Technical Report


Figure 7-7 Richmond Hill Centre Station – Alternative C – Construction Stage 1 – Tunnel Drives




Technical Report


Figure 7-8 Richmond Hill Centre Station – Alternative C – Construction Stage 2 – Station Construction




Figure 7-9 Richmond Hill Centre Station – Alternative C - Construction Stage 3 – Systems Installation

Technical Report





Technical Report


APPENDIX 1

Assessment of Richmond Hill Centre Alignment

Alternatives




Technical Report


Factors/Indicators/Measures

ASSESSMENT OF RHC ALIGNMENT ALTERNATIVES

Relevance of Factor

Baseline Value for

Comparison

Alternative A Alternative B Alternative C

1.0 Social-Economic Considerations

1.1 Population+Employment density within station zone of influence

EXISTING population+employment density within 500m radius of station

FUTURE (2021) population+employment density within 500m radius of station based on current forecasts

Number of medium-rise residential and high-rise residential towers as proxy for measuring density

Number of medium-rise residential and high-rise residential towers as proxy for measuring density

Quantifies the need/justification for a station at this location today

Quantifies the need/justification for a station at this location in the future

1.2 Major trip origins and destinations within station zone of influence

Existing conditions

Future projection

EXISTING commercial, employment, or institutional attractions within 500m radius

NEW commercial, employment, or institutional attractions within 500m radius

Name

Name

Identifies any major trip generator within the station catchment area

Identifies any major trip generator within a station's zone of

Existing condition

Known/planned future condition influence

1.3 Potential to stimulate transit supportive development within station zone of influence

Potential impact on redevelopable lands within the Richmond Hill Centre Area (east side of Yonge Street)

Description - area (m2) Assesses potential for redevelopment within a station's zone of influence

Existing conditions

Redevelopment potential within station zone low, medium, high of influence (500m radius)

Assesses potential for redevelopment within a station's zone of influence

Existing conditions

All alternatives yield similar results - this indicator is related to selection of station locations




Higher flexibility for redeveloping RHC lands - minimal impact to lands

Less than Options B and C

Half of the station catchment area is outside of potential redevelopment of the


Least flexibility for redeveloping Lower flexibility for

RHC lands - alignment would redevelopling RHC lands - create 2 triangular parcels which are less desirable for redevelopment alignment would leave a large fairly regularly-shaped parcel for redevelopment

Higher than Option A, similar to

Option C

Higher than Option A, similar to

Option B

The entire station catchment is within potential redevelopment of the Richmond Hill Centre area


1.4 Potential impacts to residential and commercial properties

Number of commercial properties impacted / displaced

Number; Descript ion Extent to which local businesses may be displaced

Existing condition

Number of residential propert ies impact ed

/ displaced

Number; Descript ion Extent to which stable residential properties may be displaced

Existing condition

Construction impacts on commercial properties on the west side of Yonge Street between Hwy 7 and Roosevelt

Drive

Construction effects can be mitigated through proper construction management plan

3 buildings would be potentially displaced, plus up to 3

1 building would be displaced, plus 1 building impacted during buildings impacted during construction, for building a subway station box and tail tracks structure construction, for building a subway station box and tail tracks structure



Higher potential for impacting residential properties (existing residential houses on the west side of Yonge Street)

Lower potential for impacts as there are no residential houses adjacent to the alignment





Technical Report




Relevance of Factor

Baseline Value for

Comparison

Alternative A


1.5 Potential effects on local noise, vibration, and air quality

Potential effects # of residential of surf ace facilities

Ef fects as proxy properties w ithin 200m measures for effects on human health and quality of life

Existing condition

Alternative B Alternative C

Higher potential for impacting Lower potential impacts as sensitive receptors as there are there are no sensitive existing residential houses on the west side of Yonge Street and adjacent to the alignment receptors adjacent to the alignment

Lower potential for impacts as there are no sensitive receptors adjacent to the alignment

Future northerly extension north of High Tech Road: lower potential for impacting sensitive receptors since recent residential houses are on the east side of Yonge

Street only


Street only

Future northerly extension north of High Tech Road: higher potential for impacting sensitive receptors since there are recent residential developments on both sides of the rail corridor

No impacts as there are no community facilit ies w it hin the area

1.6 Potential impacts to schools, places of worship, and unique community features

Number of community f acilities impacted

/ displaced

Number; Description Extent to which community/recreational

Existing condition facilities may be displaced

Number of institutional facilities impact ed

/ displaced

Number; Description Extent to which institutional facilities may

Existing condition be displaced

Construction impacts on a temple on the west side of

Yonge Street at Highway 7; can be mitigated through proper construction management plan

No impacts No impacts

1.7 Achieve reasonable costs

Range of capital cost (construction only) High level range of capital cost 2008 $

Millions -

PRELIMINARY

Measures the pot ential range of capital cost associat ed w ith each option

Low est cost

Alt ernative: " A"

Baseline $7 t o $ 10 million more than baseline

$1.5 t o $ 3 million more than baseline




Technical Report




Relevance of Factor

Baseline Value for

Comparison

Alternative A


1.8 Minimize potential cost associated with clean-up of potentially contaminated sites

Number of sites with High potential for contamination (i.e. landfill or gas service station on property) that may be affected

Number of sites with Medium potential for contamination (i.e. property with record of previous spill) that may be affected

Description

Description

Measures the potential risk associated w ith need for mitigation of contamination.

See above

Based on desktop review of available data/resources

See above

Number of sites with Low potential for contamination (i.e. average commercial property) that may be affected

Description See above See above

Number of Gas Conflict Areas (i.e. contact with underground gas pipeline) that may be affected

Description

Number of Spill sites that may be affected Description

Number of Fuel Storage sites that may be affected

Description

See above

See above

See above

See above

See above

See above


This indicator is related to assessing station design concepts









Technical Report




Relevance of Factor

Baseline Value for

Comparison


2.0 Transportation Opportunities

2.1 Transit Network Connectivity

Local transit connections Total number of future feeder bus routes from the east, west, or north intercepted (inbound,

AM peak hour)

Assesses connectivity with local transit.

Assuming all 6 potential stations are provided in the network

Intermodal transit connections Description Assesses opportunity to connect with other transit modes

Future transit network in the area

All alternatives yield similar results

All alternatives yield similar results

Protection for future northerly extension Description Assess potential physical limitation to expanding the line terminus north of RHC.

Existing conditions

2.2 Associated Station Surface Facilities

Integration of station surface facilities - the extent to which the alternative can offer a compact and well-integrated mobility hub

Approximate walking distance to GO rail station (m)

Assess connectivity with existing surface facilities

(assumed VIVA bus station will be relocated)

Existing GO rail station location. Assumed distance from GO station on east side of rail, walked north to ped bridge and that distance was constant for all options (approx 250m)

Future extension would remain within the Yonge Street ROW

Future extension would return to and follow the Yonge Street

ROW

Future extension would use the railway corridor before returning to and following the

Yonge Street ROW

Has maximum flexibility for siting a future station near 16th

Ave/Carville, with the least potential for impact on private property north of the study area



Has less flexibility for siting a future station near 16th Ave, with the greatest potential for impact on private property north of the study area

645 575 410

2.3 User Accessibility

Convenience of access for all users, including

Wheel-Trans users and other passengers with disabilities

Not a decision relevant factor - user accessibiliy can be designed into all three alignment options




Technical Report



3.0 Technical / Constructability

3.1 Compliance with design standards & criteria

Horizontal and vertical alignments Description


Relevance of Factor

Baseline Value for

Comparison

Alternative A

3.2 Constructability

Traffic impacts as a result of cut & cover construction

Lower, higher

Physical limitation on the surface as it relates to station construction

Descript ion


Compliance w ith technical design standards

TTC Design Standards

Availability of diversion routes during construction

Existing conditions

Assesses potential physical limitation on the surface for st ation construction

Existing conditions

Assesses effects to water control.

Existing conditions

Higher complies with TTC standards for 80 KPH design speed

Lower Lower

Limited working area Impact to High Tech Road and

Yonge-HWY 7 ramp and

Impact to High Tech Road and


Cinema Cinema

Minor potential impact to Storm Minor potential impact to Storm

Water Management Pond Water Management Pond

Minor potential impact to protected woodlot at

Yonge/High Tech

Ground water control required. Ground water control required. Ground water control required.

Potential impact to ground water Description

4.0 Cultural Environment

4.1 Potential impacts to known archaeological sites

Number of known sites in proximity of Number alignment

Area of archaeological potential that have previously been undisturbed by development

Hectares

4.2 Proximity to heritage features

Potential for displacing or disrupting built heritage features permanently

Lower, higher

4.3 Potential impacts to parks and recreation sites

Local parks and trails impacted / displaced Description

Assess the potential for causing adverse effects on any known archaeological site

Assess the potential for causing adverse effects on any known area of archaeological potential

Existing condition

Existing condition

Assess the potential effects on any significant

Existing condition built-heritage and cultural heritage features in the area

Measures the potential for causing adverse effects on any park and trail in the area

Existing condition

The majority of the study area has low archaeological potential as the area has been extensively disturbed by ROW construction and adajacent development. Stage 2 archaeological assessment required prior to any construction within the study area

The majority of the study area has low archaeological potential as the area has been extensively disturbed by ROW construction and adajacent development. Stage 2 archaeological assessment required prior to any construction within the study area

No impacts as there are no heritage f eatures in t he area

No impacts as there are no parks or trails in the area




Technical Report




Relevance of Factor

Baseline Value for

Comparison


5.0 Natural Environment

5.1 Potential impacts to Environmentally Sensitive Areas, Natural Heritage Systems, and Wildlife Corridors

Provincial/Federal natural f eatures / environmentally signif icant features

Descript ion Assess the pot ential effects on any

Existing condition There are no Provincial or Federal natural features / environmentally significant features within the area pot entially affected significant natural resources / f eatures, if present

Regional/Local natural feat ures / environmentally signif icant features pot entially affected

Descript ion Assess the pot ential effects on any significant natural resources / f eatures, if present

Existing condition Potential for impact on woodlot on the southeast corner at

Yonge Street and High Tech

Road

Potential for impact on woodlot on the southeast corner at


Road

Minimal potential for impact on woodlot at the southeast corner of Yonge Street and High Tech

Road

5.2 Potential impacts to surface water, identified water crossings, drainage features, and areas susceptible to surface water contamination

TRCA regulatory limits pot entially af fected

Descript ion Assess the pot ential effects on drainage

Existing condition This option is located within the None

Pomona Creek flood lines and utilities

Drainage features and utilities potentially af fected

Descript ion Assess the pot ential effects on drainage and utilities

Existing condition

None

Minimal potential for impact on stormwater management pond south of RHC

Potential for impact on stormwater management pond south of RHC

Potential for impact on stormwater management pond south of RHC

Potential effects to underground w at er Descript ion Assess potential dew at ering requirements

Existing condition Potential for impacting groundwater as a result of tunnelled and cut-and-cover structures

Potential for impacting groundwater as a result of tunnelled and cut-and-cover structures

Potential for impacting groundwater as a result of tunnelled and cut-and-cover structures

5.3 Potential impacts to terrestrial features

Habitat potentially displaced or severed Descript ion Existing condition No impact as there are no significant terrestrial features in the area Assess the pot ential effects on terrest rial features

5.4 Potential impacts to fisheries and aquatic resources

Aquatic features potentially af fected Descript ion Existing condition No impact as there are no fisheries and significant aquatic features in the area Assess the pot ential effects on aqautic features

Shaded rows indicate criteria that are not decision-relevant for selecting station locations




Technical Report


APPENDIX 2

Evaluation of Richmond Hill Centre Alignment

Alternatives





EVALUATION OF RHC ALIGNMENT ALTERNATIVES

Relevance of Factor

Baseline Value for

Comparison

Alternative A



Potential impact on redevelopable lands within the Richmond Hill Centre Area (east side of Yonge Street)

Description - area (m2) Assesses potential for redevelopment within a station's zone of influence

Existing conditions

Redevelopment potential within station zone low, medium, high of influence (500m radius)

Assesses potential for redevelopment within a station's zone of influence

Existing conditions

Technical Report



Higher flexibility for redeveloping RHC lands - minimal impact to lands

Less than Options B and C

Half of the station catchment area is outside of potential redevelopment of the


Least flexibility for redeveloping Lower flexibility for

RHC lands - alignment would create 2 triangular parcels redevelopling RHC lands - alignment would leave a large which are less desirable for redevelopment fairly regularly-shaped parcel for redevelopment

○

Higher than Option A, similar to Higher than Option A, similar to

Option C Option B




Number of commercial properties impacted / displaced

Number; Description Extent to which local businesses may be displaced

Existing condition

Number of residential properties impacted Number; Description

/ displaced

Extent to which stable residential properties may be displaced

Existing condition

Construction impacts on commercial properties on the west side of Yonge Street between Hwy 7 and Roosevelt

Drive


3 buildings would be potentially 1 building would be displaced, displaced, plus up to 3 buildings impacted during plus 1 building impacted during construction, for building a construction, for building a subway station box and tail tracks structure subway station box and tail tracks structure



○

Higher potential for impacting residential properties (existing residential houses on the west side of Yonge Street)








Relevance of Factor

Baseline Value for

Comparison

Alternative A



Potential effects # of residential Ef fects as proxy properties w ithin 200m measures for effects of surf ace facilities on human health and quality of life

Existing condition

Technical Report


Alternative B

Higher potential for impacting Lower potential impacts as sensitive receptors as there are there are no sensitive existing residential houses on the west side of Yonge Street and adjacent to the alignment receptors adjacent to the alignment

Alternative C

Lower potential for impacts as there are no sensitive receptors adjacent to the alignment


Street only


Street only

Future northerly extension north of High Tech Road: higher potential for impacting sensitive receptors since there are recent residential developments on both sides of the rail corridor


Number of institutional facilities impact ed Number; Description Extent to which Existing condition

/ displaced institutional facilities may be displaced

Construction impacts on a temple on the west side of

Yonge Street at Highway 7; can be mitigated through proper construction management plan

No impacts No impacts


Range of capital cost (construction only) High level range of capital cost 2008 $

Millions -

PRELIMINARY

Measures the pot ential range of capital cost associat ed w ith each option

Low est cost

Alt ernative: " A"

SUMMARY

Baseline $7 t o $ 10 million more than $1.5 t o $ 3 million more than baseline baseline

○






Relevance of Factor

Baseline Value for

Comparison

Alternative A



Protection for future northerly extension Description Assess potential physical limitation to expanding the line terminus north of RHC.

Existing conditions

Technical Report



Future extension would remain within the Yonge Street ROW

Future extension would return to and follow the Yonge Street

ROW

Future extension would use the railway corridor before returning to and following the

Yonge Street ROW





Has less flexibility for siting a future station near 16th Ave, with the greatest potential for impact on private property north of the study area


Integration of station surface facilities - the extent to which the alternative can offer a compact and well-integrated mobility hub

Approximate walking distance to GO rail station (m)

Assess connectivity with existing surface facilities

(assumed VIVA bus station will be relocated)

Existing GO rail station location. Assumed distance from GO station on east side of rail, walked north to ped bridge and that distance was constant for all options (approx 250m)

SUMMARY

645

○

575 410






Relevance of Factor

Baseline Value for

Comparison

Alternative A

3.0 Technical / Constructability


Traffic impacts as a result of cut & cover construction

Lower, higher

Physical limitation on the surface as it relates to station construction

Description

Availability of diversion routes during construction

Existing conditions

Assesses potential physical limitation on the surface for station construction

Existing conditions

Higher ○

Limited working area

SUMMARY

○

○

Technical Report


Alternative B

Lower

Alternative C

Lower



Cinema

Minor potential impact to Storm

Water Management Pond



Cinema

Minor potential impact to Storm

Water Management Pond

Minor potential impact to protected woodlot at

Yonge/High Tech

○


No Key Decision Relevant Factors / Indicators / Measures


5.1 Potential impacts to Environmentally Sensitive Areas, Natural Heritage Systems, and Wildlife Corridors

Regional/Local natural features / environmentally significant features potentially affected

Description Assess the potential effects on any significant natural resources / features, if present

Existing condition Potential for impact on woodlot on the southeast corner at


Road

Potential for impact on woodlot on the southeast corner at


Road

Minimal potential for impact on woodlot at the southeast corner of Yonge Street and High Tech

Road


TRCA regulatory limits potentially affected

Description Assess the potential effects on drainage and utilities

Existing condition This option is located within the None

Pomona Creek flood lines

None

SUMMARY





Overall Summary

Alternative A


1.1 Population+Employment density within station zone of influence

1.2 Major trip origins and destinations within station zone of influence






1.8 Minimize potential cost associated with clean-up of potentially contaminated sites

Technical Report



Advantages: Advantages: Advantages:

- Provides higher flexibility for redevelopment as it maximizes large parcels of land which can residential properties.

- Least potential for impacting easily be developed

- Lowest capital and operating costs

- Low potential for impacting receptors sensitive to noise, vibration and air quality, adjacent the proposed alignment and adjacent the

- Low potential for impacting residential properties.

- Station is more central to population and employment densities, with more opportunity for TOD in station zone of influence, and brings potential future extension of the trip origins and destinations alignment north of High Tech

Road.

closer to station

Disadvantages: Disadvantages:

- Potential for constructionrelated impacts to residential properties west of Yonge

Street

- Population and employment densities are mainly to east and are much further away from station, with less opportunity for TOD in station zone of influence, and pushes trip origins and destinations further from station

- Potential for impacting temple

- Least flexibility for redeveloping land - alignment would create 2 triangular parcels which are less desirable for redevelopment

- Highest capital and operating costs.

on west side of Yonge Street at

Highway 7

- Higher potential for impacting receptors sensitive to noise, vibration and air quality, adjacent the proposed alignment. However, potential impacts can very likely be successfully mitigated to MOE guidelines, as described in the noise report, through technically and economically feasible mitigation measures.

Disadvantages:

- Lower flexibility for redeveloping land - alignment would leave a large fairly regularly-shaped parcel for redevelopment

- Higher capital and operating costs.

- Higher potential for impacting receptors sensitive to noise, vibration and air quality, adjacent the potential future extension of the alignment north of High Tech Road.

However, potential impacts can very likely be successfully mitigated to MOE guidelines, as described in the noise report, through technically and economically feasible mitigation measures.





Overall Summary

Alternative A




2.3 User Accessibility

Technical Report


Alternative B

Advantages:

- None identified

Disadvantages:

- Poorer opportunity to create a better integrated transit hub - long walking distance to local transit connections (GO Transit /

VIVA)

Advantages:

- Good opportunity to create a better integrated transit hub - medium walking distance to local transit connections (GO transit / VIVA).

Disadvantages:

- None identified

Alternative C

Advantages:

- Best opportunity to create a better integrated transit hub - short walking distance to local transit connections (GO transit /

VIVA)

Disadvantages:

- None identified

3.0 Technical / Constructibility

3.1 Compliance with design standards & criteria



4.1 Potential impacts to known archaeological sites

4.2 Proximity to heritage features

4.3 Potential impacts to parks and recreation sites

Advantages:

- Lower constructionrelated traffic impacts at

RHC

Disadvantages:

- Higher constructionrelated traffic impacts on

Yonge Street

○

No change to cultural landscape.

Advantages:

- Low construction-related traffic impacts on Yonge

Street

Advantages:

- Lowest constructionrelated traffic impacts on

Yonge Street

Disadvantages:

- Higher constructionrelated traffic impacts at

RHC

Disadvantages:

- Higher constructionrelated traffic impacts at

RHC







Overall Summary

Alternative A


5.1 Potential impacts to Environmentally Sensitive Areas, Natural Heritage Systems, and Wildlife

Corridors


5.3 Potential impacts to terrestrial features

5.4 Potential impacts to fisheries and aquatic resources

Advantages:

- Furthest away from SWM pond south of RHC.

Technical Report


Alternative B

Advantages:

- None identified

Alternative C

Advantages:

- Furthest away from protected woodlot – no impact

Disadvantages:

- Within proximity of protected woodlot – has potential for impact

Disadvantages:

- Within proximity of SWM pond south of RHC – has potential for impact

- Within proximity of protected woodlot – has potential for impact

Disadvantages:

- Within proximity of SWM pond south of RHC – has potential for impact

CONCLUSION - Option 'C' Preferred

- Best opportunity to create a better integrated transit hub - short walking distance to local transit connections (GO transit

/ VIVA)

- Best transit oriented development integration opportunity

- Low potential for impacting residential properties.

- Lowest construction-related traffic impacts on Yonge Street

- No impact on temple on west side of Yonge Street at Highway 7

- Furthest away from protected woodlot

Most Opportunity / Most Preferred / Lowest Impact

Medium Opportunity / Medium Preference / Medium Impact

○

Least Opportunity / Least Preferred / Highest Impact

○


Yonge Subway Extension Finch Station to Richmond Hill Centre

Yonge Subway Extension

Finch Station to Richmond Hill Centre

Conceptual Design and Functional Planning

Technical Report

Richmond Hill Centre Alignment Alternatives

PREFACE

1. INTRODUCTION

2. OPPORTUNITIES AND CONSTRAINTS

3. RICHMOND HILL CENTRE ALTERNATIVES

4. ASSESSMENT AND EVALUATION OF LONG-LIST OF

ALTERNATIVES

5. ASSESSMENT AND EVALUATION OF SHORT-LIST OF

ALTERNATIVES

6. REFINEMENTS SUGGESTED DURING CONSULTATION

7. CONSTRUCTION STAGING

APPENDIX 1

Assessment of Richmond Hill Centre Alignment

Alternatives

APPENDIX 2

Evaluation of Richmond Hill Centre Alignment

Alternatives

Related documents

Products

Support

Yonge Subway Extension Finch Station to Richmond Hill Centre

Yonge Subway Extension

Finch Station to Richmond Hill Centre

Conceptual Design and Functional Planning

Technical Report

Richmond Hill Centre Alignment Alternatives

PREFACE

1. INTRODUCTION

2. OPPORTUNITIES AND CONSTRAINTS

3. RICHMOND HILL CENTRE ALTERNATIVES

4. ASSESSMENT AND EVALUATION OF LONG-LIST OF

ALTERNATIVES

5. ASSESSMENT AND EVALUATION OF SHORT-LIST OF

ALTERNATIVES

6. REFINEMENTS SUGGESTED DURING CONSULTATION

7. CONSTRUCTION STAGING

APPENDIX 1

Assessment of Richmond Hill Centre Alignment

Alternatives

APPENDIX 2

Evaluation of Richmond Hill Centre Alignment

Alternatives

Related documents

Add this document to collection(s)

Add this document to saved

Suggest us how to improve StudyLib