Page 1

DESIGN FOR WALKABILITY An

Initiative to Reduce Traffic in Target Areas of Ward 30

Final Report 2015


PLG 620: Advanced Planning Studio II School of Urban and Regional Planning Ryerson University, Toronto, Ontario, Canada This Final report has been prepared as part of the partial fulfillment of the 3rd year Advanced Planning Studio of the School of Urban and Regional Planning, Ryerson University

Student Project Group: Candelaria Abascal Nauf Al-Baldawi Kim Behrouzian Martin Ceralde Rachel Currey Elwyn Daroya Jacob Dosman Gavin Liu Ayat Mohammed James Rhule Rebecca Sturley

Course Coordinator: Donald Verbanac Client: Councillor Paula Fletcher, Ward 30 Toronto-Danforth City of Toronto

April 2015


4

Contents List of Figures

8

List of Tables

11

List of Schedules

11

Executive Summary

12

A

Introduction

1.0

Problem Statement

16

1.1

Goals and Objectives

16

2.0

Methods of Study

20

3.0

Assumptions

22

B B

Study Area

1.0

Ward 30

26

1.1 Location

26

1.2 Characteristics

26

1.3 Transit

27

1.4

Study Area

28

1.5

The Pocket

30

1.5.1

Study Area

30

1.5.2

Area Context

30

1.6

Upper Leslieville

32

1.6.1

Study Area

32

1.6.2

Area Context

32

2.0

Area Assessment

2.1

Identifying Street User Conflict

2.2

Existing Conditions

2.2.1

The Pocket - Danforth Ave to Baird Ave

2.2.2

The Pocket - Baird Ave to Shudell Ave

2.2.3

The Pocket - Shudell to CN Rail Tracks

2.2.4

Upper Leslieville - Jones Ave to Hastings Ave

2.2.5

Upper Leslieville - Hastings Ave to Greenwood Ave

34 34 35 36 38 40 42 44


5

2.3 Analysis

46

2.3.1

Pedestrian and Motor Vehicle Patterns and Volumes

46

2.3.2

Cyclist Volumes

47

2.3.3

Dangerous Intersections

48

2.3.4 Transit

50

3.0

Local Considerations

52

3.1

Design Speed vs. Target Speed

52

3.2

Speed Safety

53

3.3

Canadian Attitudes Towards Speeding

54

3.4

Challenges to Conventional Ideas about Streets

55

3.5

Local Priorities

56

4.0

Demographic Profile

58

4.1

Age Makeups

59

4.2

Transportation to Work

59

4.3

Housing Types

59

5.0 Stakeholders

60

C

Policy Documents

1.0

Policy Documents

64

2.0

Road Classification

69

D

Health Benefits of Active Living

1.0 Walkability

72

2.0 Accessibility

74

3.0 Playability

76

E

Traffic Calming

1.0

History of Traffic Calming

80

2.0

Decision History in Ward 30

82

3.0

Case Studies

84


6

3.1 Bollard

85

3.2

Speed Bump, Hump, and Table

86

3.3

Speed Kidney

87

3.4

Speed Cushion

88

3.5

Curb Extention and Bump Out

89

3.6

Play Street

90

3.7 Parklet

91

3.8

Naked Street

92

3.9

Yield Street

93

3.10

Mural Intersection Painting

94

3.11

Street Printing

95

3.12 Roundabout

96

3.13 Diverter

96

3.14 Woonerf

97

F

Recommendations

1.0 Principles

100

2.0

Design Interventions

102

2.1

Intervention #1 Primary Traffic Control Sign

103

2.2

Intervention #2 Symbolic Bollard

104

2.3

Intervention #3 Street Stamp

106

2.4

Intervention #4 Raised Crosswalk

108

2.5

Intervention #5 Bump Out

110

2.6

Intervention #6 Bump Out

112

2.7

Intervention #7 Woonerf

114

2.8

Intervention #8 Yield Street

116

2.9

Intervention #9 Play Street

118

2.10

Intervention #10 Parklet

120

2.11

Intervention #11 Street Treatment, Mural Intersection Painting

124

2.12

Intervention #12 Street Treatment, Change in Surface Material

126

2.13

Intervention #13 Raised Intersection

128

3.0 Implementation

129


7

G

Conclusion

1.0

Concluding Remarks

References Figure References

134 136 143


8

List of Figures Figure 1: Gerrard Street and Leslie Street Pedestrian Crosswalk Figure 2: Jones Avenue Figure 3: Street Activity Figure 4: Riverdale Avenue Traffic Calming Zone Figure 5: Danforth Avenue Pedestrian Activity Figure 6: Local Road in the Pocket Figure 7: The 506 Streetcar En Route Along Gerrard Street East Figure 8: Looking East at the corner of Gerrard and Greenwood Avenue Figure 9: Slow Sign on Condor Avenue Figure 10: Riverdale Avenue Traffic Calming Zone Figure 11: Logan Avenue Figure 12:Traffic calming signs on Oakvale Avenue Figure 13: Danforth and Greenwood, Major Arterial Roads Bounding the Site Figure 14: Speed Control Zone Sign on Condor Avenue Figure 15: Ball and Hockey Prohibited Signs Figure 16: Jones Avenue Figure 17: Jones Avenue Figure 18: Common Residential Homes Along Local Roads Figure 19: Ball and Hockey Prohibited Signs Figure 20: Jones Avenue Figure 21: Gerrard Street and Leslie Street Pedestrian Crosswalk Figure 22: Gerrard Street and Leslie Street Signage Figure 23: Pedestrian Crosswalk Markings Figure 24: Gerrard Street and Leslie Street Pedestrian Crosswalk Figure 25: Leslie Street and Myrtle Avenue Intersection Figure 26: Traffic Calming Zone Signage Figure 27: Hastings Avenue Figure 28: Limited Sidewalk Space on Garbage Day, Bloomfield Avenue Figure 29: Gerrard Street Figure 30: Logan Avenue Figure 31: Speed Statistics Graphic Figure 32: Slow Down Kids at Play Signs Found Throughout Ward 30 Figure 33: Confusion of User Priority on Streets Figure 34: Pape Avenue School Yard Playground Figure 35: Pape Avenue and Riverdale Avenue Figure 36: Element of a Great Street Figure 37: Toronto Official Plan Figure 38: Toronto Traffic Calming Policy Figure 39: Ontario Traffic Manual Figure 40: Local Road in Study Area Figure 41: Minor Arterial Road in Study Area Figure 42: Major Arterial Road in Study Area Figure 43: Riverdale Avenue Figure 44: Boultbee Avenue Figure 45: East Danforth Figure 46: Toronto Transit Commission Streetcar Figure 47: Gerrard Street and Leslie Street Pedestrian Crosswalk

16 16 18 26 27 30 32 34 34 35 35 36 36 36 38 38 38 40 40 40 42 42 42 42 43 44 44 45 52 52 53 54 55 56 56 56 64 65 66 69 69 69 72 73 74 74 75


9

Figure 48: Logan Avenue Figure 49: Logan Avenue Figure 50: Logan Avenue Figure 51: Logan Avenue Figure 52: Riverdale Avenue Speed Humps Figure 53: Local Traffic Calming Zone Figure 54: Logan Avenue Figure 55: Condor Avenue Speed Bump Figure 56: Jones Avenue and Boultbee Avenue Intersection Figure 57: Logan Avenue Figure 58: Bell Bollards, New York City Figure 59: Temporary Bollards, New York City Figure 60: Cement Bollards, New York City Figure 61: Logan Avenue Bollards, Toronto Figure 62: Speed Bump Figure 63: Speed Hump Figure 64: Speed Table Figure 65: Speed Kidney Figure 66: Speed Kidney Figure 67: Speed Cushion Figure 68: Bump-out Figure 69: Bump-out Figure 70: Play Street Signage Figure 71: Play Street Activities Figure 72: Play Street Yoga Figure 73: Parklet on Church Street, Toronto, Ontario Figure 74: Parklet, Chicago, Illinois Figure 75: Non-Naked Street Illustration Figure 76: Naked Street Illustration Figure 77: Yield Street with Parallel Parking Figure 78: Yield Street Signage Indicating Two-Way Traffic Figure 79: Mural Intersection Figure 80: Street Stamping (Street Print™ ) Figure 81: Residential Traffic Circle Figure 82: Diverter Figure 83: Diagonal Diverter Figure 84: Woonerf, Washington, DC. Figure 85: Plan for Residential Woonerf, Santa Monica Figure 86: Principles Figure 87: Gerrard Street and Leslie Street Crosswalk Figure 88: Gerrard Street and Leslie Street Crosswalk Figure 89: Jones Avenue Crosswalk Figure 90: Jones Avenue Crosswalk Figure 91: Child Bollards, Lincolnshire, ENG, UK Figure 92: Pencil Bollards, Location Unknown Figure 93: Jones Avenue Crosswalk Figure 94: Jones Avenue Crosswalk

80 80 81 81 82 82 83 83 83 83 85 85 85 85 86 86 86 87 87 88 89 89 90 90 90 91 91 92 92 93 93 94 95 96 96 96 97 97 101 103 103 104 104 105 105 106 106


10

Figure 95: Showing Textured Pavement Figure 96: Crosswalk in the Study Area Figure 97: Crosswalk in the Study Area Figure 98: Displaying a Raised Crosswalk in the study area Figure 99: Bump-outs on Logan Avenue, Toronto, CAN Figure 100: Bump-outs on Logan Avenue, Toronto, CAN Figure 101: Diagram of Bump-outs Figure 102: Bump-outs on Logan Avenue, Toronto, CAN Figure 103: Displaying Bump-outs on a Street. Figure 104: Seymour Avenue Figure 105: Seymour Avenue Figure 106: Seymour Avenue Woonerf Rendering Figure 107: Yield Street Signage Figure 108: Example Yield Street with Parallel Parking Figure 109: Play Street Activities Figure 110: Play Street Activities Figure 111: Play Street Rendering Figure 112: Residential Parklet, San Francisco, CA Figure 113: Church Street Parklet, Toronto, CAN Figure 114: Successful Intersection, Toronto, ON, CA Figure 115: Successful Intersection, Toronto, ON, CA Figure 116: Mural Intersection, North 49th Street and Burke, Seattle, WA Figure 117: Mural Intersection Plan, Black Street and Northwood Terrace, Halifax, NS, CAN Figure 118: Mural Intersection, Black Street and Northwood Terrace, Halifax, NS, CAN Figure 119: Logan Avenue and Gerrard Street Intersection Figure 120: Example of Raised Intersection Figure 121: Example of Raised Intersection

107 108 108 109 110 110 110 112 113 114 115 115 116 117 118 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 127 128 128 128


11

List of Tables Table 1: Pedestrian and Motor Volumes on Four Streets within the study area.

45

List of Schedules Schedule 1: Location Map Schedule 2: Ward 30 Map Schedule 3: The Pocket Area Map Schedule 4: Upper Leslieville Area Map Schedule 5: The Pocket- Baird Avenue to Danforth Avenue Schedule 6: The Pocket- Baird Avenue to Shudell Avenue Schedule 7: The Pocket- Shudell Avenue to CN Rail Tracks Schedule 8: Upper Leslieville- Hastings Avenue to Jones Avenue Schedule 9: Upper Leslieville- Hastings to Greenwood Avenue Schedule 10: Dangerous Intersections Map Schedule 11: The Pocket and Upper Leslieville Mobility Schedule 12: Business Improvement Areas

17 27 31 33 37 39 41 43 45 49 51 61


12

Executive Summary

The following report will provide an integrated approach to traffic calming design. There are many existing standard and guiding documents that authorities can draw upon when determining their overall approach to street design and the details of the traffic calming measures that can be included in their design options. The existing documentation caters well for the needs and requirements of vehicle-based users, but does not offer sufficient recognition and innovative solutions to the needs of other users, particularly pedestrians. This report has been informed by an interim report, Design For Walkability: An Initiative to Reduce Traffic in Target Areas of Ward 30. The interim report served as the background research for what is now the recommendations for achieving effective traffic calming measures. An in-depth analysis of demographics of the Study Area was completed to ensure that the existing built form and residing population was properly considered. Target areas were thoroughly assessed as a way to look at the existing conditions of the Study Area, to see what traffic-calming measures are in place and their level of effectiveness. The interim report has guided the decision making process for this final report. This report sets out to address this imbalance, by providing recommendations to augment current policies and guidelines. The intention is to allow for a more balanced approach to street design, which gives full consideration to all street users. The concept of a pedestrian-oriented approach to street planning and design, as advocated in this report, is addressed here by recommending the inclusion of design measures that primarily focuse on pedestrian needs.

A

Introduction Problem Statement will describe the problem statement and the purpose of this study Goals and Objectives will describe the goals and objectives of this study Methods of Study outlines the tools used to inform the recommendations Assumptions outlines what the report’s intention is, and the report’s limitations

B

Study Area Describes the study area characteristics, conditions and concerns This section of the report will assist with the diagnosis of problems at the level of the street design segment


13

C

Policy and Road Regulation Provides a review of the pertinent policy that informs and regulates the implementation of traffic calming measures Assesses the roads within the study area and their designated function and capacity

C

D

Health Benefits of Active Living Discuss the concepts of walkability, accessibility, and playability and will describe the associated health benefits of each. This report advocates integrating all three concepts into the way we plan and design for streets

E

Traffic Calming Reviews the history of traffic calming, the decision history in Ward 30 and will evaluate traffic calming best practices to provide greater context in terms of what is available currently in the Toronto traffic calming toolkit and the various design interventions available to improve pedestrian safety on local roads

F

Recommendations Provides the guiding principles behind the reports final recommendations, the design interventions recommended and the implementation considerations of such measures


14

A


Introduction 1.0 Problem Statement 2.0 Method of Study

15

3.0 Assumptions

A1 A2 A3 A4


16

1.0

The City of Toronto has become increasingly congested with automobile traffic. As a result, local roads throughout the City are subject to increased automobile volumes, through traffic and frequent violations of posted speed limits and other road regulations. Traffic congestion and its associated impacts undermine pedestrian safety and neighborhood vitality.

A1 A2

Problem Statement

Figure 1: Gerrard Street and Leslie Street Pedestrian Crosswalk

A3

Ward 30-Toronto-Danforth is currently experiencing the adverse effects associated with traffic congestion. In response to local concerns, Ward 30 Councillor, Paula Fletcher, has advocated for the installation of traffic calming measures throughout the Ward to improve pedestrian safety. Councillor Fletcher has identified that the City’s current process and methods of traffic calming and traffic mitigation are not sufficient, as such a stronger more innovative and creative toolkit is required for the municipality to effectively address the citywide issues associated with traffic congestion. Various cities and countries have employed a number of innovative design techniques to calm traffic. Many of these measures are uncommon in the City of Toronto but should be considered in the pursuit of making neighborhood roads safer for pedestrians.

A4

Figure 2: Jones Avenue

This report will aim to solve the problems associated with traffic congestion by providing new and innovative traffic calming measures to expand the current City of Toronto traffic calming tool box. In particular, this report will recommend the implementation of new traffic calming measures within the targetted neighborhoods of Ward 30.

1.1 Goals and Objectives Goals

Foster a positive public-realm that accommodates all road users;

Illustrate with a variety of traffic calming measures the basic principle of changing driver behavior through design.

Encourage walking through improving pedestrian safety on local roads; and

Objectives Identify the problems associated with increased traffic congestion and the effects it has on local roads within target Ward 30 neighborhoods;

Identify current best practices for alleviating the effects of congestion on local streets; and

Create a new and innovative toolkit that will integrate pedestrian and road safety into neighborhood planning.


e Rane

Ave

se Av Melro

W

e

Ledbury

ue Aven Elm R Lawre

ve E nce A d

ood R

St

Don Mil

12 t

Rd

d ood

Rd

Fer

ria Victo St Cla

E

Oriole

Foxrid

r

ge D

edy R

Dr

Ave

en Ward

d

Moun

w Ave

y

macy

Phar

Birch

moun

t Rd

Ave

Ave

Park

St

ir Ave

St Cla

Midla

Ave

Hollis

nd Av

Laird

Pkwy

n Ave

Dento

e

ir Ave

tt Rd Sinno d ille R e Manv en Av Ward

E

e Ave

Oakw ve ood A

Gle nC eda r Rd

Spad ina R

t Plea

d

Oriole P kwy

Yonge St n Wella

sant R d d Ave

Pape

ls Rd Coxw

Main St

Ave

ell Av e

tE

en S

Que

y Rd

Park d ris R

rd St Gerra

b Wood ve ine A

UPPER BEACHES

Bathu rst St

u Aven e Rd

Loga

Pape

Jone

Gree

n Ave

s Ave

Ave

Wine va Av e THE BEACHES

Midla

e ds

Bayvie

ve den A Lu ms

e

Ave

Dove

Chris tie St St Ge orge

Jarvis

nwoo d Ave

Ronc esvall

Brock

Lansd

rcour t Rd St

Leslie St

Sorau

owne Ave

Ave

Shaw St

Ch err

LAKE ONTARIO

Kenn

m on

Lane

St

tern Eas

Danfo

rth Av

berry Hack

Linkw

Marle

LESLIEVILLE

dE Blv ore Sh

TURNING BASIN

Ber

E ed Ave

Wickste

lvd aB er le

Dr

ve urn A Cosb

ve mer A Morti

nnor O'Co

Location Map

ve way A

Broad

n Ave

Eglinto

DVP

RIVERDALE

E rd St Gerra das St E Dun

n St E Quee ve ern A East

e Lak

PORT LANDS

SHIP CHANNEL

OUTER HARBOUR

Brimle

Blythw

r Rd E

Mano

n St

Merto

e

re Av

Moo

St E

ROSEDALE

Bloor

ST. JAMES TOWN

slie Le

St St W

St W

CABBAGETOWN REGENT PARK

n St E Quee

INNER HARBOUR

yS t

The Pocket

Rd

ton

A4

WARD'S ISLAND EASTERN GAP ALGONQUIN ISLAND

Upper Leslieville

es Av

Ward 30

t

gs

d

hS

Kin

hR

fort

Dan

ntos

McI

Rd ger llin

e Ave

e wn Av

Heath

Bloor

DOWNTOWN t St W Fron lvd ner B Brem

Ov

nc Lawre ve airn A Glenc ve W ton A

Eglin

t St

St W

W ide St Adela ssway

4 km

rth

Rd

nfo

Da

Dr

ore

nm

Clo

Dawes Rd

Dr So

A3 iew Av e

Broadv

Ho

A2 Dr le

Rae va

Mc uth

A1 d Glen R

la Rose

Rd

n Dupo

tW

e ine r Expr

d

Vaughan Rd

Ave W

D avenport

ir St Cla

Ave

s Dunda

rd St Harbo

on St Dews ge St Colle

n St W

Dun das St W

Qu e e

y ard s wa G

King S

2

Gard iner Expre s

1

rk R Pa

Dufferin S rs Rd Roge

ce Walla

0

E

Schedule 1: Location Map

Boulton Dr

17 ve ren A

e

St

nd Av

e


18

Shopping

Socializing

Accessing Services

Waiting for a streetcar

A1 A2 A3 A4 Figure 3: Street Activity Graphic

Providing services

Walking to school

Crossing

Cycling, parking a bike


19

Competing Street Activities As illustrated in Figure 3, there are a variety activities typically found during the day on an urban multi-purpose street. Some people are rushing along the street either on foot, or in various types of vehicles, to get to and from other places while others are strolling, or enjoying a coffee. In the process they may stop to take a rest, arrange to meet friends or just come across them by chance while walking along the street. For many people, the street provides an important part of the public realm, either as a backdrop to their main activities or something to be enjoyed on its own, by sitting and watching the street and its different activities. After school hours and on weekends, streets take on the role of a playground, where the road becomes a hockey rink and street furniture becomes a jungle gym. Streets play an important role to the economy: they allow for the exchange of goods and services to and from locations, making it imperative that vehicles are in constant flow. For the City of Toronto specifically, parking and loading generate revenue back to the City and businesses, allowing for streets to operate at an economic level. Fire, police and ambulance services also use streets to provide emergency care across the City. It is important that streets be designed in a way to facilitate all of these activities, though prioritizing may be difficult. For people with physical limitations, the street layout may have impacts on their mobility. Children also need to be protected, as their height and street usage makes them vulnerable to oncoming traffic. It must also be realized that vehicular traffic can be dangerous but it is also an economic commodity that can be hindered if the flow of it goes ignored. Great streets allow for all users to utilize the streets to their greatest capacity; they facilitate engagement while also fufilling their function in the user’s day-to-day activities.

A1 A2 A3 A4


20

2.0

Design for Walkability

A1 A2 A3 A4

A

Introduction

B

Study Area

C

Policies

D

Health Benefits

E

Traffic Calming

F

Reccomendations

G

Conclusion

Method of Study

This report will provide recommendations for a variety of traffic calming measures in two neighborhoods within Ward 30. This report’s recommendations were informed by an initial analysis. In particular, this analysis involved assessing the neighbourhoods in terms of the existing area characteristics, as well as traffic and road conditions. This analysis allowed for properly identifying the issues and concerns throughout the study area. The area assessment used various methods including site visits, consultations, and secondary data sources. In terms of area characteristics of the neighborhoods, demographic profiles were refined and further assessed. The stakeholders confirmed the demographic profiles that were created and were able to provide further context relating the demographic profiles to the issues at hand. By conducting site visits, the existing conditions and issues of traffic, traffic congestion, and traffic calming were witnessed first hand. Key findings and observations were recorded and photographs were taken to further inform this study. Consultations with the local residents associations were conducted to gain specific neighbourhood concerns and suggestions that would better inform the recommendations of this report, and give value to the public interest. Secondary data was collected to confirm the initial site observations. This data was retrieved from reputable databases such as the City of Toronto and Statistics Canada. These data sources are free and transparent, assuming a level of reliability. To provide greater context, a review of the road standards and the federal, provincial and municipal policy was conducted. The intention of the policy review was to determine under which regulatory framework traffic-calming measures are approved and implemented. To further this understanding a review of the decision history for proposed traffic calming measures in Ward 30 was undertaken. Case studies of best practices from Canada and other parts of the world were reviewed to determine creative, innovative, and effective approaches to traffic calming. This report utilizes all relevant findings to evaluate and propose new traffic calming measures. This report will conclude by providing short-term and long-term recommendations in target neighborhoods of Ward 30.


21

A1 A2 A3 A4


22

3.0

Assumptions

This report advocates:

A1

An integrated approach An open and creative process Tailoring solutions to specific neighbourhood requirements

This report is aimed at providing the client, Councillor Paula Fletcher, with a collection of creative design options that work to calm traffic on local roads. This report also hopes to educate the broader community on the various types of traffic calming measures that can work to improve neighborhood street safety. 1.

In terms of limitations, the study is limited to the resources and information available to the public. This report also assumes all information provided by the stakeholders, for the purposes of creating recommendations, is accurate.

2.

This report assumes that the resources used have provided the necessary information to make appropriate design options, and this report does recognize that other factors may be introduced during the approval and implementation phases of the recommendations that are absent in the research.

3.

This report assumes that many of the recommendations are limited by federal, provincial and municipal policy. This report does not provide prescribed policy changes, but rather proposes traffic-calming measures and assesses whether amendments to existing policy are required to further implement the recommendations in this report.

4.

This report assumes that many of the recommendations are also limited by the City budget.

5.

It is important to note that this report is not limited to what is feasible in the City of Toronto; rather it expands on and works to apply local, national, and international best practices.

6.

This report will address driver education as a tool to calm traffic but it will not provide or suggest any prescriptive changes to the driver education curriculum.

7.

This report recognizes the importance of police enforcement, but it will not address police enforcement explicitly as a traffic calming measure.

8.

This report will not address new or proposed developments that may add to movement demands in the study area.

A2 A3 A4


23

A1 A2 A3 A4


24

B


Study Area 1.0 Ward 30 2.0 Area Assessment 3.0 Local Considerations

25

4.0 Demographic Profile 5.0 Stakeholders

B1 B2 B3 B4 B5


26

1.0

B1

The boundaries of Ward 30 are Danforth Avenue to the north, Coxwell Avenue, Greenwood Avenue, and Leslie Street to the east, Lake Ontario to the south and the Don Valley Parkway to the west

B3

B5

1.1 Location This study will focus on two areas within Ward 30 Toronto-Danforth. Ward 30 is located in the east end of the City of Toronto. The boundaries of Ward 30 are Danforth Avenue to the north, Coxwell Avenue, Greenwood Avenue, and Leslie Street to the east, Lake Ontario to the south and the Don Valley Parkway to the west. Refer to Schedule #2 for a map of Ward 30.

1.2 Characteristics

B2

B4

Ward 30

The Pocket and Upper Leslieville are both well established residential neighborhoods bounded by major and minor arterial roads, as well as rail tracks

Two communities within Ward 30, the Pocket and Upper Leslieville, are vulnerable to the effects of high-speed traffic. Although high-speed traffic is an issue across Ward 30, this study will focus on target street segments within the Pocket and Upper Leslieville in order to recommend and implement specific design solutions to mitigate traffic. Although the focus has been narrowed to two small street networks, this study is not limited to these areas as the findings may be useful in assessing opportunities to implement similar measures elsewhere in the City of Toronto. Attention has also been paid to the immediately adjacent areas in order to assess whether any proposed traffic calming measures are diverting traffic onto other vulnerable local roads. The Pocket and Upper Leslieville are both well established residential neighborhoods bounded by major and minor arterial roads, as well as rail tracks. Both communities are within a considerable proximity to two expressways: approximately 5km from the Don Valley Parkway, and approximately 10km from the Gardiner Expressway. Additionally, the communities are also approximately 3km from Lakeshore Boulevard East. Due to the fact that the study areas have easy access to major automobile travel routes, the local neighborhood roads are susceptible to through traffic and in turn increased automobile volumes.

Figure 4: Riverdale Avenue Traffic Calming Zone

The Pocket and Upper Leslieville are mostly composed of detached and semi-detached homes. The majority of homes have relatively narrow frontages and on the majority of local roads parking is permitted on at least one side of the streets, though this leaves little room for front yard and sidewalk activity. With minimal space for front yard and sidewalk activity (i.e. children playing) to take place, it is likely that activities spill over onto local roads.The combination of street activity spillover, through traffic and speeding vehicles creates a dangerous environment for residents and other pedestrians.


27

1.3 Transit In accordance with The Big Move, every resident in the Pocket and Upper Leslieville is within a 400m radius of a transit stop (representing an four-minute walk), and within a 1.5km radius of a rapid transit station (GTTA, 2008). Currently, four transit lines serve the study area, including the Bloor-Danforth Subway, the 506 Carlton Streetcar, and two bus routes. The 31 Greenwood line runs north and south along Greenwood Avenue from Greenwood Station to Queen Street, departing in approximately 10 minute intervals during peak periods (TTC, 2015). The 83 Jones line runs north and south along Jones Avenue, departing in approximately 20-minute intervals during peak periods (TTC, 2015). In addition, Donlands Station serves the study area along the Bloor-Danforth Subway line. The closest GO Transit Station (Danforth GO Station) is approximately a 5-minute subway ride from Greenwood Station. It is seen that transit is generally accessible and adequate in the study area. tE or S Ro sed ale Va lle

Danforth Ave

Front St E

Shore

Blvd E

Coxwell Ave Connaught Ave

Jones Ave

Greenwood Ave Greenwood Ave Eastern Ave

Eastwood Rd

Queen St E

on

gst

Kin

Rd

Ward 30 Map The Pocket Upper Leslieville

0

Schedule 2: Ward 30 Map

0.25 0.5

B4 B5

St

Lake

Fairford Ave

Leslie

Cherry St

Carlaw Ave

Eastern Ave

St E

Leslie St

Carlaw Ave

River St

Dundas St E

B1

B3

tE

rd S

rra

Ge

Woodbine Ave

Pape Ave

Logan Ave

Gerrard St E

Queen St E

King

Walpole Ave

Riverdale Ave

Broadview Ave

Bayview Ave

Parliament St Shuter St

Hanson St Felstead Ave

Jones Ave

Dundas St E

Carlaw Ave

Riverdale Park

Activity

B2

Blo

yR d

Figure 5: Danforth Avenue Pedestrian

1 km


28

1.4 Study Area The study area contains street segments prioritized for attention and the immediately adjoining areas

B1 B2 B3 B4 B5

The scope of this study consists of the study area. The selected sites that will form the basis for this study are the Pocket and Upper Leslieville. The study area will contain the street segments, with their associated frontages, plus some immediately adjoining parts of the street network. Within the study area, all land that is owned by the City of Toronto will be considered, including space that may not be formally recognized as part of the street network but may perform the role of public space. Street segments within the study area are subdivided where necessary to reflect on local differences in the existing conditions and street characteristics.


29

B1 B2 B3 The Pocket and Upper Leslieville are different, but both communities share the goal of making streets and pedestrians safer. Since both areas are in walking distance to a number of services and modes of public transportation the areas have the potential to become more walkable and more vibrant. Although the current street network can be deemed walkable in its current state, there are a number of factors that generate and proliferate traffic. Such factors will be addressed in the following sections of this report in order to achieve the aforementioned goals and objectives and to produce informed recommendations for the targeted neighborhoods.

B4 B5


30

1.5 The Pocket 1.5.1

Study Area

The Pocket is a community located in the east end of Toronto within Ward 30 and is bounded by Danforth Avenue to the north, Greenwood Avenue to the east, the CN Rail Tracks to the south and Jones Avenue to the west. Refer to Schedule #3 for a map of the Pocket. The Pocket is an active community where walking and cycling are popular modes of transportation and leisure (personal communication, 2015). There are a number of schools surrounding the Pocket. The Blake Street Public School is located just outside the identified study area boundaries. The area surrounding the school can be considered a ‘catchment area’ within the study, as issues related to traffic congestion are evident on the surrounding streets.

B1

As mentioned previously, the Pocket is in close proximity to a number of subway stations including Pape Station, Donlands Station and Greenwood Station. The average distance one would have to walk to reach a subway station along Danforth Avenue is approximately 1km, representing an approximate ten-minute walk. Apart from public transportation and educational institutions, the Pocket houses a number of important community services.

B2 B3 B4

1.5.2

B5

Figure 6: Local Road in the Pocket

Area Context

The City of Toronto streets are primarily designed in a grid pattern, allowing for simplified navigation for automobile drivers. Toronto drivers, being aware of this pattern, learn to deviate from their routes and cut through local streets to avoid traffic congestion. This behavioral pattern poses a concern to the Pocket in particular as the community, from an outsiders perspective follows the pattern but the TTC Rail Yard acts as a barrier blocking through traffic to Greenwood Avenue (Refer to Schedule #3). Through traffic has been identified by the Pocket Community Association (PCA) as a generator of concerns (personal communication, 2015). Baird Avenue, Shudell Avenue, Hunter Street and Boultbee Avenue run perpendicular to Jones Avenue and are often misconstrued by drivers as direct routes to Greenwood Avenue (personal communication, 2015). There is also limited access north to Danforth Avenue with exits only available on Euston and Byron Avenue and little access south of the Pocket as the CN Rail line cuts through the area, as shown in Schedule 3. The Pocket is surrounded by a number of schools, and it is because of this feature that the PCA has identified that the streets surrounding Blake Street Public School, as well as other school districts as potential ‘catchment areas’ as traffic volumes have been observed to be the heaviest during the morning drop off hours from approximately 8:30AM to 9:00AM, during lunch hours, and again during the afternoon rush hour. The residents identified that the following activities overlap throughout the day:

presence of children and adults walking to and from work and school; dropping off children and school buses picking up and dropping off children; and vehicles driving to and from work.

A further description and analysis of the generators of traffic congestion, associated implications, and critical issues in the study area will be further discussed in Section E of this report.


31

DANFORTH AVE BYRON AVE

CHATHAM AVE

EUSTON AVE

BEN KERR LANE

PHIN AVE

B1

OAKVALE AVE

EARL GREY RD

B2

PHIN PARKETTE

DAWSON AVE

B3

CONDOR AVE

BAIRD AVE

B4 GREENWOOD AVE

JONES AVE

INSERT MAP

SHUDELL AVE

SEYMOUR AVE

CONDOR AVE

HUNTER ST

CRYSTAL ARTS SQ

BOU LT BEE A V E

LESLIE ST

AVE

IVY THE POCKET AREA MAP MYRTLE AVE

100

500

250

SCALE 1:400

LEGEND

HARRIET ST

PRUST AVE

HASTINGS AVE

BUSHELL AVE

CN RAIL LINE

BLOOMFIELD AVE

Schedule 3: The Pocket Area Map

SANDFORD AVE

B5


32

1.6 Upper Leslieville 1.6.1

Study Area

Upper Leslieville is a community within Ward 30 immediately south of the Pocket, bounded by the CN Rail Tracks to the north, Greenwood Avenue to the east, Gerrard Street to the south and Jones Avenue to the west. As mentioned previously, Upper Leslieville residents are in close proximity to a number of TTC streetcar stops. The average distance one would have to walk to reach a streetcar stop on Gerrard is less than 50m, representing an approximate 5-minute walk. TTC bus service is also available on Jones Avenue and Greenwood Avenue. There are two schools located within Upper Leslieville, being Eastern Commerce Collegiate Institute and Riverdale Collegiate Institute, as well as a daycare facility located at Myrtle and Leslie Street.

B1 B2

Apart from public transportation and educational institutions, Upper Leslieville houses a number of other important community services.

B3 1.6.2

B4

Area Context

Traffic congestion and traffic related concerns within Upper Leslieville have increased in the last 5 to 6 years (personal communication, 2015). The neighborhood has become more affluent and is home to more Downtown Toronto commuters (personal communication, 2015).

B5

Figure 7: The 506 Streetcar En Route Along Gerrard Street East

Upper Leslieville’s close proximity to the Don Valley Parkway (DVP) has been noted as a generator of traffic (personal communication, 2015). When the DVP is closed drivers often use Leslie Street as a short cut (personal communication, 2015). Many other instances of through traffic have been noted within Upper Leslieville (personal communication, 2015). Automobile drivers are cutting through from Gerrard Street and Greenwood Avenue onto local roads to avoid traffic congestion during rush hour, frequently violating posted speed limits and driving in the wrong direction on one-way roads (personal communication, 2015). The residents identified the following neighbourhood safety concerns:

increased rush hour vehicle volumes; through traffic; and violation of driving regulations.

A further description and analysis of the generators of traffic congestion, its associated implications, and critical issues Upper Leslieville is facing are further discussed in later parts of Section B.


33

CRYSTAL ARTS SQ

BOU LT BEE A V E

LESLIE ST

MYRTLE AVE

IVY AVE

B1 HARRIET ST

BLOOMFIELD AVE PRUST AVE

HASTINGS AVE

BUSHELL AVE

SANDFORD AVE

B5

UPPER LESLIEVILLE AREA MAP 250

500

SCALE 1:400

LEGEND

Schedule 4: Upper Leslieville Area Map

CN RAIL LINE

B3 B4

INSERT MAP GERRARD ST E

100

B2


34

2.0

Area Assessment

2.1 Identifying Street User Conflict Conflicts of various kinds often result from the juxtaposition of different street user groups and the activities that carry out in close proximity to one another. While a certain degree of conflict may be acceptable, this can result in a general lowering of levels of satisfaction among street users. Reconciling these conflicts with traffic calming measures is one of the primary objectives outlined in this report. That said, most of these conflicts result either from lack of capacity or compatibility.

B1 B2 B3

Figure 8: Looking East at the corner of Gerrard and Greenwood Avenue

B4 B5 Figure 9: Slow Sign on Condor Avenue

Capacity Conflicts Capacity conflicts arise when there isn’t enough space within a street design section to accommodate the full set of requirements of all street users. This may be due to a physical constraint resulting from the limited space available between frontages, or it may arise from the way that the street space has historically been allocated among different street user groups, through policy (covered in Section C of this report). On the road, conflicts arise between motor vehicles and pedestrians who wish to cross the street, both due to road width and loss of capacity where formal zebra or signalized pedestrian crossings are installed. Compatibility Conflicts Even in situations where all the street user requirements could be physically accommodated, there may be reasons why certain activities do not “fit” well together, because they are not compatible. Fast moving traffic inhibiting the use of the adjacent footway, or the movement of pedestrians across the street is often what gives rise to conflicts between motor vehicles and pedestrians. As is the case with these types of conflicts, the nature and extent of compatibility problems may vary at different times, such as daytime in comparison to evening, or summer in comparison to winter months.


35

2.2 Existing Conditions A number of visits were made to examine the existing conditions in the study area. The Pocket and Upper Leslieville were both divided into five smaller areas for observation. 1) Danforth Avenue to Baird Avenue
 2) Baird Avenue
to Shudell Avenue 3) Shudell Avenue
to CN Rail Tracks 4) Hastings Avenue to Jones Avenue 5) Greenwood Avenue to Hastings Avenue Several site visits were made to examine street characteristics within the area, and identify street user conflicts and traffic control devices that are already in place. It is important to analyze the behavior of drivers within the area and examine the level of effectiveness of existing traffic control devices such as speed humps, traffic signals, and signage, among others.

B1 Figure 10: Riverdale Avenue Traffic Calming Zone

B2 B3 B4 B5

Figure 11: Logan Avenue


36

2.2.1

1) The Pocket - Danforth Avenue to Baird Avenue Boundary The area from Danforth Avenue to Baird Avenue is located in The Pocket. The boundaries are Danforth Avenue to the north, Greenwood Avenue to the east, Baird Avenue to the south, and Jones Avenue to the west. Signage

B1 B2 B3

Figure 12: Traffic calming signs on Oakvale Avenue

B4

Similar to the other identified sites in the study area, there is a significant amount of signage implemented in the area. The signage indicates that through traffic and speeding is a big concern. “Watch for Children” signage can be found on Condor Avenue from Baird to Chatham and Earl Grey Road. In addition, “slow” signs, which indicate that drivers should drive at a lower speed, can also be found on Condor Avenue from Baird to Chatham and on Oakvale Avenue, when entering from Greenwood Avenue. Signs indicating that ball and hockey playing is prohibited are posted in certain parts of the area, specifically on Ravina Crescent. There are also a number of Speed Control Zone signage, which limits trucks to 10 kilometers per hour and cars to 15 kilometers per hour. These signs can be found on Ben Kerr Lane and right at the laneway before Byron Avenue on Chatham Avenue. Speed Control Zone signs that also indicate speed bumps are ahead can be found on Condor Avenue from Baird Avenue to Chatham Avenue and Oakvale Avenue. Lastly, for the speed bumps on Condor Avenue and Ben Kerr Lane, there are signs acknowledging that a speed bump is present. Street Characteristics

B5

Figure 13: Danforth and Greenwood, Major Arterial Roads Bounding the Site

Major arterial roads such as Danforth Avenue, contain two lanes of traffic and parking on both sides of the road for businesses. Greenwood Avenue and Jones Avenue, the minor arterial roads in the area contain two lanes, which allows for parking on both sides of the street, and consists of bike lanes on both the west and east sides of the road. Baird Avenue, a local road, consists of two lanes and parking on one side of the street. In addition to being able to identify the street characteristics of the boundaries, some notable local streets within our area of study was analyzed. Condor Avenue from Baird to Chatham is a narrow one-way street. On Chatham, from Greenwood to Byron Avenue is a two-way street with parking on one side and from Byron Avenue to Jones Avenue, Chatham Avenue becomes a wide one way- street with parking on one side. It is important to mention that Toronto Fire Station 323 is located on a local street, Chatham Avenue near Byron Avenue. Traffic Calming Measures Speed bumps are the only traffic calming measure present in this area. Specifically, there are three speed bumps located on Condor Avenue from Baird to Chatham, which would complement the signs that acknowledge that a speed bump is present. Speed bumps can also be found on Ben Kerr Lane and Oakvale Avenue. Analysis of Conditions

Figure 14: Speed Control Zone Sign on Condor Avenue

In reference to the meeting with The Pocket Community Association (PCA), a major problem that residents have identified is that the one-way street on Chatham from Byron Avenue to Jones Avenue is extremely wide and therefore, encourages drivers to speed, putting pedestrians’ safety at risk.


37

The Pocket Baird Ave to D

25

100

LEGEND

Byron Ave

Euston Ave

Chatham Ave

SCALE 1:400

Danforth Ave

Traffic Calm

Watch for C Phin Ave

B1

“Slow” Sign

Greenwood Ave

Condor Ave

Earl Grey Rd

Jones Ave

B2

Speed Limit

Oakvale Ave

Baird Ave

1 Hour Parki

B3

Pedestrian C

B4

Speed Bump

B5

Ball Hockey

The Pocket Baird Ave to Danforth Ave 250

100

500

SCALE 1:400

Danforth Ave Byron Ave

LEGEND Traffic Calming Zone Sign Watch for Children Sign

Phin Ave

“Slow” Sign Speed Limit Sign

Oakvale Ave

Greenwood Ave

1 Hour Parking Sign Pedestrian Crosswalk Speed Bump with Signage Ball Hockey Prohibited Sign

Schedule 5: The Pocket - Baird Ave to Danforth Ave


38

2.2.2 The Pocket - Baird Avenue to Shudell Avenue Boundaries The boundary for this area is Baird to the north, the TTC Greenwood Subway Yard to the east, Shudell Avenue to the south, and Jones Avenue to the west. Signage

B1

Figure 15: Ball and Hockey Prohibited Signs

Signage throughout the area includes maximum speed limit signs of 40 kilometers per hour, as well as stop signs to indicate two-way intersections and four-way intersections. There is also a sign prohibiting ball and hockey playing on the street, at Condor and Dawson Avenue. Traffic Calming Measures There are no traffic calming measures in this area, as there are in other areas. However, a pedestrian crosswalk is present at Baird and Jones, so that pedestrians can make their way to either side of Jones. The bend in the road at Dawson Avenue and Condor Avenue lacks a sidewalk for several meters, presumably because of the laneway that ends on the east side of Condor Avenue. Jones allows for heavier traffic and faster speeds of vehicles, and few pedestrian crossings may force pedestrians to make illegal and dangerous crossings. All streets have two lanes of traffic, while Jones Avenue is a four-lane street, with bicycle lanes on both sides.

B2 B3 B4 B5 Figure 16: Jones Avenue

Figure 17: Jones Avenue

On local residential streets, on-street parking is available, and many houses include driveways or parking pads at the rear of the house, as seen on Condor Avenue and Dawson Avenue. Winter conditions have made snow clearing on sidewalks difficult, and therefore pedestrians may be forced to walk on the roadway, alongside vehicles.


39

Phin Ave

The Pocket Baird Ave to Shudell Ave

LEGEND

Greenwood Ave

SCALE 1:400

Earl Grey Rd

Jones Ave

500

100 Oakvale Ave 250

Traffic Calming Zone Sign

Condor Ave

Baird Ave

Watch for Children Sign

Queen Victoria St

“Slow” Sign

Speed Limit Sign

Condor Ave

Seymour Ave

Dawson Ave

Shudell Ave

1 Hour Parking Sign Pedestrian Crosswalk Speed Bump with Signage Ball Hockey Prohibited Sign

Phin Ave

500

LEGEND

Greenwood Ave

Earl Grey Rd

SCALE 1:400

Traffic Calming Zone Sign

Condor Ave

Baird Ave

Watch for Children Sign

Queen Victoria St

Speed Limit Sign

Condor Ave

Seymour Ave

Dawson Ave

Shudell Ave

“Slow” Sign

B2 B3 B4 B5

The Pocket Baird Ave to Shudell Ave 100 Oakvale Ave 250

B1

1 Hour Parking Sign Pedestrian Crosswalk Speed Bump with Signage Ball Hockey Prohibited Sign

Schedule 6: The Pocket- Baird Ave to Shudell Ave


40

2.2.3 The Pocket - Shudell Avenue to CN Rail Tracks Boundaries This area is located in the Pocket, bounded by Shudell Avenue to the north, the TTC Greenwood Subway Yard to the east, the CN Rail Tracks to the south and Jones Avenue to the west, refer to Schedule #7 for a map of the area. This area consists of residential homes along local roads, with the exception of some commercial buildings on Jones Avenue, an arterial road. The following summary will provide an inventory of the current street characteristics in terms of parking, signage, and interesting observations as well as a description of some of the site-specific issues. Signage

B1 B2 B3

Figure 18: Common Residential Homes Along Local Roads

B4

All roads within the area have a posted speed limit of 40 km/h. In terms of signage apart from speed limit signs there are “Ball and Hockey Playing Prohibited” signs (Refer to Figure #19). There are many one-way stop signs and only one all-way stop located at the Condor Avenue and Shudell Avenue intersection. There is also a “no exit” sign on Boothroyd Avenue but there is not a “no exit” sign indicating that Crystal Arts Square is a dead end. Street Characteristics All the local roads provide car parking on at least one side of the road. Jones Avenue (a minor arterial) provides parking on both sides of the road as well as bike lanes (Refer to Figure #20). In terms of street markings, on local roads there are no lines indicating where cars should stop at an intersection in order to have appropriate sight lines. Streets that run perpendicular to Jones Avenue such as Hunter Street and Shudell Avenue have such markings, but the lines seem to be set back far enough for drivers sightlines to be obstructed.

B5

Figure 19: Ball and Hockey Prohibited Signs

Traffic Calming Measures There are no traffic calming zones or speed humps within this area. Analysis of Conditions Issues specific to this area include through traffic and crosswalk safety. Through consultation with the PCA it was determined that this area experiences frequent through traffic as drivers typically assume that there is vehicular access to Greenwood Avenue from streets such as Hunter Street and Shudell Avenue.

Figure 20: Jones Avenue

The Jones Avenue and Boultbee Avenue intersection is also concerning to the residents as the east and west side of Boultbee Avenue do not line up, but there is a crosswalk that connects Boultbee Avenue. Blake Street Public School is located at the corner of Jones Avenue and west Boultbee Avenue making the crosswalk at that intersection extremely important as children are using it to walk to and from school.


41

The Pocket Shudell Ave to CN Rail T

Shudell Ave

250

100

SCALE 1:400 Hunter St

Seymour Ave

Condor Ave

Jones Ave

LEGEND Traffic Calming Zone Sign

B1

Watch for Children Sign

Boultbee Ave

B2

“Slow” Sign Speed Limit Sign Wangstaff Dr

Ivy Ave

1 Hour Parking Sign

B3 B4

Pedestrian Crosswalk

Dawson Ave

B5

Speed Bump with Signage Bushell Ave

Harriet Ave

The Pocket Shudell Ave to CN Rail Tracks

Shudell Ave

250

100

Bloomfield Ave

Ball Hockey Prohibited Sign

500

SCALE 1:400 Hunter St Seymour Ave

Condor Ave

Jones Ave

LEGEND Traffic Calming Zone Sign Watch for Children Sign

Boultbee Ave

“Slow” Sign Speed Limit Sign Wangstaff Dr Ivy Ave

1 Hour Parking Sign Pedestrian Crosswalk

Dawson Ave

Speed Bump with Signage Bushell Ave

Harriet Ave

Bloomfield Ave

Ball Hockey Prohibited Sign Schedule 7: The Pocket - Shudell Ave to CN Rail Tracks


42

2.2.4 Upper Leslieville - Jones Avenue to Hastings Avenue Boundaries

Figure 21: Gerrard Street and Leslie Street Pedestrian Crosswalk

Signage

B1

On-street parking is allowed along all the streets in the specified area, accompanied by signs indicating hours when parking is prohibited. Also included are one-way signs, stop signs, and signs indicating that playing on the streets is prohibited. In addition, there is a no truck sign for laneways, and signs indicating that there are speed bumps along laneways.

B2 B3 B4

This section of Upper Leslieville is bounded by the CN Rail Tracks to the north, Hasting Avenue to the east, Gerrard Street to the south, and Jones Avenue to the west, This section
is mostly made up of single and semi-detached residential houses. Along Gerrard Street between Jones Street and Hastings Avenue are Riverdale Collegiate Institute, the Parent Resource Centre, and a few eateries such as Pizza Pizza and Starbucks. Riverdale Collegiate Institute (Figure #21) serves nearly 1,200 students for the area, creating high numbers of pedestrian traffic during peak hours, with students going to school, for lunch, or home, as mentioned earlier on in this report.

Street Characteristics Figure 22: Gerrard Street and Leslie Street Signage

B5

Gerrard Street and Jones Avenue are technically four-lane streets, with parking along both sides, making them two-lanes streets. The residential streets
are all two-lane streets, with the exception of the laneway off of Leslie at Myrtle. All residential streets allow street parking. Traffic Calming Measures There are currently very limited traffic calming measures in this site. The one-way streets of Myrtle Avenue and Ivy Avenue are in place to reduce through traffic coming south from Danforth Avenue on Greenwood Avenue going toward Gerrard Street or Jones Avenue. Aside from this, there are no other exclusive traffic calming measures currently in place for this section. Analysis of Conditions

Figure 23: Pedestrian Crosswalk Markings

Figure 24: Gerrard Street and Leslie Street Intersection

There are some identified dangerous intersections within this specified site, as outlined in 2.3.3 of this section. These intersections are Gerrard Street and Leslie Street (Figure #24), Leslie Street and Harriet Street, and Leslie and Myrtle Street. These streets will be discussed below outlining their signage, characteristics and anyway they can be improved upon. At Gerrard and Leslie there is a pedestrian prompted crosswalk, which
has been identified as dangerous, as drivers tend to speed over the posted limit along Gerrard Street, and pedestrians may not be cautious enough. With the Riverdale Collegiate Institute located at that intersection, many students use the crosswalk during morning, lunch, and afternoon peak hours. The intersection of Leslie and Harriet presents some issues with drivers, as there is a no left turn onto Leslie from Harriet, forcing the driver to go right and loop around to Ivy Street and Prust Avenue in order to get back to Gerrard Street.


43

There is also a laneway at this intersection, which has speed humps along it and a sign indicating that trucks are prohibited. However, there may be foliage that grows over during the warmer months, causing a visual obstruction of these signs. With the no left turn sign previously mentioned at the intersection of Leslie Street and Harriet Street, drivers are forced to make a right onto Leslie Street. From here they are supposed to make a right on to the one-way street, Ivy Avenue. However, drivers tend to turn left onto Myrtle Street, going the opposite direction on the one-way street/ .he current one-way designation of the two streets (Myrtle Street and Ivy Street) is already a traffic calming measure that has been put in place.

Figure 25: Leslie Street and Myrtle Avenue Intersection

B1 B2 B3

UpperLeslieville Leslieville Upper Jones Ave to Hastings Ave Jones Ave to Hastings Ave 250

100

Boultbee Ave

500

250

100

500

SCALE 1:400

Boultbee Ave

SCALE 1:400 LEGEND Wangstaff Dr Calming Zone Sign LEGENDTraffic Ivy Ave Myrtle Ave

Ivy Ave

“Slow” Sign

Watch for Children Sign

Harriet Ave

Bushell Ave

Myrtle Ave

Wangstaff Dr

Sign Sign for Children WatchCalming Zone Traffic

Bloomfield Ave

Speed Limit Sign

“Slow” Sign Prust Ave

Hastings Ave

Prust Ave

Gerrard St

Hastings Ave

Jones Ave

Leslie St

Jones Ave

Bushell Ave

Leslie St

Harriet Ave

Sign 1 Hour Parking field Ave

Bloom Sanford Ave

Speed Limit Sign

Pedestrian Crosswalk

Parking Hour Bump 1 Speed Signage withSign Sanford Ave

Prohibited Sign Ball Hockey Crosswalk Pedestrian

Speed Bump with Signage

Gerrard St

Ball Hockey Prohibited Sign

Schedule 8: Upper Leslieville - Jones Ave to Hastings Ave

B4 B5


44

2.2.5

Upper Leslieville - Hastings Avenue to Greenwood Avenue Boundaries Located in Upper Leslieville, this site is bounded by the CN Rail Tracks to the north, Greenwood Avenue to the east, Gerrard Street East to the south and Hastings Avenue to the west. Streets within the area range in classifications. Most streets are classified as local with the exception of Gerrard Street East and Greenwood Avenue, which are identified as minor arterials. Signage Overall, with the exception of the two speed humps on Ivy Avenue, the area was found to be properly equipped with appropriate signage. On Prust Avenue and Greenwood Avenue the speed limit was posted three and four times respectively. Other streets had various signs including “Neighbourhood Watch” and “Traffic Calming Zone” signs. Signs indicating that ball hockey is prohibited are found on Bloomfield Avenue and Ivy Avenue. On Hastings Avenue and Prust Avenue there are laneways leading to backyard garages that have speed bumps as well as a sign indicating this where the laneway meets the road.

B1 B2 B3

Figure 26: Traffic Calming Zone Signage

B4 B5

Figure 27: Hastings Avenue

Street Characteristics This area seemed to have the necessary measures to keep traffic at a safe volume and speed. However, not a lot has been done for the pedestrians. Firstly, there is a lack of pedestrian crossings. On Greenwood Avenue there is a crossing at Ivy Avenue and at the intersection with Gerrard Street East with nothing in between. There are two other streets that intersect with Greenwood Avenue in this section yet pedestrians have to walk approximately 300m south (from Ivy Avenue) or more than 500m north on Greenwood Avenue to reach the next crossing. Sidewalk space available for pedestrians is another issue in this area. During the winter months more than half of the sidewalk is covered with snow that has been taken off the streets by the plows. This creates a very narrow path for pedestrians to walk on. In addition, on garbage days, garbage bins take up the little room left not covered by snow making it extremely difficult to walk on the sidewalk. Furthermore, the majority of the streets in this area had onstreet parking. On the two-way streets the parked cars plus the snow banks created a very narrow path for drivers, which might actually help with reducing speeds in the area. Traffic Calming Measures Within this site, Ivy Avenue is designated as a Traffic Calming Zone with a posted speed limit of 30km/h. Two speed humps were installed on a block of Ivy Avenue from Prust Avenue to Greenwood Avenue to slow the speed of traffic on this local street.


45

Analysis of Conditions Based on the existing conditions that were witnessed and the observations made, it could be inferred that the area between Greenwood Avenue and Hastings Avenue has witnessed the implementation of several traffic control devices that have aimed to calm traffic within neighbourhood streets and enhance the level of safety on them. The designation of Ivy Avenue as a Traffic Calming Zone by installing two speed humps and reducing the posted speed limit to 30km/h has had a positive impact on the area. Although, considerations should be made to relocate the speed hump warning signs to ensure a higher level of effectiveness. Furthermore, as mentioned earlier, snow during the winter season can have both positive and negative impacts on the functionality of a particular street.

Condor Ave

Condor Ave

The narrower width of the street would lead it to function as a yield street where drivers would be forced to slow down. However, snow could also jeopardize the safety of pedestrians and the reduction in the size of the sidewalk makes it less accessible. In addition, pedestrian crosswalks in the area are distant from each other, forcing pedestrians to have to walk long distance before being able to cross the road.

B1 B2 Figure 28: Limited Sidewalk Space on Garbage Day, Bloomfield Avenue

Upper Leslieville Hastings Ave to Greenwood Ave Upper Leslieville

500 250 100 Hastings Ave to Greenwood Ave 100

SCALE 1:400

500

SCALE 1:400 LEGEND

Wangstaff Dr

LEGEND Calming Zone Sign Traffic

Wangstaff Dr

Ivy Ave

250

Traffic Calming Zone Sign

Ivy Ave

Bloomfield Ave

Prust Ave

Prust Ave

Hastings Ave

Hastings Ave

Ave rd Ave SanfordSanfo

Greenwood Ave

Bloomfield Ave

Harriet Ave

Greenwood Ave

Harriet Ave

Watch for Children Sign

Watch for Children Sign

“Slow” Sign “Slow” Sign

Speed Limit Sign

Speed Limit Sign

1 Hour Parking Sign

1 Hour Parking Sign

Pedestrian Crosswalk Crosswalk Pedestrian

Bump Speed Signage withSignage Bumpwith Speed Sign Prohibited Sign Hockey Ball HockeyProhibited Ball

St d St GerrardGerrar Schedule 9: Upper Leslieville - Hastings Ave to Greenwood Ave

B3 B4 B5


46

2.3 Analysis 2.3.1

Pedestrian and Motor Vehicle Patterns and Volumes

The intersections of Danforth Avenue and Greenwood Avenue, Danforth Avenue and Jones Avenue, Gerrard Street East and Jones Avenue, and Gerrard Street East and Greenwood Avenue are the main focus of this section of the study.

B1 B2 B3 B4 B5

24/hr Ped Volume

24/hr Motor Volume

Main Street

Side Street

Danforth Ave

Greenwood Ave

4, 212

38, 322

Danforth Ave

Jones Ave

6, 206

26, 490

Gerrard St E

Jones Ave

4, 387

22, 982

Gerrard St E

Greenwood Ave

4, 100

25, 126

Source: 2011 City of Toronto Transportation Services

Table 1: Pedestrian and Motor Volumes on Four Streets within the study area.

Table 1 shows the highest vehicular volume in a twenty-four hour period on the intersection of Danforth Avenue and Greenwood. The following intersections are included: Danforth and Greenwood, Danforth and Jones, Gerrard and Greenwood, Gerrard and Jones. The data might suggest that the problem of traffic congestion lies within the major arterial and minor arterial roads that feed the local roads. In reference to the “Road Classification System� section of this report, each street type has different carrying capacities and speeds matched to width and other design features. Major arterial roads such as Danforth Avenue are designed to carry 20,000 vehicles per day, while minor arterial roads such as Gerrard Street East are designed to accommodate between 8,000 to 20,000 vehicles per day (City of Toronto, 2012). By the extension of this knowledge, if the numbers are exceeded and the roads reach full capacity, drivers will likely find more efficient ways to reach their destination by taking detours through the local roads. With that being said, the increased amount of cut-through traffic on residential streets is a likely contributor to the high speeds. Any proposed traffic calming measure will have significant impacts on adjacent streets, and any traffic-calming proposal should be modified to include the proposed street as well as adjacent streets where traffic is expected to divert. Table 1 also highlights pedestrian volume in a twenty-four hour period, with Danforth Avenue and Jones Avenue having the highest recorded rate of pedestrian volume. Being able to identify areas where pedestrian volume is high along with high volumes of traffic would assist in making decisions in regards to the location of walking improvements, traffic signals and especially traffic calming measures, in order to further enhance pedestrian protection and safety.


47

2.3.2

Cyclist Volumes

There has been limited research completed on cycling patterns in the given study area, The Pocket and Upper Leslieville. Although the City of Toronto has conducted various bicycle counts at many intersections throughout the City, none of them fall within the study area. However there are a couple of different studies and surveys that measure cycling patterns, such as the National Household Survey which indicates the mode of transportation used to get to work, and The Transportation Tomorrow Survey by the Transportation Information Steering Committee (Data Management Group, 2012). One important piece of data often used to analyze cycling patterns is the Bicycle Mode Share, which provides the percentage of people who ride their bike to work (City of Toronto, 2015). According to the Mapping Cycling in Toronto Report by the Toronto Cycling Think & Do Tank in 2006 Ward 30 had a Cycling Mode Share of 4.4%, the 5th highest score of all 30 wards in the City. This score is also considerably higher than the City with 1.3% (2013). The Transportation Tomorrow survey is used to collect data having to do with urban travel patterns, in other words, how many one way trips are made daily and on what mode of transportation (Data Management Group, 2012). This Survey indicates that in a 24-hour period 14% of trips made were cycling or walking (Data Man- agement Group, 2012). Since the study area only accounts for a small section of all of Ward 30, it is also important to look at data at the census tract level. The National Household Survey has gained information regarding modes of transportation to work, otherwise known as the Bicycle Mode Share. In 2011, approximately 6% of the population in the Pocket cycled to work. In Upper Leslieville on the other hand, only approximately 3% of the population cycled to work. When comparing this data to that of the Transportation Tomorrow Survey that stated that 14% of trips in Ward 30 are made walking or cycling we can safely assume that approximately half of those trips were cycling and the other half walking. Cyclists from throughout Toronto use the various bike lanes and paths for commuting, exercising, or recreational riding. As noted earlier on, limited data is available for cyclist travel patterns in Ward 30. However, based on the existing bike lanes in the study area, cyclists have other limited routes to use. For the purpose of commuting, there is an option to use the bike lanes on Jones Avenue and Greenwood Avenue for the connection to northern and southern corridors. From here they could intersect at Danforth Avenue and Dundas Street, easily being able to connect to the downtown core. Those who cycle for exercise or recreation may use these routes to travel south to Tommy Thompson Park, or north to the Oakvale Trail. In addition, cyclists have the option to ride to a number of parks, trails, and paths throughout Toronto. Statistically speaking, Ward 30 has a high bike share percentage at about 4%, which is about 3% higher than the City total (Mapping Cycling Behavior in Toronto, 2012).

B1 B2 B3 B4 B5


48

2.3.3

Dangerous Intersections

Intersections are the overlapping element in two realms, the pedestrian and the vehicular. The interaction between these two realms can prove to be dangerous at times when either side fails to recognize each other and the rules governing this shared space. Examining requested traffic measures and where collisions and accidents most commonly occur will provide a better understanding of recommendations that could be made to make the study area’s intersections safer for all. Intersections with traffic calming measures requested:

B1 B2 B3 B4 B5

Carlaw Avenue at Langley Avenue Requested measure: extend the left turn prohibition to the hours of 3pm – 7pm Carlaw Avenue at Gerrard Street East Requested measure: install advance green signal to permit southbound right turns during the morning rush hour and northbound right turns at all other times Requested measure: all way stop intersection control
City Staff Recommendations: Transportation Services came to the conclusions that an all-way stop at either intersection was not warranted due to the amount of traffic and the total number of collisions reported. “ The installation criteria for all-way stop control based solely on the reported collision history at the intersection, the average annual number of collisions susceptible to correction by the use of all-way stop control must at least be two at an intersection where the major road is classified as local, and three for a major road classified as collector“ (Transportation Services, 2014). Collisions involving active transportation users in Toronto are predominantly on major arterial roads and at intersections. Pedestrians are most likely to get hit when crossing with the right of way and cyclist are most susceptible to collisions when an inadequate amount of separation from motor vehicles. Over half (58%) of pedestrian-vehicle collisions and 69% of cyclist-vehicle collisions occur on major arterials (City of Toronto 2010a, 2010b).
47% of pedestrian-vehicle collisions occur at intersections, and in over 75% of these collisions pedestrians have the right-of-way. 37% of cyclist-vehicle collisions occur at intersections, where one party is turning. 675 collisions involved pedestrians crossing with the right of way who are hit by turning vehicles. These collisions accounted for 30% of total pedestrian-vehicle collisions, and led to 10 pedestrian fatalities in 2009. 30% of cyclist-vehicle collisions involve sideswiping collisions, collisions with car doors, and rear-ending collisions (City of Toronto: Public health, 2012). Since the rate of collisions reported in the study area is very low, intersections should be “complete” in order to serve all users would further reduce the amount of collisions within the study area. Complete intersections are in tandem with complete streets, when all users have been considered in the planning process and have designated areas for sole mode use and intermodal interaction with all users equal to encourage safety and cohesion.


49

DANGEROUS INTERSECTIONS MAP Danforth Ave DANGEROUS INTERSECTIONS MAP

Danforth Ave Danforth Ave

an Ave LogLog ananAve Ave Log

PapPeaApvepeA Pa e vAeve

DANGEROUS INTERSECTIONS MAP

veAve w Aw w Ave

0 0

AveAve oodood enwenw GreGre ood Ave Greenw

0

B5

Dundas St E Dundas St E Dundas St E

e eStSt St slisli LeLe Leslie

The Pocket

B3 B4

Upper Leslieville Upper Leslieville

Eastern Ave stern Ave Ea Upper Leslieville The Pocket The Pocket Eastern Ave

B2

eAve es Av JonJon eses Ave Jon

Gerrard St E Gerrard St E Gerrard St E

B1

Riverdale Ave Riverdale Ave Riverdale Ave

ee w AvAv rlarla CaCa w Ave Cawrla

Ave iew iew Broadv adv Bro Ave adviewAve Bro

Langley Ave Langley Ave Langley Ave

Eastern Ave

0.25 0.5 0.25 0.5

1 Ea km stern Ave 1 km

0.25 0.5

1 km

Schedule 10: Dangerous Intersections

Eastern Ave


50

2.3.4

Transit

As noted earlier in the report, public transit in the study area has been the most common mode of transportation to work, with 46% using transit in The Pocket, and 41% in Upper Leslieville. Additionally, the use of public transit has overtaken personal vehicles as the most common mode of transportation since 2006.

B1 B2 B3 B4 B5

Currently, four transit lines serve the boundaries of the study area, including the Bloor-Danforth Subway, the 506 Carlton Streetcar, and two bus routes. The 31 Greenwood ine runs north and south along Greenwood Avenue from Greenwood Station to Queen Street, departing in approximately 10 minute intervals during peak periods (TTC, 2015). The 83 Jones line runs north and south along Jones Avenue, departing in approximately 20-minute intervals during peak periods (TTC, 2015). The area is also served by Donlands Station along the Bloor-Danforth Subway. Additionally, the closest GO Transit Station (Danforth GO Station) is approximately a 5-minute subway ride from Greenwood Station. It is seen that transit is generally accessible and adequate in the study area. In line with the goals of The Big Move, every resident in the study area is within a 400m radius of a transit stop, representing an eight-minute walk, and within a 1.5km radius of a rapid transit station (GTTA, 2008). In regards to traffic calming measures, it is recommended by the City of Toronto that speed bumps should not be installed on primary Toronto Fire Service, Toronto Emergency Medical Service, or Toronto Transit Commission routes (Works Committee, 2002). Moreover, traffic calming measures should avoid having major impacts on such emergency and transit services. Two major streets in which major traffic impediments should be avoided would be Byron Avenue and Chatham Avenue, which serve Toronto Fire Station 323.


51

DANFORTH AVE BYRON AVE

CHATHAMAVE RD

EUSTON AVE

BEN KERR LANE

THE POCKET AND UPPER LESLIEVILLE MOBILITY 100

250

500

SCALE 1:400

PHIN AVE

LEGEND CN RAIL LINE

OAKVALE AVE

EARL GREY RD

BLOOR-DANFORTH SUBWAY LINE

PHIN PARKET TE

SUBWAY STOP STREETCAR ROUTE

BAIRD AVE

TRANSIT STOP BUS ROUTE

DAWSON AVE

GREENWOOD AVE

SHUDELL AVE

BIKE LANE

B2 B3

SEYMOUR AVE

CONDOR AVE

B4 B5

CRYSTAL ARTS SQ

JONES AVE

LESLIE ST

MYRTLE AVE

B1

IVY AVE

HARRIET ST BLOOMFIELD AVE

PRUST AVE

HASTINGS AVE

BUSHELL AVE

SANDFORD AVE

GERRARD ST E

Schedule 11: The Pocket and Upper Leslieville Mobility


52

3.0

Local Considerations

3.1 Design Speed Vs. Target Speed

B1 B2 B3

Figure 29: Gerrard Street

Leading up to the present day, streets ranging from rural to urban areas have been built behind the concept of design speeds (National Association of City Transportation Officials, 2013). Rooted in highway design, this technique allows for streets to be physically designed to accommodate for the 85th percentile of fastest vehicles; it accommodates for speed and forgives driver errors. This passive technique encourages speeding while also degrading the public realm for other modes of transportation: wider curb radii, wider lanes, guardrails, and other elements that degrade the walkability and comfort for road users aside from vehicles (National Association of City Transportation Officials, 2013). The approach to design speed is to design the street based off of how fast drivers are going, rather than how fast they should be driving (National Association of City Transportation Officials, 2013). The streets in the Study Area have been designed in the conventional way, where the posted speed does not translate to the actual operating speed of vehicles. The lack of enforcement in the Pocket neighbourhood and Upper Leslieville neighbourhood has led to an increase in traffic violations, which is the prelude to more accidents to occur. The outcome of the design of the roads in these neighbourhoods has meant that the posted speed does not equate to traffic safety. A proactive solution to the current design of the streets in the study area is to design streets so that the street design will translate to the (en) forced speed that is posted and followed by drivers. Through better street design, the enforced speed will result in reduced traffic violations, and therefore less risk of accidents. Instead of streets being designed by vehicle speeds, the new street design will result in traffic safety.

B4 B5

Figure 30: Logan Avenue

The design of the residential streets facilitates an environment for vehicles to speed, and the lack of enforcement provides opportunities for the laws to be broken

As the Study Areas have recently had physical sidewalk upgrades, physical design changes to the layout of streets are not a short-term option, but more of a long-term solution. Traffic calming measures can be used to in the mean time to facilitate the proactive design of streets, where they are conducive to all modes of transportation rather than prioritizing vehicle use. The root cause of the increasing volume of through traffic in the Study Area is from the over capacity of the arterial roads surrounding the Pocket and Upper Leslieville neighbourhoods. As they reach capacity in peak hours, drivers are cutting through the residential streets as a way to avoid the traffic on Danforth, Jones, Gerrard, and Greenwood. The design of the residential streets, as discussed above, facilitates an environment for vehicles to speed, and the lack of enforcement provides opportunities for the laws to be broken. Design strategies are what will mitigate this issue from occurring: by designing the streets in a way where the design will translate to the speed that is posted and then followed by drivers. Traffic calming measures have been studied as a way to analyze what traffic calming measures can be applied to the Study Area, until a long-term solution like the physical reconstruction of sidewalks becomes viable.


53

3.2 Speed Safety Increased speeds create increased dangers for all road users; including vehicles and pedestrians. As the streets in the Study Area are designed based on the speed of the vehicle, pedestrians and other road users are put at risk because the increasing volume of through traffic is speeding throughout the residential areas. Studies show that at increased speeds, the drivers peripheral vision decreases, thus making them less aware of what is going on around them (National Association of City Transportation Officials, 2013). This causes an overall delay of reactions while driving. On streets where there are a variety of users, it is critical to pedestrian safety that drivers are able to react to situations in a timely manor, where appropriate corrective actions can be taken. As the existing conditions analyses shows, a high number of residents take public transportation to work and leave for work during the peak morning rush hour period. This time overlaps with the time that through traffic in the Study Area is at its highest. This poses a safety risk, as pedestrians and vehicles simultaneously share a street designed for speeding vehicles.

Studies show that at increased speeds, the drivers peripheral vision decreases, thus making them less aware of what is going on around them

Increased speed also increases the amount of time it takes for a vehicle to come to a complete stop. This poses as a danger to all road users, as increased speeds will delay reaction times, thus delay the opportunity to fully stop, and thus increase the severity of injuries to a pedestrian.

Speed poses as a danger to all road users, as increased speeds will delay reaction times, thus delay the opportunity to fully stop, and thus increase the severity of injuries to a pedestrian

NACTO (2013) has released the speed of vehicles versus the fatality risk of a pedestrian being struck: “Driving at a speed of 32 km per hour to 40 km per hour, a vehicle needs approximately 12 metres to fully stop, and carries a 5% risk of fatality. To compare, a vehicle travelling at a speed of 48 km per hour to 56 km per hour would need 22 ft to fully stop, and has a 45% fatality risk. Any vehicle going over 64 kilometres per hour needs at least 35m, to fully stop, which has a fatality risk of 85%.�

B1

The safety of streets is put at risk with speeding vehicles, as corrective action takes longer to successfully achieve, thus proving to be damaging to the pedestrian environment. Consideration through a proactive street design needs to be taken in order to account for all road users, and ensure that speeding vehicles do not threaten the public realm throughout the Study Area. 20-25 KMP Drivers peripheral vision

Stopping distance

Crash risk

30-35 KMP Drivers peripheral vision

Stopping distance

Crash risk

Figure 31: Speed Statistic Graphic

B2 B3 B4 B5


54

3.3 Canadian Attitudes Towards Speeding

B1 B2 B3 B4 B5

Conventional street design is passive: it allows for the speed of drivers to design the street, which fosters higher speeds

A research survey conducted by Transport Canada in 2007 aimed to reveal Canadian attitudes towards speeding. There were three definitions regarding what speeding exactly was (EKOS Research Associates Inc., 2007):

Solution:

By having three different definitions as to what is considered to be speeding, it can be seen that there is no clear-cut consensus. Therefore, a proactive street design which designates a target speed rather than allowing for the fastest set of drivers to create the speed limit would be a viable solution to creating safer speeds for streets.

Street design = Forced speed Forced speed = Reduced traffic violations Street design = Traffic safety If the proactive target speed formula were used, the flow/speed of traffic would be reduced because the street would be designed around an intended target speed that was deemed appropriate

i) ii) iii)

Technical: Driving above the posted speed limit Relative: Speeding in the context of the situation. (I.e.: weather conditions) Absolute: Driving significantly above the posted speed limit

Most respondents of the survey also said that keeping up with the flow of traffic was more important than obeying the speed limit (EKOS Research Associates Inc., 2007). This demonstrates that the conventional street design is passive: it allows for the speed of drivers to design the street, which fosters higher speeds. If the proactive target speed formula were used, the flow/speed of traffic would be reduced because the street would be designed around an intended target speed that was deemed appropriate, instead of having the speed of traffic design the street. Driver education can also be a tool to solve the critical issues of speeding and obeying the laws when driving. By educating all drivers about the dangers of speeding, perhaps some of these issues can be solved. Driver education can also be used to as a way to engage drivers in obeying traffic calming measures. Some case studies, such as woonerfs and naked streets (touched upon later in this report) require drivers to obey new rules that are not widely used or known in the Canadian driving context or experience. Education can be a necessary tool to help drivers participate in safe driving practices, which can result in safer streets for all road users.

Figure 32: Slow Down Kids at Play Signs Found Throughout Ward 30


55

3.4 Challenges to Conventional Ideas About Streets The current Road Classification System (RCS) is designed around the movement of vehicles and access to property; achieving both of these simultaneously is not an option. This means that RCSs are not looking at viable options, which can accommodate both high speeds of traffic, and access to property with pedestrian friendly elements such as boulevards (Mess & Milroy, 2006). Boulevards combine characteristics of arterials, collectors, and local roads, into one individualized street, which have been proven to function well in places around the world, including Paris. By only classifying streets based on speeds and traffic volumes, Toronto’s RCSs has a rigid structure, which does not provide chances for integrating multiple design elements (Mess & Milroy, 2006). Mess and Milroy (2006), argues that if how streets are perceived is to be changed, then change needs to also be brought into Road Classification Systems. Attitudes must be changed to show that mobility and access do not have to be mutually exclusive in achieving safe street design (Mess & Milroy, 2006). Within the Study Area there are major arterials, minor arterials, and local roads. Major arterials are designed to carry heavy volumes of traffic and to keep them moving, while minor arterials carry slightly less volumes of traffic and provide limited access to properties. The major and minor arterials of Danforth, Jones, Greenwood, and Gerrard are all exceeding capacity, as set out in the analysis section of this report. The Road Classification System sets out the characteristics of the road. Since there is a rigid structure, these characteristics and roads are seen as separate. As Mess and Milroy (2006) argue, a less rigid structure can improve the flow of traffic by incorporating multiple design elements and changing the geometric design of streets. This can pose as a long-term design solution, though not just specific to the study area, but the Ontario Road Classification System as a whole.

?

Figure 33: Confusion of User Priority on Streets

By only classifying streets based on speeds and traffic volumes, Toronto’s RCSs has a rigid structure, which does not provide chances for integrating multiple design elements

B1 A less rigid structure can improve the flow of traffic by incorporating multiple design elements and changing the geometric design of streets

B2 B3 B4 B5


56

3.5 Local Priorities The local residents associations, Upper Leslieville Toronto Residents Association (ULTRA) and the Pocket Community Association (PCA) are important stakeholders as they have a direct interest in the project and will be directly affected by the outcome.

Figure 34: Pape Avenue School Yard Playground

B1 B2 B3

Figure 35: Pape Avenue and Riverdale

The PCA has formed a committee of a few residents with the overall goal of improving pedestrian safety for kids and adults in the community (personal communication, 2015).
The PCA is looking for long-term redesigns of their street network and are accepting of short-term, pilots and phasing of traffic calming measures to reach their goal (personal communication, 2015). The PCA’s intention is to install proactive traffic calming measures, the residents do not want to wait until collisions or fatalities occur to start reacting (personal communication, 2015). The ULTRA has raised many concerns regarding traffic congestion and the associated impacts. ULTRA is looking to improve the safety of streets through single street solutions such as sign refreshers, management of foliage, crosswalk improvements and reduction of vehicular speeds (personal communication, 2015). Critical issues of streets are centred on speed and street design, and how well these two factors work together. By proactively thinking about design, critical issues can be mitigated, and public streets can be transformed into safe and usable environments for all users.

Avenue

B4 B5 SAFE

LIVELY

GREAT STREETS PEOPLE MOVEMENT

HEALTHY

ATTRACTIVE Figure 36: Elements of a Great Street


57


58

4.0

Demographic Profile

This section of the report will focus on the demographics of the study area. Demographics allow for an understanding of basic characteristics of the study area and are an essential part of the decision-making process. The Pocket neand Upper Leslieville have populations of 3125 and 2725 residents, respectively
 (Statistics Canada, 2011). Both study areas have a relatively large proportion of children aged 17 and younger: the Pocket consists of 22.8%, while Upper Leslieville is comprised of 22.2% (Statistics Canada, 2011). The median income of the Pocket is higher than Upper Leslieville, with an average household income of $74,548 compared to $65,469 (Statistics Canada, 2011).

B1 B2 B3

Population below 17 in the Pocket

B4 B5

22.9%

Median Income in the Pocket

Median Age in the Pocket

38

$74,548

Median Income in Upper Leslieville

Median Age in Upper Leslieville

37

3,125

Population below 17 in Upper Leslieville

22.2%

$65,469

2,725


59

4.1 Age Makeups The Pocket and Upper Leslieville neighbourhoods have relatively similar age makeups. In both areas, the largest age groups are residents aged 20 to 39, making up 35% in Upper Leslieville and 32% in the Pocket. Following closely behind are those aged 40-59, with 31% of residents in Upper Leslieville and 32% of residents in the Pocket. Ages 0-19 makeup the third largest age cohort in the Study Area, with 19% of residents in Upper Leslieville and 20% of residents in the Pocket.

4.2 Transportation to Work The most common form of transportation used to get to work by the Pocket residents is public transit, with 46% of the total population choosing this mode. Closely behind taking public transit to work is driving to work by car, van, or truck, with 36% of Pocket residents choosing this option. A significant shift in this demographic is revealed when comparing the 2006 data to 2011 data. In 2006, driving to work was chosen by 42% of residents, while taking public transit was chosen by 39% of residents. In 2011, public transit became the most common form of transportation to work, used by 46% of the population, in comparison to 36% of the population driving. Similar to the Pocket residents, more residents of Upper Leslieville choose to take public transit to work in 2011, with 41% of the total population choosing this option. While more residents choose to take public transit, traveling to work by car, van, or truck, follows close behind with 40% of the residents choosing this option. This demographic has remained consistent from 2006 to 2011. The majority of the working population in the Pocket and Upper Leslieville leave for work between the hours of 7am and 9am, with 71% of the Pocket residents and 59% of Upper Leslieville residents travelling in this peak hour. It is important to note that this statistic is also consistent on a city-wide level as the highest proportion of the working population leaves between 7am and 9am. This peak travel time also overlaps with school start times; therefore the morning peak travel hour is one of the most active times for travel across all of Toronto, as well as the study areas.

4.3 Housing Types The majority of households in the area (37%) are apartment or buildings that have fewer than five storeys. However, 28% of the population lives in semi-detached homes while 23% reside in single-detached homes. Overall, 51% of residents live in detached homes. It is therefore safe to conclude that there is a significant number of semi-detached homes and single-detached homes in the Pocket. It would appear that Upper Leslieville has approximately the same type of housing as the Pocket. 44% of occupied dwellings in Upper Leslieville are apartments or buildings that have fewer than five storeys followed by semi-detached houses (24%) and single-detached houses (21%). In total, 44% of the housing in the area is made up of detached houses. Comparing this data from 2006 to 2011 reveals no significant changes in the Study Areas, in terms of housing types.

B1 B2 B3 B4 B5


60

5.0

B1 B2 B3 B4 B5

Stakeholders

The process of evaluating and implementing traffic calming measures requires consultation and collaboration between various stakeholders. Consultation and collaboration will ensure that our recommendations are accepted, successful and serve the public interest. All of the stakeholders will be involved in the preliminary approval process as well as the implementation stage of the recommended traffic calming measures and strategies. All residents residing within the Pocket and Upper Leslieville are important stakeholders as they are directly affected by both the initial problem of traffic congestion and any implications associated with traffic calming measures. Non-residents are stakeholders but they are not the focus of as they are not reliant on the outcome of the proposed recommendations. Since through traffic is an issue within the targeted neighborhoods, the recommendations are tailored to deter this, thus causing non-resident motorists to avoid using local roads for convenient travel. Non-residents will be encouraged to drive on designated travel roads at the posted speed limit by using design techniques. The local residents associations, Upper Leslieville Toronto Residents Association (ULTRA) and the Pocket Community Association (PCA) are important stakeholders as they have a direct interest in the project and will be directly affected by the outcome. The PCA and the ULTRA are important stakeholders to consult with as they hold first hand knowledge and experience on the effects of traffic congestion within their community. The resident associations initiatives and insight will aid in informing the final recommendations. The residents associations were consulted with to ensure that the recommendations proposed respond to the concerns of both communities. Further consultation shall occur during the implementation phase and after installation to monitor the success of the recommendations. Toronto’s emergency services such as the Toronto Fire Services, the Toronto Police Services 55 Division, and the Toronto Emergency Medical Services have a direct interest in the matter as certain traffic calming measures may impede on their access to important travel routes, which can have an impact on their response time. Other City services such as snow removal, garbage collection, road maintenance, water management systems, and other Public Works are stakeholders. The TTC is also a stakeholder, as any traffic calming measures proposed on Danforth Avenue, Greenwood Avenue, Gerrard Street East, or Jones Avenue may have an impact on transit service. It is important to consult with these departments during each phase of the proposed recommendations to ensure that the traffic calming measures do not hinder the function of these services.


61

The City of Toronto and its Planning Department are important stakeholders considering the nature of this project entails public realm planning and transportation planning. The cost of the final recommendations put forward will ultimately impact the City’s budget and it is because of this that the City and the City Planning Departments have a direct interest in the matter in the approval process, the implementation stage and the operation of the recommended measures. Business Improvement Areas (BIAs) are important stakeholders as they can work with the City and the residents to improve the pedestrian environment and can support certain traffic calming measures in streetscape improvement programs. The Business Improvement Areas surrounding the study area are the Danforth Mosaic BIA and the Greektown on the Danforth BIA. Refer to Schedule #12 for the location of the local BIA’s. Ongoing consultation and collaboration with these stakeholders will aid in achieving the established goals and objectives and will allow the recommendations proposed in the latter section of this report to be implemented successfully.

B1 B2

Danforth Mosaic BIA

B3 B4 B5

Danforth Greektown BIA Schedule 12: Business Improvement


62

C


Policies and Road Standards

63

1.0 Policy Documents 2.0 Road Classification

C1 C2


64

1.0

Policy Documents

Municipal Policy Official Plan The City of Toronto Official Plan (“OP”) is the legal tool that guides development in the City. Once in legal effect, all municipal by-laws and public works must be consistent with the OP.

C1 C2 Figure 37: Toronto Official Plan

The lands bounded by the study area are designated primarily as Neighbourhoods within the Official Plan with the exception of Danforth Avenue East and Gerrard Street East, which are designated Mixed Use Areas. The areas designated in the OP as Neighbourhood are not intended for redevelopment purposes, but instead are intended to be stable areas where redevelopment corresponds to the existing built form. Mixed-Use Areas in the OP are intended to accommodate a broad range of uses including retail, residential, and institutional uses. Mixed Use Areas should also provide a wide range of housing, both in form, tenure, and affordability. The OP commits the City to developing a pedestrian and transit-supportive community. Policies concerning streets are woven throughout the OP, both in the general discussion and in formal policy statements. Formal policies addressing streets start in “Chapter Two: Shaping the City” which focuses on integrating land use and transportation. Policy 2.4.8 states that: “An urban environment and infrastructure will be created that encourages and supports walking throughout the City through Policies and practices that ensure safe, direct, comfortable, attractive, and convenient pedestrian conditions including safe walking routes to schools, recreation centres and transit” (Toronto Official Plan, 2010). The most direct and detailed policies for streets are found in “Chapter Three: Building a Successful City” under Section 3.1.1 titled, “Public Realm”. The OP also includes a complete street policy. This complete street policy requires that the City accommodate all users on the city streets. It also identifies the need for street designs that support active modes of transportation, transit, and vehicles. Policy 3.1.1.14 requires the City to provide a connected grid of streets within adjacent neighbourhoods, and promote a connected grid of streets and extended sight lines (Toronto Official Plan, 2010).


65

Avenues Within the defined study area, Danforth Avenue, Jones Avenue, and Greenwood Avenue are designated Avenues within the OP. The OP designates Avenues as major streets that must accommodate new housing and jobs in the city while creating a positive pedestrian realm and improving curb appeal, shopping opportunities and transit service for community residents (Avenues and Midrise Buildings Study, 2010). It is expected that Avenues change incrementally as development occurs along their routes. The OP calls for Avenue Studies to be undertaken to determine a local “framework for change” to include the following:

How the streetscape and pedestrian environment can be improved;
 Where public open space can be created and existing parks improved;
 Where trees should be planted;
and How use of the road allowance can be optimized and transit service enhanced.

C1 C2

(Avenues and Mid-rise Buildings Study, 2010).

The recommendations that are made in the Avenue studies are intended to guide city council actions on changing zoning by-laws, and adopting urban design guidelines and policies for streetscape improvements (Avenues and Mid-rise Buildings Study, 2010). Any proposal made will be reviewed against the policies described above as well as the policies of the Official Plan as a whole. Traffic Calming Policy The Toronto Traffic Calming Policy is a very pertinent policy document as it outlines the current framework for approval and implementation of traffic calming measures within the City of Toronto (Transportation Services, 2010). In order to make feasible recommendations and effective implementation strategies this document should be considered as it provides traffic calming warranting criteria, ranking procedures, the traffic calming process and administration, and requirements regarding the impacts traffic calming measures have on emergency services, transit and the natural environment (Transportation Services, 2010). The warranting criteria for traffic calming measures determine whether a project meets the petition, safety and technical requirements as set out by the City to ensure that the proposed traffic calming measures are accepted, appropriate and effective (Transportation Services, 2010). The ranking procedures outlined in the policy dictate project ranking, which enforces that the budget will be allocated to priority projects first (Transportation Services, 2010). The strategy also enforces that the environmental implications of the traffic calming measures be considered and that consultation amongst emergency services and transit services occur in order to minimize the negative impacts traffic calming measures may impose (Transportation Services, 2010). The Toronto Traffic Calming Policy provides necessary guidance and requirements to ensure that traffic-calming measures are feasible, appropriate, and approved.

Figure 38: Toronto Traffic Calming Policy


66

Provincial Policy

Ontario Traffic Manual

Figure 39: Ontario Traffic

C1 C2

Manual

The Ontario Traffic Manual is an extension to the Canadian Manual (MUTCDC) and is designed to meet the specific needs or conditions of the province, its laws and traffic requirements. The OTM hopes to provide information and guidance for transportation practitioners and to promote uniformity of treatment in the design, application and operation of traffic control devices and systems across the province of Ontario. Its main objective is to nurture safe driving behavior, which can be achieved through predictable roadway environments through consistency in applying appropriate traffic control devices. The OTM incorporates current best practices in the province and the interpretations, recommendations and guidelines are intended to provide an understanding of traffic operations by covering a broad range of traffic situations encountered in practice. Traffic control and management relies on a system of traffic control devices for conveying messages to the road user. The OTM states that Simplicity in design, care in placement and a high standard of maintenance are essential and defines an effective traffic control device as one that will attract attention, be legible and comprehensible and be appropriate to the driver’s needs. The relative, informative sections of the Ontario Traffic Manual are thought to be Section 3, 5, 7 and 10. These sections of the Manual are thought to be more useful to our specific case. Starting off with section 3, which could be referred to during preliminary and advanced discussions about possible sign and marking installations on our site. In this section, the legal authority of traffic control devices is reviewed. Reference to the Highway Traffic Act is made when the legal authority of signs (prescribed signs, official signs, etc.), the legal authority of markings and delineation and the legal authority of traffic signals is discussed (OTM, 2012). Section 5 “Principles” contains twelve subsections that would be considered relevant to our study. The first is “Drivers Needs and Limitations” which discusses how traffic control devices are more effective if designed while keeping in mind driver needs and limitations. The “Function and Objectives of Traffic Control Devices” portion, means to inform readers that a traffic control device could range from being “a sign, a signal, a marking or any other device placed upon, over or adjacent to a roadway by public authority or official having jurisdiction” and that the device is designed to regulate, warn, guide and inform the road user. Next, the “Excessive Use of Traffic Control Devices” – they should be chosen carefully and located to assist the road. The “Standardization of Traffic Control Devices” is a complex section that branches into three standardization categories; the standardization of the shape and colour codes for signs and pavement markings, the position and the application of traffic control devices. The purpose of standardization is to enable traffic control devices to be easily recognizable and understandable. It is important to note that all traffic control devices installed should conform to the standards set forth in the OTM. Book 1B, Book 2, Book 12 (located in Appendix B) and Book 1A within Appendix A, could be used as references. Subsection 5.7, “Illumination and reflectorization”, focuses on the legibility of signs that carry messages of warning, important regulations or essential directional information and argues that clarity of these signs is as necessary at night as by day.


67

Maintenance is a key factor that plays a major role in assuring continued effectiveness of the traffic control device. In the “Maintenance” part of Section 5, it is stated that all traffic control devices must be kept in proper position, clean, visible, and legible at all times. Furthermore, damaged devices are to be repaired or replaced as soon as possible. Also, regular scheduling for inspection (both day and night), cleaning and replacement of traffic control devices Is encouraged. Language is one of the most controversial topics when it comes to signage, warning messages and so on. Hence, the manual includes a subsection (“Meaning of Must/Shall, Should and May”) to explain what each term indicates. The last of the subsections under Section 5 includes a subsection on the “Development of new Traffic Control Devices”. There, it is mentioned that traffic control devices should not be revised or newly developed unless there is “a clearly established need and review has shown that no existing device will meet the need (OTM, 2012). Another section of the Ontario Traffic Manual that is seen to be relevant to the purposes of this project is Section 7 “Classification of Traffic Control Devices”. This component of the Manual includes subsections that examine the hierarchy of signing (signs that are required to have high-intensity or high reflectivity micro-prismatic sheeting as of a prescribed date, temporary condition signs, regulatory signs, warning signs, and information signs which include emergency services signs, motorists services signs, public transportation signs, boundary signs, attraction signs), the classification of traffic sign (Class R, Class W, Class TC, Class I, Tab Signs and Dynamic Message Signs), the classification of markings and delineation (Pavement Markings, Delineation, Object Markings, and Glare Control), and the classification of traffic signal types (primary traffic control signals which alternate vehicular right-of-way, Miscellaneous Traffic Control Signals, Flashing Beacons, and Integrated Traffic Signal Systems)(OTM, 2012). Lastly, Section 10 – this section contains definitions related to traffic. This section of the OTM could be an extremely beneficial resource that would provide us with the meaning of traffic-related vocabulary and in some cases, examples of scenarios may also be provided. Definitions related to traffic calming under Section 10 are: Plan (Traffic Calming) – a formulated and sufficiently detailed description of how an objective or number of objectives are to be accomplished. A traffic calming plan typically describes measures to be used, where they are to be used, in what order and at what times that will be implemented and how the costs of the measures will be funded; Traffic Calming – this combination of mainly physical measures that reduce the negative effects of motor vehicle use, alter driver behaviour and improve conditions for non-motorized street users; Traffic Calming Measure – a physical device, regulation or other action which affects the movement of motor vehicles, bicycles, and/or pedestrians (OTM, 2012).

C1 C2


68

Ontario Provincial Standards for Roads and Public Works The OPS organization prioritizes consistent development and maintenance of cost-effective methods that function to improve the administration of road building in the province of Ontario through the provision of a comprehensive set of standard specification and drawings, source lists for products, services, and technical solutions, and standard master tender items list (MTO, 2009). The OPS is divided in three categories: “Municipal and Provincial Common”, Provincial-Oriented” and “Municipal-Oriented”. For the purposes of this project, the section was found to be most relevant is “Municipal and Provincial Common”. Under this municipal and provincial heading, specifically under Volume 1, Section 3 and 7 are going to be focused on.

C1 C2

In Section 3 “Pavements (Flexible and Rigid)”, guidelines on construction specifications are provided for: Single/double surface treatments; Asphalt sidewalks, driveways and boulevards; Sidewalk surfacing; Asphalt curb and gutter systems; Concrete sidewalks, steps, curbs and gutter systems; and Previous concrete pavement for low volume traffic applications and more (MTO, 2009). In Section 7 “Traffic Safety”, construction specifications are included for:

Permanent small signs and support systems; Traffic control signing; and Pavement marking (MTO, 2009).

Also under “Municipal and Provincial Common”, Volume 3 (Sections 500 and 600) contains significant information. Section 500 (Paving), for instance, included guidelines on raised traffic islands, interlocking concrete pavers on a granular base, concrete or asphalt, and interlocking concrete pavers for retrofit crosswalk installations. Section 600 (Curbs and Gutters), on the other hand, provides specifications for the different types of curb installations (MTO, 2009). The Provincial Standards for Roads provides guidelines and construction specifications that should be taken into consideration when proposing plans that include curb extensions, pavement markings, sidewalk surfacing and so on.


69

2.0 Street classification has major implications for street planning and design

Identifying the types of roads in the study area is important in relation to the context of the study as it identifies whether certain traffic calming practices are suitable for certain roads or not

Road Classification

A road classification system is used to manage streets as a network, designating streets into a specific category based on certain characteristics and the service they provide (City of Toronto, 2012). Identifying the types of roads in the study area is important in relation to the context of the study as it identifies whether certain traffic calming practices are suitable for certain roads or not. The City of Toronto has established 5 classifications in which every street in Toronto is subjected to adhere to. Local Road Collector Road Minor Arterial Road Major Arterial Road Expressway Within the study area, there are 3 distinct road classifications:

Local Road Minor Arterial Road Major Arterial Road

Local Road

Figure 40: Local Road in Study Area

The study area consists mostly of Local Roads. Local Roads are intended to provide access to property. Other characteristics include that it does not cater to public transportation, it is typically of low speed, accommodates 2,500 vehicles per day, and sidewalks are typically present on one side of the street (City of Toronto, 2012). Minor Arterial Road

Figure 41: Minor Arterial Road in Study Area

Greenwood Avenue, Jones Avenue, Gerrard Street East and Pape Avenue are classified as Minor Arterial Roads. The primary function of a Minor Arterial Road is to move traffic, while providing limited access to properties. It is estimated that on Minor Arterial Roads, there are between 8,000 to 20,000 vehicles per day, 1,500 to 5,000 bus passengers per day an a traffic speed of 40 to 60 km/h (City of Toronto, 2012). Major Arterial Road

Figure 42: Major Arterial Road in Study Area

Danforth Avenue is the only Major Arterial Road in the study area. Like a Minor Arterial Road, the primary function of a Major Arterial Road is to move traffic, but with a larger capacity: 20,000 vehicles per day and adequate bus service (over 5,000 bus passengers per day). Other characteristics include speeds of 50 to 60 km/h and sidewalks being present on both sides (City of Toronto, 2012).

C1 C2


70

D


Health Benefits of Active Living

71

1.0 Walkability 2.0 Accessibility 3.0 Playability

D1 D2


72

1.0

Walkability

Introduction

D1 D2 D3

The social, economic and environmental well being of our cities are heavily influenced by the design and function of our cities

Health is strongly influenced by many social, economic and environmental factors and conditions. These factors and conditions are heavily influenced by the design and function of our cities. The World Health Organization (WHO), the United States Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and the Heart and Stroke Foundation of Canada (HSFC) are among many institutions that recognize that the way we plan, design, and build our communities can influence our health (WHO, 2010; CDC, 2010; HSFC, 2011). Accordingly, healthy cities are cities that are livable, prosperous and sustainable. These are cities with high quality built and natural environments, public transit, housing, culture, education, food, and health care. They provide urban environments in which the built and natural environments support health, mobility, recreation, safety, social interaction, and a sense of pride and cultural identity that is accessible to all residents.

Walkable and transit-supportive neighbourhoods can play an important role in creating healthier cities

Healthy cities result from creative vision, strategic decision making, and thoughtful implementation that respects the needs and challenges of all residents; through intentional investment and provision of infrastructure, programs and services with health in mind (TPH, 2011). Walkable and transit-supportive neighbourhoods can play an important role in creating healthier cities. A growing body of evidence suggests that walkable and transit-supportive neighbourhoods are healthier and more environmentally sustainable than non-walkable neighbourhoods because they allow people to walk, bike and take transit more, while driving less for their day to day trips.

Figure 43: Riverdale Avenue


73

Walkability Physical Inactivity Physical inactivity poses a significant risk to human health in modern day Canadian society. It has been clearly linked to an increased risk in chronic diseases such as colon cancer, Type 2 diabetes, osteoporosis, and heart disease (PHAC, 2003; HSFC, 2011). Estimates suggest that in 1999, physical inactivity cost Canadians about $2.1 billion in health-related costs (Katzmarzyk et al, 2000). Despite the significant health benefits associated with physical activity, most Canadian adults and youth do not meet the activity levels recommended by the Canadian Guidelines for Physical Activity. A recent study found that: 85% of Canadian adults do not get the 150 minutes per week of moderate to vigorous physical activity recommended; and 91% of boys (6 to 19 years in age) and 96% of girls do not get the 60 minutes per day of moderate to vigorous physical activity recommended (Colley, 2011a; Colley, 2011b). A number of studies have demonstrated that neighbourhood design is associated with increased levels of physical activity among residents because of its impact on their travel choices. Neighbourhood features such as population density, employment density, land use mix, and street design have all been associated with the walking and cycling habits of residents. One study found that urban sites with small blocks and extensive sidewalk systems had, on average, three times the volume of pedestrians as suburban sites with long blocks and short, incomplete sidewalk systems (Hess et al. 1999). Walking is the number one activity used by most Canadians to stay physically fit. It is an activity that is generally easy for all age groups. Additionally, it is seen as inexpensive, and accessible to most people (Cameron, 2005). Several studies have found that time, or lack thereof, is one of the most common barriers to physical activity. For this reason, active transportation, where physical activity is substituted for a trip that might otherwise be made in a vehicle, is seen as a good way to encourage people to be more physically active because it allows them to accomplish two tasks in the same period of time (Lee & Moudon, 2004; HRHD, 2009).

Most Canadian adults and youth do not meet the activity levels recommended by the Canadian Guidelines for Physical Activity

D1 D2 D3 Figure 44: Boultbee Avenue

Studies have demonstrated that neighbourhood design is associated with increased levels of physical activity among residents because of its impact on their travel choices


74

2.0

Accessibility

Accessibility Store Accessibility In Toronto, it is estimated that four out of ten adults and one in five teenagers are overweight or obese (TPH, 2010). The escalating rates of obesity have been attributed to physical inactivity, poor nutrition, and the consumption of calorie dense but nutritionally poor foods which are often high in sodium, fat and/or refined carbohydrates (Raine, 2005; Drewnowski, 2003).

D1 D2 D3

Figure 45: East Danforth

Neighbourhood design has been associated with both the levels of physical activity among residents, as discussed above, and the consumption of foods with poor nutrients, and high energy. Studies have demonstrated that people are more likely to eat healthy foods when they have ready access to grocery stores that sell healthy and affordable foods, such as fresh vegetables and fruit, than if they only have access to food from nearby convenience stores that offer mostly packaged and processed foods (Morland, 2002). Access and availability to healthy foods has been found to have a greater impact on low income households that have less mobility and fewer transportation options. Several studies have demonstrated that the increased density of “fast-food” restaurants in lower-income neighbourhoods is a factor that contributes to increased rates of obesity in some American cities (Block et al., 2004; Maddock, 2004; Reidpath et al, 2002; RWPH, 2005). Transit Accessibility Poor air quality is a significant public health concern in Canada, particularly in southern Ontario. Air pollution has been clearly associated with increases in a broad range of acute health impacts and in chronic respiratory and cardiovascular diseases. The Canadian Medical Association has estimated that air pollution costs Canadians about $8 billion per year in health-related costs (CMA, 2008).

Figure 46: Toronto Transit Commission Streetcar

A number of studies have demonstrated that neighbourhood design and the provision of transit can have a substantial impact on emissions of air pollutants by influencing vehicle use, transit use and active modes of transportation (Frank & Chapman, 2004; Lawrence Frank & Company et al., 2005; Frank, 2006; Friedman et al., 2001). A transit accessible neighbourhood is significant to improve the health of the residents within the area. As an example, the California Air Resources Board (CARB) found that “complete” neighbourhoods built around public transit, with a variety of services within a five minute walk, reduced vehicle-related air emissions by up to 20% (CARB, 1997).


75

Relation to our study It is evident that walkable neighbourhoods provide many health and social benefits. Proper design and planning would strongly influence and facilitate physical activity, social interaction, and access to jobs, services, and healthy foods. The design of streets can be conducive to a healthier population as they allow for the continuing flow of pedestrians. It is therefore important to consider health benefits when planning and designing a better community through traffic mitigation. That said, when looking for ways to reduce excessive traffic speeds in the area, it is recognized that it is important to consider pedestrian street users, since many are supressed by current conditions (especially certain kinds of street play activities). The competing demands of street users must be balanced by taking into account the different functions each street can serve.

D1 D2 D3

Figure 47: Gerrard Street and Leslie Street Pedestrian Crosswalk


76

3.0

Playability

Relation to Study Area

D1 D2 D3

Previous generations have spent their childhood riding bikes and playing games like baseball or dodgeball on side streets and in neighbors' backyards. Children of today’s generation spend much of their time indoors, playing games on their tablets or watching television. According to The American Academy of Pediatrics, lots of unstructured outdoor play is critical to the health of children, though many have experienced a marked decline in the time they spend in free play. For a wide range of reasons, children today, are simply not experiencing as much active play time as their parents did. In fact, a new term is used to describe this trend; it's called nature deficit disorder (Richard Louv, 2008). It is essential that young children get frequent and regular opportunities to explore and learn in the outdoor environment. In recent years there has been a cultural shift in our society that has reduced the access and use of outdoors for many young children, for example, television, video and computer games have taken away from outdoor play time. Furthermore, it is significant to note that active kids are healthy kids. Advantages of Playing outside:

Being outside and playing outside is vital to a child’s growth;

Daily exposure to natural settings increases children’s ability to focus and therefore enhances cognitive abilities;

Allows children to play safely and freely while they learn to assess risk and develop the skills to manage new situations;

Supports the development of healthy and active lifestyles;

Opportunities for children to do physical activities, freedom and movement, and promoting a sense of well-being;

Offers a chance for more social interaction with peers;

Offers more opportunities for creativity and free play; and

Helps to build a strong link between physical health and outdoor play, at a young age.

Being outside and playing outside is vital to a child’s growth, and their physical and mental development; it’s important to allow and encourage our kids to spend as much time as possible in the natural world. By engaging in outdoor activities, it helps to stimulate the curiosity and creativity of children, and also boosts their confidence as they learn new things (City of Toronto Public Health, 2012).


77

Outdoor time is vital for kids of all ages, but it's especially good for younger children to learn and grow as they explore local parks, different water bodies like creeks or ponds, playgrounds, walking trails and other natural settings. Parents and caregivers can be with children during these activities and interact with them along the way, or they can supervise them from nearby. With a little freedom and independence while outdoors, and a bit of guidance or supervision from an adult, a child can learn a lot and get health benefits from each and every outdoor experience. At any age, children and youth are "born to be outside," so planners should design to encourage them to be outdoors more often (City of Toronto Public Health, 2012). Applying the advantages of Street Play in the real world: Case Study from Bristol: Bristol City council got involved and ran a pilot scheme in 2012, offering residential streets the opportunity to apply for temporary play street orders, allowing the roads to be closed to through-traffic for up to three hours once a week. In 2014, over 60 streets in Bristol have had at least one Playing Out session and there have been nearly 50 temporary play street orders. But the scheme has spread far beyond Bristol, with 30 local authorities across England adopting a positive street play policy and over 100 streets regularly playing out. In Bristol the council have been highly supportive, helped in large part by the active communities, who pushed for temporary street orders to be available. The original streets are reapplying, and new applications are flooding in. Plan for an active community: Communities that emphasize outdoor recreation in their design and create welcoming places for both spontaneous and structured play support balanced child and youth development and healthier residents overall. For example, land use bylaws can allow for the creation of community gardens, footpaths to local schools and business developments to support active transportation, and can permit short-term closures of roadways to create walkable pedestrian shopping malls. However, sometimes bylaws which were originally enacted to as a precaution to protect citizen safety, can have the unintended consequence of restricting opportunities for physical activity by residents. For example, traffic bylaws can prevent children from playing road hockey on residential streets as well as ban skateboarding or cycling. Unfortunately, 96% of 24 major municipalities surveyed in Canada report having a policy that hinders physical activity participation for children and youth (City of Toronto Public Health, 2012). Municipalities are responsible for protecting the safety of community residents. Local governments are rightfully concerned about the legal risks and liability issues in specific community locations where allowing certain forms of physical activity (i.e. skateboarding) could create new risks for other residents (pedestrians). This issue of safety versus liability can push officials to enact community-wide bylaws which don’t take into account other reasonable context and location specific opportunities. For example, in the City of Edmonton it is unlawful to obstruct a street with objects (like a hockey net) or to stand in the street and obstruct traffic. On a busy road this makes sense for obvious safety reasons. However, in other residential areas where the traffic volume is low, preventing kids from playing in the street for safety reasons can be inconsistent with creating healthy communities.

D1 D2 D3


78

E


Traffic Calming

79

1.0 History of Traffic Calming 2.0 Decision History in Ward 30 3.0 Case Studies

E1 E2 E3


80

1.0

History of Traffic Calming

In order to understand the context of this study it is important to outline the history of traffic calming, and how it has evolved within the City of Toronto.

E1

Figure 48: Logan Avenue

The terms traffic calming and traffic mitigation are used interchangeably in this report. Both terms are defined as a strategy that seeks to use street designing techniques to resolve problems concerning pedestrian safety, walkability, and cycling. It involves a variety of physical modifications to streets to moderate vehicle speeds, improve driving behavior, give more physical space to other road users, and reclaim some pedestrian space (Mobushar, 1999).

E2

Modern traffic calming was introduced in Europe in the 1930’s and in the USA and Canada in the 1960’s.

E3

Although traffic-calming measures have proven to be successful, North America has not universally accepted the merits of traffic calming (Works Committee, 2002). The first speed hump in the former City of Toronto was implemented in 1974 (Works Committee, 2002). Toronto began implementing traffic calming policy in the early 1990s, starting in the former City of Toronto in 1994, North York in 1995 and York in 1997 (Works Committee, 2002). The former municipalities of Toronto were aware of the impacts of traffic calming measures. Since the early 1990s, speed humps have been discouraged on roads allocated for transit and emergency vehicle routes, and specific attention has been paid to the comfort of cyclists (Works Committee, 2002). These considerations have remained in the current traffic calming approval process (Works Committee, 2002).

Figure 49: Logan Avenue


81

Prior to amalgamation, the various jurisdictions enforced different traffic calming policies and initiatives with different criteria and procedures (Works Committee, 2002). The amalgamated City of Toronto required a uniform traffic calming policy, thus the new Toronto Traffic Calming Policy combined best practices from each of the former municipalities (Works Committee, 2002). Today, traffic calming measures are continuously implemented to improve street safety: approximately $750,000 worth of traffic calming measures are installed annually, which includes the installation of 300 speed humps (Works Committee, 2002). Although traffic calming measures are becoming increasingly accepted, the impacts and costs associated with it require a rigorous and systematic approval process to ensure that the limited budget is allocated to priority projects first (Works Committee, 2002). The concept of traffic calming will continue to evolve as new and innovative measures arise and as policy is updated to better accommodate the needs of urban areas. This project will consider the history of traffic calming at international and local levels, while also looking further into the future of traffic calming to determine the best and most appropriate methods, policies, and necessary steps to improve the effectiveness of traffic calming.

Figure 51: Logan Avenue

Figure 50: Logan Avenue

E1 E2 E3


82

2.0 Introduction

E1

Decision History in Ward 30

In recent years, the Toronto and East York Community Council has proposed a number of traffic calming measures throughout Ward 30 and specifically within the identified study area. An overview of the various decisions made in regards to traffic calming will provide context and guidance for future proposals and requests. This overview will not provide a comprehensive analysis of all decisions made within Ward 30 and the study area, but will instead present a few relevant decisions that have informed the study. Riverdale Avenue (Ward 30)

E2 E3

Figure 52: Riverdale Avenue Speed Humps

In May of 2013, Transportation Services determined that traffic calming measures were not warranted on Riverdale Avenue from
Kiswick Street to Pape Avenue, as the
technical requirements as outlined in the
Toronto Traffic Calming Policy, 2010 were not satisfied (City of Toronto, 2013b). The operating speed on Riverdale Avenue was less than the minimum, and Toronto Police Services
reported that no collisions have taken place over a three-year period (City of Toronto, 2013b). Despite the previous recommendation by
Transportation Services, Riverdale Avenue from Kiswick Street to Pape Street is currently a Traffic Calming Zone with a posted speed limit of 30 km/h and two speed humps with appropriate signage. The Toronto and East York Community Council decided that the traffic calming measures were beneficial, and through community support, the measures were installed. Refer to Figure 52 for an image of the speed humps implemented and Figure 53 for the traffic calming zone signage implemented. Carlaw Avenue (Ward 30) In March of 2007, Transportation Services recommended that the seven proposed speed humps not be installed on Carlaw Avenue between Danforth Avenue and Riverdale Avenue (City of Toronto, 2007a). According to Toronto Police Service records, there were five collisions during a three-year period, none of which were caused by speeding vehicles (City of Toronto, 2007a). The average operating vehicle speed on Carlaw was below the minimum requirement to warrant traffic calming measures (City of Toronto, 2007a). It was determined that Carlaw Avenue did not meet the criteria for traffic calming (City of Toronto, 2007a). Despite the previous recommendation by Transportation Services, Carlaw Avenue from Danforth Avenue to Riverdale Avenue is now a Traffic Calming Zone. The seven proposed speed humps were installed along with the appropriate signage and a posted speed limit of 30 km/h. Although the Toronto Traffic Calming Policy requires certain criteria to be satisfied, the Toronto and East York Community Council and local community recognized the benefits of these traffic calming measures and pushed for their implementation.

Figure 53: Local Traffic Calming Zone

Logan Avenue (Ward 30) In October of 2013, Transportation Services responded to a request from the Toronto and East York Community Council to examine the feasibility of replacing the pedestrian crossover at Logan Avenue and Withrow with an all-way stop control.


83

After an investigation on vehicle and pedestrian volumes and a review of the collision history within the intersection, Transportation Services concluded that the results do not satisfy the warrant criteria and so a recommendation was made to not approve an all-way stop control. In December of 2014, the Toronto and East York Community Council sought a final decision on creating a traffic-calming zone on Logan Avenue between Lake Shore Boulevard East and Eastern Avenue based on a suggestion from Councillor Paula Fletcher on behalf of the local residents. According to the assessment conducted by Transportation Services, traffic calming measures were not warranted because the operating speed was under the existing maximum speed of 50km/h and for a street to satisfy the traffic calming policy, the operating speed should be at least 10km/h over the indicated speed limit. The recommendation made by Transportation Services stated that speed humps should not be installed on Logan Avenue between Lake Shore Boulevard East and Eastern Avenue.

Figure 54: Logan Avenue

E1

Queen Victoria Street & Condor Avenue (The Pocket)

E2

In January of 2012, a proposed stop sign was recommended by Transportation Services at the then uncontrolled T-type intersection of Queen Victoria Street and Condor Avenue (City of Toronto, 2012). The stop sign would be installed at the cost of $150.00 made available in the 2012 budget (City of Toronto, 2012). The stop sign was installed to designate a clear pedestrian right-of-way and improve safety conditions (City of Toronto, 2012). Although the Toronto Police Service records showed that there were no collisions at this intersection within a three year time period, Condor Avenue is a through street and vehicle speed control by the use of a stop sign is required to create a safe environment (City of Toronto, 2012).

E3 Figure 55: Condor Avenue Speed Bump

Ivy Avenue - Greenwood Avenue and Leslie Street (Upper Leslieville) In March of 2007, Transportation Services recommended that the proposed speed humps planned on Ivy Avenue from Greenwood Avenue to Leslie Street not be installed as the average speed on Ivy Avenue do not warrant traffic calming measures (City of Toronto, 2007b). In September of 2013, Transportation Services at the request of a residents’ petition conducted a review of the technical and safety requirements (as outlined in the Toronto Traffic Calming Policy, 2010) (City of Toronto, 2013a). Based on the review, Transportation Services recommended that the proposed speed humps planned on Ivy Avenue from Greenwood Avenue to Leslie Street should not be installed, as the requirements are not sufficiently met (City of Toronto, 2013a). In March of 2014, Transportation Services recommended that the proposed speed humps planned on Ivy Avenue from Greenwood Avenue to Leslie Street not be installed as the local poll conducted did not demonstrate the required level of support as outlined in the Toronto Traffic Calming Policy, 2010 (City of Toronto, 2014).There was a long-standing effort to install traffic calming measures on Ivy Avenue by the Toronto and East York Community Council. Although the requests were not recommended by Transportation Services, the Toronto and East York Community Council was delegated the power to make the final decision by City Council (City of Toronto, 2014). As a result, a block of Ivy Avenue from Prust Avenue to Greenwood Avenue has been designated as a Traffic Calming Zone with a posted speed limit of 30 km/h and the presence of two speed humps. Community and Council support was a major driver for traffic calming measures on Ivy Avenue.

Figure 56: Jones Avenue and Boultbee Avenue Intersection

Figure 57: Logan Avenue


84

3.0

Case Studies

This section of the report is composed of 14 case studies, ranging from the local to the international level. These case studies represent best practices of traffic calming measures, and are each innovative in their own right. This section contains a brief background of the traffic calming measures with their advantages and disadvantges.

E1 E2

Bollard

E3

Speed Bump, Hump, and Table Speed Kidney Speed Cushion Curb Extentions and Bump Outs Play Streets Parklet Naked Street Yield Street Mural Intersections Street Stamping Roundabouts Diverters Woonerfs


85

3.1

Bollard

Bollards are short posts typically used to divert traffic from an area. Bollards, a form of physical obstruction can be temporary or permanent and are available in a number of materials and designs from the traditional fixed bollard, retractable bollards, lay-flat bollards, bell bollards, break away bollards and in some circumstances planters can be used as bollards (Transportation Alternatives, 2007). In terms of traffic calming, bollards can be used to protect pedestrians and property, control traffic flow, narrow roads, prevent illegal parking, narrow turning radii, extend sidewalks, delineate other traffic calming measures and much more (Transportation Alternatives, 2007).

Figure 58: Bell Bollards, New York City

Bollards have been implemented in various cities around the world including Toronto, CAN, New York City US, Leicester, Plymouth and Bristol, England UK. Refer to Figures 58, 59, 60 and 61 for images of various bollards.

E1

Advantages:

Inexpensive and easy to install, ranging between $300 to $1000 CA Do not require drainage work or physical changes to the road Bollards come in many designs and work well as pilots for other strategies

E2 Figure 59: Temporary Bollards, New York City

Disadvantages:

Permanent bollards can interfere with emergency vehicle routes and access Retractable and electronic bollards come with a higher cost Figure 60: Cement Bollards, New York City

Figure 61: Logan Avenue Bollards, Toronto

E3


86

3.2

Figure 62: Speed Bump

E1 E2

Figure 63: Speed Hump

Speed Bump, Hump, and Table

Speed bumps, humps, and tables placed across roads used to slow traffic down without fully stopping. The three are visually different but have the same purpose. Speed bumps are one of the most common traffic calming techniques being used all over the world. Speed humps and tables are variations of the original speed bump. They have evolved and improved to become more dynamic and effective at slowing vehicle speeds. A speed bump is shaped like a half circle and is higher than a speed hump and a speed table (see Figure #62). Speed humps are wider flatter version of a speed bump. Speed tables are usually the same height as speed humps but with a flat surface on the top rather than curved (Parkhill, Sooklall , & Bahar) (See Figure #63). Since the speed bump is higher in height it forces drivers to reduce their speed more than if approaching a speed hump or table. Speed bumps are most commonly placed in parking lots while speed humps and tables are found on residential streets (Parkhill, Sooklall, & Bahar). Humps, bumps, and tables can be permanent or temporary depending on their material. Advantages:

E3

Can be permanent or temporary.

Disadvantages: Figure 64: Speed Table

Cause delay for emergency vehicles (approximately 10 seconds per bump/ hump) (City of Toronto, 2010); Cyclists cannot avoid them; Snow removal during the winter months.


87

3.3 Speed Kidney Speed kidneys and speed cushions are raised bumps in the road separated into three different parts so as to provide more flexibility for vehicles.The first test speed kidneys were implemented in Valencia, Spain in April 2011. Speed kidneys were developed with the following hypotheses in mind; cars would moderate their speed rather than apply breaks forcefully, driver and passenger discomfort would be reduced and minimal to no delay for emergency vehicles (Garcia et al., 2012). Refer to Figure 65 and 66 for images of speed kidneys. Figure 65: Speed Kidney

Advantages:

The curved bump is narrow enough for emergency vehicles to drive in a straight line and straddle the hump without having to slow down; The gap in between the speed kidney and the edge of the road allows for cyclists to go around the hump; Can be permanent or temporary depending on weather they are prefabricated or not.

Disadvantages: Figure 66: Speed Kidney

Snow removal during the winter months

E1 E2 E3


88

3.4

Speed Cushion

Speed cushions are defined as speed tables with wheel cut outs in the middle. Speed cushions can be installed two different ways, three humps at a time or two humps at a time. Speed cushions are an adapted version of the original speed bump or hump. The cut out in between each cushion make it more effective at allowing flexibility while cars approach them. Refer to Figure 67 for an image of a speed cushion. Advantages:

E1 E2

The cut outs in between each hump allow for emergency vehicles to straddle the hump so that response time is not hindered; Cyclists can also ride in between the humps rather than over them allowing for a smoother ride; Can be permanent or temporary.

Disadvantages:

Snow removal during the winter months

E3

Figure 67: Speed Cushion


89

3.5

Curb Extension and Bump Out

Curb extensions or bump outs usually involve extending the curb line into an existing parking lane, which would overall reduce the street width. Curb extensions come in many shapes and forms and can be implemented on downtown, neighbourhood and residential streets. Refer to Figure 68 and 69 for examples of bump outs. There are many benefits associated with implementing curb extensions. The biggest advantage is by physically and visually reducing the width of the roadway, drivers are more inclined to slow down (New York City DOT, n.d). In addition to the strategy being able to effectively calm traffic, it is also most commonly used at crosswalks, which would help increase the overall visibility of pedestrians, as their presence would be aligned with the parking lane (NACTO, n.d). This overall provides much safer and shorter distances when crossing the street. Curb extensions have also been used as bus bulbs, in which the extension has been used to provide room for transit stops and allowing busses to never leave the travel lane therefore, it would help them move faster. Landscaping opportunities are also applicable, allowing for the improvement of aesthetics of the area.

Figure 68: Bump-out

E1 E2 E3

Advantages:

Both visually and physically alter the driving route, so drivers are more inclined to slow Can be used in tandem with other measures, such as crosswalks to increase the safety Can serve as extra transit stops, so busses no longer have to pull over or merge Aesthetics can be improved with increased foliage

Disadvantages:

Has impacts on other services, such as emergency vehicles and garbage pick ups

Figure 69: Bump-out


90

3.6

Figure 70: Play Street Signage

E1 E2

Play Street

Play streets are sectioned off from traffic at a regular scheduled time and date, in order to create large areas of public space for active play among children. Activities are usually unstructured and can range from sports such as soccer to other activities such as hopscotch, dance, and arts and crafts, among others (Transportation Alternatives, 2011). Play streets provide space for neighborhood children who may otherwise lack parks and play areas, a space to safely and comfortably play in. One of the many benefits of play streets is that it encourages children to participate in physical activity, which helps tackles public health issues such as obesity and other related issues (Transportation Alternatives, 2011). In addition, play streets create a space where children are able to interact socially. Refer to Figure 70, 71 and 72 for images of implemented play streets. Advantages:

Figure 71: Play Street Activities

E3

Provide a space to play in areas that lack parks and other public open spaces Encourages residents to participate in physical activity Fosters social interaction

Disadvantages:

Figure 72: Play Street Yoga

Most effective in low-volume, residential, dead-ended streets; therefore limited applicability Surrounding streets need to be heavily traffic calmed before implementation


91

3.7

Parklet

Parklets are formal on street parking spaces that have been turned into public spaces. The aim of parklets is to achieve a more pedestrian friendly streetscape by acting as an extension of the existing sidewalk (City of Toronto, 2014). The physical design of parklets are levelled platforms from the adjoining sidewalk that project into the location of where the space for a parked vehicle would otherwise be, made of materials ranging from wood to plastic (City of Toronto, 2014). Parklets originated in San Francisco, California as part of the Pavement to Parks Program (City of San Francisco, 2013). This grass-roots initiative aims to beautify the public realm by reclaiming underutilised space, and transforming it into an inviting, pedestrian oriented place (City of San Francisco, 2013). Funding for parklets comes from stakeholders: community organizations, local residents, and local businesses, although they are publicly accessible to all (City of San Francisco, 2013). Advantages:

Achieve an extension of the public realm Parklets are not permanent, they can be removed Beautify the streetscape

Disadvantages:

Parklets are costly Cannot weather all seasons, and are only allowed from May 1st to September 31st Maintenance is required

It has been estimated that for one parklet, a cost of $8000 to $12 000 is incurred; four parklets cost approximately $80 000 (Ionova, 2013). It must also be taken into consideration that maintenance must be done to upkeep the presentation of the parklets, and any furniture must also be stored away during night hours in case of thefts (City of San Francisco, 2013). Parklets have since become an international movement, though with only pilot runs in Toronto. Currently, private sector parklets are only permitted in Toronto through an appeal to City Council (City of Toronto, 2014). If an application has been approved, it is subject to the terms in Chapter 743 and 441 of the Toronto Municipal Code (City of Toronto, 2014). Because parklets do take the space of formal parking spots for vehicles, approved applicants are required to submit financial requirements pertaining to any revenue that would have been generated by the Toronto Parking Authority (City of Toronto, 2014). Parklets can work in tandem with other traffic calming measures, as a way to ensure that slow speeds are being followed and pedestrian safety is a priority (San Francisco, 2013). Parklets are a way to extend the public realm, and bring vibrancy back into automobile centred environments.

Figure 73: Parklet on Church Street, Toronto, Ontario

E1 Figure 74: Parklet, Chicago, Illinois

E2 E3


92

3.8

Naked Street

Naked Streets are streets that have been stripped of all signs, signals, markings, barriers, and even curbs. Figures 75 and 76 illustrate a typical street that includes traffic signs, signals, markings, and curbs. As well, it illustrates in comparison the concept of a Naked Street. Figure 75: Non-Naked Street Illustration

E1 E2 E3

Figure 76: Naked Street Illustration

The concept of traffic integration inspired by the Netherlands was used instead of traffic separation in a number of residential areas, called 'Woonerven' (Pucher & Buehler, 2008). This reconstructed the streets to remove the distinction between areas for vehicle and pedestrians, along with speed reducing measures that were appropriate to walking speeds were constructed (Pucher & Buehler, 2008). Therefore evolving from the Woonerven concept, the naked street concept brought new planning and design procedures for urban traffic areas, and with that new traffic signal and signage were implemented. The motivation is to encourage the users to react with each other in a 'shared space' to induce greater responsibility for their behavior, where the priority is now ambiguous (Emling, 2005). This will prompt drivers to slow down and hence, decrease the number of accidents. The lack of signage, curbs, and signals encourage drivers to interact and make eye contact with pedestrians and hence, regulate their actions and be more cautious (Emling, 2005). The unusual traffic arrangements will force drivers to rely less on road signs to dictate their driving. This will incentivize drivers to slow down to below 20 m.p.h., a speed that guarantees that if a child is hit they are five times more likely to live as one who is hit at more than 30 m.p.h. (Emling, 2005). Therefore the naked street encourages users to share the space actively and acts as a 'psychological traffic calming' technique (ITE, 2005). Advantages

Drivers are self-regulated therefore more cautious driving; More spatial interaction, therefore drivers behave to reduce speed; Shared space, the priority is ambiguous, therefore eye contact must be made; Low cost of implementation; and Low maintenance cost.

Disadvantages

If there are no other users, other than the driving activity, it will not be effective; Need to educate and train users in order to succeed.


93

3.9

Yield Street

Yield streets are two-way streets in which drivers are obliged to travel at low speeds in order to yield to motorists driving in the opposite direction without the risk of a head-on collision (NACTO, 2012) (Refer to Figure 78). Also known as courtesy streets, queuing streets, or skinny streets (Bray & Rhodes, 1997; Sopko, 2012), yield streets are only wide enough to accommodate traffic flow in one direction, yet allow motorists to travel in both directions by yielding or giving courtesy to incoming motorists. Drivers must pull over to one side in order to allow a car in the opposite direction to pass, thus imposing slower driving speeds for motorists (Horgan, 2012). The concept is most appropriately and effectively applied in low-density (single-dwelling) residential neighborhoods (Bray & Rhodes, 1997).

Figure 77: Yield Street with Parallel Parking

E1

A one-way street with low traffic volumes can potentially be used rather as a yield street. Additionally, two-way streets with extremely low traffic volumes can also be converted into a yield street by adding parking or other street treatments on one, or both sides of the street. If added, these treatments can be staggered or checkered, which would allow for motorists to give courtesy to vehicles travelling in the opposite direction, by pulling over into the open space. Street widths may vary from 16 feet with parking on one side, to 28 feet with parking on both sides. (NACTO, 2012) Parking lanes are usually 7 feet wide, allowing for just enough space for a lane of traffic with a minimum width of 10 feet (Horgan, 2012) (Refer to Figure #77). Advantages

Drivers are forced to be cautious, resulting in reduced travel speed, calmed traffic, and a reduced number of causalities (Bray & Rhodes, 1997); Provision of parking is usually provided; Other than parking, space may be used for eco-treatments, such as planters, trees, green space, or even furnished parklets; Can be used as an alternative to “inconvenient� one-way street grids

(Sopko, 2012).

Disadvantages

Only effective when implemented on streets with very low traffic; Negative impact on emergency vehicles such as police, fire, and ambulance; Concept is not very common, therefore information, education and enforcement should be applied.

E2 Figure 78: Yield Street Signage Indicating Two-Way Traffic

E3


94

Street Treatments 3.10

Figure 79: Mural Intersection

E1 E2 E3

Mural Intersection Painting

Mural intersection paintings are pieces of artwork painted on smaller neighborhood intersections designed to aid drivers in slowing down. Painted intersection murals serve as visual cues to inform drivers that they are driving through a lived-in neighborhood where pedestrian activity might be present. Consequently, drivers approach with more caution as they pass through. Intersection paintings are entirely organized by the community, and truly of and for communities. It is very cost effective as all materials and permit fees are the responsibility of the group. It promotes community and place-making in the form of public art, as well as helping to create a stronger sense of place. Paintings usually require a permit in most cities and majority support via petition from adjacent neighbours. Depending on road conditions and traffic, murals can last between one to four years. However, it is recommended that a repainting is done every two years. While research suggests overall improvement on traffic condition however, limited data is actually available to indicate reduction in speeds and collisions. Advantages:

Very cost effective; Promotes community and place making in the form of public art; Stronger sense of place for community members.

Disadvantages:

Limited data available to indicate reduction in speeds and collisions.


95

3.11

Street Printing

Street printing is a process by which existing asphalt is heated and then printed on with a variety of patterns. Using a StreetHeat machine to heat the asphalt, in which a steel template is pressed into the heated asphalt using a plate compactor, can do street painting. The steel template may be in any pattern depending on what is needed. Some examples include a brick layout or irregular stones. This street treatment can be done on roads, driveways, pedestrian crosswalks and any other asphalt surface. Advantages

Cheaper than repaving or installing real bricks – less labor costs; No room for weeds to grow; Snowplows do not have to alter their plowing patterns, as it is a flat sur face; No maintenance to be done; Very customizable, custom designs can be printed that the community identifies with; Visually appealing when different colors are used.

Disadvantages

Texture may not feel different to drivers and therefore not reducing speed.

Figure 80: Street Stamping (Street Print™ )

E1 E2 E3


96

3.12

Roundabout

Roundabouts and Traffic Circles are not very different in terms of how they work, but the only difference is the scale of the treatment. Typically roundabouts are larger than traffic circles as they appear on larger roads, whereas traffic circles are generally referred to as “neighbourhood traffic circles� showing up at a smaller scale. Traffic circles/roundabouts work by allowing vehicles to approach the roundabout, yielding to the vehicles already inside the roundabout. From there, the vehicle will make a right hand turn and enter into the circulatory roadway, signaling to the right when exiting.

Figure 81: Residential Traffic Circle

Advantages:

E1 E2 E3

Effective at slowing drivers down Raises the motorists awareness of paying attention

Disadvantages:

3.13

Costly on roads that would need to be retrofitted Do not work well with high volumes of street parking

Diverter

Diverters are physical installations that prevent automobile traffic from entering residential streets by deflecting the traffic onto a different course (Project For Public Spaces, n.d). By doing this, neighborhood through traffic is highly prevented and discouraged. In terms of design, there are two common designs for diverters: Diagonal Diverter and Semi Diverter. Diagonal Diverter is a barrier placed diagonally on a 4-way intersection, creating two unconnected L-shaped streets where drivers are forced to make only right or left turns (Fehr & Peers, n.d). A Semi Diverter is typically an extension from the curb, which restricts automobile traffic in one direction as the extension acts as a barrier for drivers (Refer to Figures 82 and 83) (Portland Bureau of Transportation, n.d).

Figure 82: Diverter

Advantages:

Ability to reduce automobile traffic on targeted streets; Can be designed to allow easy movement of emergency vehicles; Provide opportunities for landscaping.

Disadvantages:

Very expensive; Residents may be forced to take a longer route in order to reach their home; Minimum impact on speed reduction.

Figure 83: Diagonal Diverter


97

3.14

Woonerf

A woonerf, Dutch for a living yard, is a street where pedestrians and cyclists have shared priority with motorists. Through physical alteration of the street, a woonerf intentionally erases the boundary between the sidewalk and street and provides a common public space shared by pedestrians, cyclists, and low-speed motor vehicles. The woonerf concept combines various traffic calming devices that function to force drivers to slow down and exercise caution. In a traditional woonerf, the street is shared by pedestrians, bicyclists, and motor vehicles; however, pedestrians and cyclists have the right-of-way. Figure 84: Woonerf, Washington, DC

Figure 85: Plan for Residential Woonerf, Santa Monica

Rather than coerce people into driving safely, Woonerfs incent them to do so by using design cues (Sucher, 2003). For example, by planting trees in the right-of-way, using bollards, eliminating the grade separation between sidewalk and street and/or using angled parking to carve out pocket community spaces like gardens, seating or children’s play areas, woonerfs send an implicit message to drivers that they should exercise caution. The vision in Toronto’s OP includes lowered car use with more people using transit and various other active modes of mobility. Woonerfs achieve this vision by requiring a redesign of existing streets in line with the vision of the OP that realigns the relationship between urbanity and vehicles. Advantages:

Reduction of driving speeds and therefore increase in level of safety; A more efficient use of space; More socialization and activities; A more visually attractive street; Improvement in the overall environmental quality of urban streets.

Disadvantages:

Access for emergency vehicles; If unsuccessful, the woonerf won’t serve a multi-purpose use for all users.

E1 E2 E3


98

F


Recommendations

99

1.0 Principles 2.0 Design Interventions 3.0 Implementation

E1 E2 E3


100

1.0

F1 F2 F3

Principles

The design interventions have been organized in terms of crosswalk measures, road measures and intersection measures. As discussed in Section B3.0 signage alone does not control the speeds nor the actions of drivers. It is a well known fact that the reaction time of drivers reduced with the increase in speed. The design interventions proposed therefore involve forcing divers into situations which require them to reduce speed and be more vigilant of their surroundings. These Interventions include creating obstacles or perception of obstacles that would force divers to immediately reduce their speed and draw attention to their surroundings. This report will fulfil its goals and objectives by applying the following principles to the appropriate design interventions: Speed Reduction: Lower speeds to mitigate accidents. Clear Crossing: free of physical obstructions. Pedestrian Safety: Safeguarding against bodily harm & injury of pedestrians Visibility: Maintain clear sight lines. Through-traffic Reduction: Reduce automobile volumes and ideally deter through traffic. Conflict Deterence: Reduce conflict between automobiles, pedestrians, and cyclists. Accessibility: Barrier-free access for all age groups and abilities. Self Regulation: Minimize reliance on enforcement. Service ability: Allows access by service, maintenance and emergency vehicles, including snow plows, garbage trucks, fire trucks, ambulances and other large or specialty vehicles Maintain ability: Enables existing or reduces maintenance levels, especially during winter months


101

Maintain ability

Conflict Deterence

F1

Speed Reduction

Visibility

F2 F3

Clear Crossing Accessibility

Pedestrian Safety

Self Regulation

Service ability

Figure 86: Principles


102

2.0

Design Interventions

Crosswalks Attributes of a Functional Crosswalk

F1 F2 F3

A functional crosswalk is one that provides pedestrians with safe movement across roadways. Therefore, a substandard crosswalk is one that does not allow pedestrians to safely cross the roadway. Attributes of a functional crosswalk can be achieved through the implementation of a number of traffic calming measures, which will be discussed in the recommendations below. Visibility: The location and illumination of the crosswalk allows pedestrians to see and be seen by approaching traffic while crossing. Clear delineation of the crosswalk will allow motorists to be more aware that they are approaching a crosswalk and in turn adjust their driving behavior to suit. Functional crosswalks are clear from visual obstructions, such as corner street furniture at intersections. Clear Crossing: A functional crosswalk is free of barriers, obstacles and hazards. Conflict Deterence: A functional crosswalk improves pedestrian safety by maintaining maximum visibility for pedestrians and automobiles; promoting design elements that would give automobiles sufficient reaction time to slow down and obey the crosswalk rules. In turn, if accidents do occur, the likelihood of serious injury will be reduced. Speed Reduction: A functional crosswalk will use design techniques and other traffic calming measures to reduce automobile speed. For example bump-outs, raised tables, and street treatments can be used to slow automobiles when approaching a crosswalk. Pedestrian Safety: A functional crosswalk provides a visually open and defined passage for pedestrians that is visiblve to motorist with the intention of minimizing the severity and frequency of accidents. Maintain ability: Enables existing or reduces maintenance levels especially during winter months.


103

Intervention #1 Primary Traffic Control Signal Traffic signals are electronically operated traffic control devices by which traffic is warned or is directed to take a specific action. Implementing traffic signals where warranted will help minimize conflicts between users, improve pedestrian safety, and add a conventional visual cue for motorists to slow and stop. Police enforcement can be used in combination with traffic signals to entice motorists to respect the rules of the road and obey traffic laws. Although traffic signals are not a traffic calming measure this report recommends that this intervention be implemented to improve safety conditions at dangerous intersections long term. Application

Figure 87: Gerrard Street and Leslie Street Crosswalk

Implementing a traffic signal at Leslie Street and Gerrard Street would help improve pedestrian safety and minimize conflicts between users, as it has been identified that conflicts occur at this dangerous intersection. The installation of a traffic signal will improve crosswalk visibility at all hours of the day, will provide a clear crossing path, and in turn will improve safety levels at Leslie and Gerrard. The traffic signal proposed for the Leslie and Gerrard intersection will be synchronised with other traffic signals along Gerrard to avoid disrupting the movement of motorists whilst also providing a safe crossing point for pedestrians travelling throughout the study area. Book 12 of the Ontario Traffic Manual (OTM) provides guidelines for the design and operation of traffic signals. For this intersection a primary traffic control signal is proposed as a safer alternative than the existing crosswalk. This type of traffic signal alternates vehicular right-of-way between conflicting streams of traffic, or vehicular traffic and pedestrians crossing a roadway, with maximum efficiency and safety. The installation of a traffic signal needs to be justified by meeting warranting criteria, which includes a number of elements. These elements include looking at minimum vehicle volumes, delay to cross traffic, collision experience, combination justification and pedestrian volumes. More details on the process of installing a traffic signal can be found in Book 12 of the OTM. Short Term: As regulated traffic signals are a costly expenditure, short term traffic calming measures can be installed to make the intersection safer in the near future. The use of symbolic or temporary bollards to act as bump-outs on the shoulder, or street treatments can work to improve the crosswalk safety levels (Refer to Interventions #2, #3, and #5, for examples of possible interim crosswalk measures). There is transit service available on Gerrard Street therefore, consideration for the operation of the TTC must occur before implementing any traffic calming measures. Consultation with the TTC as recommended by the Toronto Traffic Calming Policy, should take place prior to the implementation of any short term traffic calming measures on the Gerrard Street and Leslie Street crosswalk. Long Term: Once funding is available the primary traffic control signal can be installed to provide permanent regulation of motorist and pedestrian movement. The primary traffic control signal can work in tandem with the other proposed traffic calming measures to make the Gerrard Street and Leslie Street crosswalk functional.

F1 F2 F3

Figure 88: Gerrard Street and Leslie Street Crosswalk


104

Intervention #2 Symbolic Bollards Symbolic bollards are theme-decorative short vertical posts used as a physical barrier and a visual cue. Symbolic bollards can calm traffic, not necessarily by impeding traffic but to subconsciously change the motorists mindset; to notify them of the current neighbourhood conditions (children at play, schools, playgrounds, parks etc.). Symbolic bollards can work to delineate crosswalks for approaching motorists, which will allow for improved safety conditions and minimized conflict amongst users. Application

F1 F2 F3

Figure 89: Jones Avenue Crosswalk

Figure 90: Jones Avenue Crosswalk

Symbolic bollards in the form of children or pencils will add to the success of a crosswalk located in close proximity to schools, as motorists would expect the presence of children and would adjust their speeds and awareness levels to avoid dangerous driving behavior. The crosswalk at Boultbee Avenue and Jones Avenue can benefit from the implementation of child or pencil bollards as the Blake Street Public School is located just west of the crosswalk. The presence of child or pencil bollards can force motorists to be more conscientious of the pedestrians present and crossing the road way; be it children, teenagers or adults. Bollards can be found throughout the City of Toronto, in a number of different designs, colors, and materials. The City of Toronto has yet to implement child or pencil bollards. The implementation of bollards requires warranting criteria; however the testing of such an unconventional design as a pilot project initially can ensure the measures are considered as a viable solution to pedestrian safety. Also, maintenance procedures and costs should be taken into account since small street sweeper vehicles typically require 2.0m of unobstructed running width. The OTM recommends that designers should check the requirements for their municipality and refer to section 8 of Book 18 for information on maintenance considerations. Apart from impacting City maintenance procedures, bollards can in some circumstances act as a physical barrier for pedestrians. Since one of the guiding principles of this report is to encourage barrier-free design it is required that the placement of symbolic bollards be considerate to the pedestrian path. The installation of such bollards is inexpensive in comparison to other measures such as the installment of a regulated traffic signal, as it does not require electricity, drainage work, or any other reconstruction of the existing infrastructure. The bollards require off-site construction and can be shipped and installed very quickly. Short Term: In many cities in the United Kingdom, child bollards were installed as pilot project in selected school zones. Symbolic bollards can be installed on either side of the Boultbee Avenue and Jones Avenue intersection on the sidewalk as a pilot project, to provide explicit crosswalk delineation. The pilot project would act as a test to determine whether the symbolic bollards should be installed in other locations across the study area including other school zones, parks, and on pedestrian travel paths frequented by children.


105

Boultbee Avenue and Jones Avenue crosswalk would be an ideal pilot project location for symbolic bollards, as there is opportunity to install the figures adjacent to the sidewalk. This way the bollards will not act as a barrier to pedestrians but will still provide the psychological cue. Consultation with the local residents should occur before, during, and after the pilot project. Local residents can be involved in the design phase to provide ideas on how best to represent the neighbourhood context. Bollards can take many forms therefore there is an opportunity for the community to get involved in shaping the bollards to suit the neighborhood. During and after installment local residents can provide important feedback and insight on any aesthetic concerns and the overall effectiveness of the symbolic bollards in creating a safer crosswalk.

Figure 91: Child Bollards, Lincolnshire, ENG, UK

F1 F2

Long Term: Symbolic bollards, if the pilot project proves effective at the Boultbee Avenue and Jones Avenue crosswalk, can be applied to other crosswalks in close proximity to schools. The concept is not limited to crosswalks, it can also be rolled out into a City-wide initiative to improve school zone road safety. The long term implementation process of symbolic bollards would require the street modifications be added to the Transportation Services budget and the installation of permanent features will occur when funding becomes available.

F3 Figure 92: Pencil Bollards, Location Unknown


106

Intervention #3 Street Stamping Street stamping (ex. Streetprint™) is a process by which existing asphalt is heated and then printed on with a variety of patterns. Street stamping can act as a visual cue for both automobiles and pedestrians. Street stamping is more efficient in terms of longevity as a stamped road does not require maintenance. Street stamping will aid in improving pedestrian safety with clear markings that guide pedestrians safely from one side of the roadway to the other. Street stamping improves visibility as it will inform motorists to stop at a safe distance away from pedestrians crossing. Additionally, street stamping creates a textured surface, making motorists more aware that speed needs to be reduced. Overall, street stamping has the potential to minimize conflicts between pedestrians, cyclists and motorists, improve visibility, provide clear crossing, and in turn improve pedestrian safety.

F1 F2

Application

F3

Street stamping can be applied to the approach of all crosswalks within the study area to better delineate the pedestrian travel path. All crosswalks on Jones Avenue and Greenwood Avenue will benefit from the installation of street stamping, as they are on heavily trafficked roads and have been observed to have a number of vehicles travelling above the posted speed limit.

Figure 93: Jones Avenue Crosswalk

The Ontario Provincial Standard Specifications on surface treatments provided by the Ministry of Transportation has been developed for use in provincial and municipal-oriented contracts. The administration, testing, and payment policies, procedures, and practices reflected correspond to those used by many municipalities and the Ontario Ministry of Transportation. It is important to refer to Volume 7 (Traffic Safety) of the Ontario Provincial Standards for Roads and Public Works before implementation. In Toronto, street stamping has been implemented along Royal York at all intersections between Algoma Street and Simpson Avenue. This has set a precedence across the City.

Figure 94: Jones Avenue Crosswalk

It is important to consider that the implementation of street stamps requires coordination with the Public Work’s schedule for street repaving. Once a certain street is due for re-paving a street treatment different from what was once there may be applied. Short Term: Street treatments can be implemented on one crosswalk as a pilot project. Once the measure is proven effective and accepted more can be implemented throughout the study area. Pilot projects can also be conducted to test what type of street stamping is most effective in the specific neighborhood context, this way in the long term the best, most successful street treatment can be applied to all the crosswalks in the study area.


107

Prior to implementation, local residents could provide design contributions. During and following the pilot projects for street stamping residents can provide feedback to which design is the most accepted and appropriate for the neighbourhood. The crosswalk at Greenwood Avenue and Ivy Avenue is a good location to implement the pilot street stamping project. Currently there are zebra stripes at the crosswalk, by implementing the pilot project here the speed of vehicles approaching the crossing can be compared before and during the pilot project. Long Term: The vision for the study area is to make all crosswalks safer therefore the installation of street stamping is recommended on all crosswalks. Long term, street stamping can be applied to all crosswalks within the study area in tandem with other proposed interventions such as primary traffic control signals, bump-outs, bollards, etc to improve visibility, minimize conflicts and overall improve street safety. The long term installation of permanent street stamping will rely on the success of the pilot project.

Figure 95: Showing Textured Pavement

F1 F2 F3


108

Intervention #4 Raised Crosswalks Raised crosswalks provide pedestrians with an elevated pathway from one side of the roadway to another. Raised crosswalks are constructed to be the same elevation of the adjacent curbs and sidewalks. Raised crosswalks are used to safely guide pedestrians across a roadway additionally the measure works to slow automobiles down, without fully impeding on automobile movement. Additionally, where applied the measure allows for increased visibility of the crosswalk and pedestrians to motorists. Raised crosswalks are applicable at intersections with pedestrian-activated crosswalks.

F1

Application According to the Canadian Guide to Neighbourhood Traffic Calming, raised crosswalks increase the effectivity of other traffic calming measures like textured crosswalks and bump-outs.

F2 F3 Figure 96: Crosswalk in the Study Area

A raised crosswalk can be installed at the Jones Avenue and Strathcona Avenue crosswalk. This measure will work in tandem with Intervention # 5 (bump-outs) to ensure the fulfillment of all the attributes of a functional crosswalk. A raised crosswalk can be installed at the Boultbee Avenue and Jones Avenue crosswalk. This measure will work in tandem with Intervention # 2 (symbolic bollards) to ensure the fulfillment of all the attributes of a functional crosswalk.

Figure 97: Crosswalk in the Study Area

A raised crosswalk can be installed along Greenwood Avenue, specifically Greenwood Avenue and Felstead Avenue as well as Greenwood Avenue and Ivy Avenue. The rationale being the fact that Greenwood Avenue has been noted as a road where speeding mostly occurs due to its “fairly open stretch of road” (Fanfair, 2014). This would ensure the fulfillment of all the attributes of a functional crosswalk, more specifically speed reduction. Raised crosswalks will provide pedestrians with a clear path and will force motorists to approach cautiously, slow down and will overall create a safer environment at all the selected locations mentioned prior. Raised intersections have been implemented at several locations in the City of Toronto. Examples of such installations include Huron Street, Waverly Avenue and Logan Avenue. This has set a precedence throughout the City. Short Term: A temporary raised crosswalk can be implemented as a pilot project on Boultbee Avenue and Jones Avenue in conjunction with symbolic bollards, as it was recommended earlier that Symbolic Bollards be installed in the same intersection. It is important to test the raised crosswalk before permanent installation to fully understand any implications/affects the measure has on traffic flow, operations of public services, transit, etc. The temporary raised crosswalk can first be made of plastic, and if applicable can be made permanent. Since the pilot project is a temporary installment the City’s road maintenance schedule is not a major constraint.


109

The Toronto Traffic Calming Policy recommends that all proposed traffic calming measures consider and consult with the TTC and emergency services to ensure that the traffic calming measure does not impede their operations (Transportation Services, 2010). The Toronto Traffic Calming policies and procedure must be considered to ensure that the proposed permanent measures are approved and appropriate for the chosen location. Long Term: Once the raised crosswalks are granted approval and allocated for funding the raised crosswalk can be installed permanently. The implementation of a raised crosswalk long term, should be coordinated with the Public Work’s schedule for street repaving. Once a certain street is due for re-paving or reconstruction a raised crosswalk can be installed permanently.

F1 F2 F3

Figure 98: Displaying a Raised Crosswalk in the study area


110

Intervention #5 Bump-Outs Bump-outs involve reducing the street width by extending the sidewalk onto the roadway, usually aligning them by the parking lane. In doing so, the crossing distance for pedestrians would be significantly reduced and visibility of pedestrians would overall increase. Application Bump-outs can be applied to the east side of the crosswalk at Jones Avenue and Strathcona Avenue. On the east side of the Jones Avenue and Strathcona Avenue crosswalk there is a parking lane which provides the needed space for a bumpout. Installing a bump-out at this location will extend the pedestrian realm and will provide pedestrians with a shorter crossing distance. Additionally, the bump-out will better delineate the crosswalk and will make pedestrians more visible to approaching automobiles.

F1 F2 F3

Figure 99: Bump-outs on Logan Avenue, Toronto, CAN

Figure 100: Bump-outs on Logan Avenue, Toronto, CAN

This location allows a bump-out to be implemented without interfering with the existing bike lanes. This solution follows the Toronto Traffic Calming Policy recommendation that the comfort of cyclists be taken into consideration when placing traffic calming measures (Works Committee, 2002). Further consultation with emergency services and the TTC will ensure that the bump-outs implemented in the study do not impact the operations of such agencies, as recommended in the Toronto Traffic Calming Policy (Transportation Services, 2010). According to City of Toronto By-law No. 602-89, the City has the authority for “the construction, widening, narrowing, alteration and repair of sidewalks, pavements and curbs at various locations. Bump-outs have been implemented throughout the City of Toronto. For example, Logan Avenue has bump-outs mid-block and at street corners which has set precedence within the City. Short Term The bump-outs proposed at the Jones Avenue and Strathcona Avenue crosswalk can be implemented using low-cost, interim solutions such as temporary curbs, bollards, planters, or striping. The bump-outs recommended at the Jones Avenue and Strathcona Avenue crosswalk can be implemented in tandem with the raised table proposed in Intervention # 4 to promote the attributes of a successful crosswalk.

Figure 101: Diagram of Bump-outs

Long Term Once funding is acquired, and after taking into consideration the impact of extending curbs at suggested locations on drainage, City operations and cyclists, more permanent installments can be applied to other crosswalks throughout the study area.


111

Roads Roads are a critical element in both the automobile network and the pedestrian network. Although roads remain primarily for vehicle use, pedestrian safety must be considered in the design of roads as pedestrians walk on adjacent sidewalks, access from adjacent properties and cross over roadways to reach other destinations. Attributes of Good Neighbourhood Roads A good neighbourhood road deters through traffic, reduces automobile speed, and provides for the safe movement of automobiles while remaining safe for pedestrians. Therefore bad neighbourhood roads encourage through traffic, facilitate high speeds, and provide an unsafe environment for both motorists and pedestrians. There are many attributes of good neighbourhood roads, such attributes are achieved through the implementation of a number of traffic calming measures, which will discussed in the recommendations below. Through Traffic Reduction: A good neighbourhood road design reduces and ideally deters automobiles from cutting through an area using a local road. Speed Reduction: A good neighbourhood road uses design techniques and other traffic calming measures to reduce automobile speed such as bump-outs, and raised tables. Accessibility: Good neighbourhood roads employ a barrier free design. Service-ability: Allows access by service, maintenance and emergency vehicles, including snow plows, garbage trucks, fire trucks, ambulances and other large or specialty vehicles. Safe for Pedestrians: Good neighbourhood roads are designed to facilitate the movement of automobiles and pedestrians safely by reducing speed. Conflict Deterence: Good neighbourhood roads should take into account pedestrian safety. To maximize pedestrian safety, good roads support design elements that give motorists incentive to slow down and drive cautiously. Maintain ability: Enables existing or reduces maintenance levels especially during winter months.

F1 F2 F3


112

Intervention #6 Bump-Outs Bump-outs involve extending the sidewalk, and reducing the street width. When the road is narrowed motorists are more inclined to slow down. Bump-outs will also aid in reducing the amount of through traffic on local roads as bump-outs work as an impediment that forces diversion. Such impediments will deter non-local motorists from continuing to use local roads as short cuts. Bump-outs when placed strategically, allow for vehicle and pedestrian access. Bump-outs will help improve pedestrian safety levels on the road as through traffic levels will decrease, and overall traffic volumes on local roads will be reduced.

F1

Application Bump-out in Toronto are commonly implemented at crosswalks but can also be used mid-block and in a staggered formation to force automobiles to deviate from the straight line travel of the conventional road. A combination of bump-outs at street corners and mid block on Chatham Avenue will significantly help to reduce speed, as speeding is an issue on Chatham Avenue as identified by the local residents, and it also has the potential to deter non-local motorists from cutting through the neighborhood.

F2 F3

Figure 102: Bump-outs on Logan Avenue, Toronto, CAN

To reiterate, under the City of Toronto By-law No. 602-89, the City has the authority for “the construction, widening, narrowing, alteration and repair of sidewalks, pavements and curbs at various locations. Bump-outs have been implemented throughout the City of Toronto. For example, Logan Avenue has bump-outs mid-block and at street corners which has set precedence within the City. In accordance with the Toronto Traffic Calming Policy, implementation of bump-outs on Chatham Avenue requires consultation with the Toronto Fire Station 323. The fire station is located on Chatham Avenue and the road is used as a primary travel route for fire trucks. Therefore, it is important to ensure that the placement of the bumpouts accommodates emergency vehicles. Bump-outs are a viable option to calm traffic on residential roads but implementation is reliant on the the Public Works schedule for sidewalk maintenance. If the opportunity arises bump-outs can be installed as a part of the scheduled sidewalk maintenance plan or if the City is planning to dig up the road or segments of a road or sidewalk for the purposes of infrastructure maintenance/construction. Short Term: The concept of a bump-out can be tested by using bollards. Specifically, bollards in the form of planters can be used to act as pilot project for future installment of concrete sidewalk extensions. A planter is a non-permanent, movable, aesthetically pleasing technique used to test road impediments. Representatives from the Pocket Community Association have offered support of such measures and have agreed to negotiate with the City to allow the community to maintain the planters.


113

The Pocket community has recently had their sidewalks redone. Therefore on roads like Chatham Avenue short term options such as bollards are necessary. The use of bollards or planters as a method of extending the curb, is not only a means of testing the measure but it is a way to implement the measure without relying on the City’s road/sidewalk maintenance schedule. This way bump-out concept can be installed in a short period of time, with little disturbance to the residents. Long Term: If the pilot project is successful and accepted by the community and service operations then once the sidewalk is slotted for reconstruction the bumpouts can be installed permanently.

F1 F2 F3

Figure 103: Displaying Bump-outs on a Street.


114

Intervention #7 Woonerf A woonerf is a street where pedestrians and cyclists have shared priority with motorists. A woonerf will reduce speed as it will require automobiles to share the space with all other users, and therefore force them to slow down and be more cautious, and this as a result would minimize conflicts. In addition, the priority will be ambiguous and pedestrian safety will be improved as motorists become more aware of pedestrians. Woonerfs have the potential to reduce through traffic, as the constant presence of people and activities may be considered an inconvenience to motorists and therefore they will be less inclined to drive through the study area. Application

F1

The implementation of a woonerf will change the way motorists view the road. If a woonerf was installed on Seymour Avenue the road would be perceived as a space for all users rather than a path to a destination. Increased levels of street activity and the presence of various users would force a driver to adjust behavior and speed to avoid road conflicts and accidents.

F2 F3 Figure 104: Seymour Avenue

The woonerf concept is fairly new to the City of Toronto. In fact, the first woonerf is scheduled to be completed this upcoming spring. Therefore, there is little precedence when it comes to the applicability of specific policies that guide the process of implementing woonerfs especially on residential roads. Short Term: The woonerf concept may be tested on the proposed street of Seymour Avenue, through a pilot project. A pilot project would allow residents of the study area to experience and understand the woonerf concept where automobiles, cyclists and pedestrians share the street. There is opportunity to test the concept of a woonerf on a residential road through the implementation of a play street or extending the public realm by installing a parklet. The elements of a woonerf that can be applied to Seymour Avenue as a short term pilot project are for example lowering the posted speed limit, providing signage that indicates to automobiles that they are entering a shared space, provide moveable street furniture, and stagger parking to allow for mid-block alcoves for pedestrian activity. This short term pilot would work to educate the pedestrians and automobiles about the concept and ease the period of adaptation, should the City along with the residents decide to install a permanent residential woonerf in the future. Long Term: In the future, after a pilot project has taken place, if residents are accepting of the woonerf concept as an effective traffic calming measure, the City may consider making a permanent installment of a woonerf. The City can, through seeking advice from planners, landscape architects, and other consultants, take into account all the relevant policies and aspects that would ensure successful implementation of a permanent woonerf on a residential road.


115

The long term elements of a woonerf, which can be applied to Seymour Avenue if the pilot proves successful, are for example eliminating the continuous curb which would blur the designated spaces for pedestrians and cars and implement street treatments to define the space and give it aesthetic variety. The long term woonerf elements can work with other traffic calming measures proposed throughout the area to promote the attributes of a good neighbourhood roads. Permanent woonerf concepts are recommended first as a pilot project to ensure that the selected location is suitable, accepting and functional as such. Also, the long term elements of a woonerf are very expensive. In order for a woonerf to be effective in a residential neighbourhood, the streets would need to be retrofitted. The intersection of Seymour Avenue and Shudell Avenue can be retrofitted into a pedestrian and cyclist friendly community front yard. This process would require that the roadbed be raised to eliminate all vertical curbs. In addition, decorative pavers to dictate walking, driving, and socializing spaces would also be necessary to both inform road users and enhance the public realm.

Figure 106: Seymour Avenue Woonerf Rendering

Figure 105: Seymour Avenue

F1 F2 F3


116

Intervention #8 Yield Street Yield streets are two-way streets in which automobiles are obliged to travel at low speeds in order to yield to motorists coming in the opposite direction without the risk of head-on collision. Yield streets are only wide enough for one vehicle to drive on, yet allow motorists to yield or give courtesy to vehicles coming in the opposite direction. In addition, it is encouraged that signage indicating bidirectional traffic at transition points or where two-way operation has been introduced should be implemented (NACTO, 2012).

F1 F2 F3

Figure 107: Yield Street Signage

Besides lowering speeds, yield streets will also reduce through traffic as it will add an inconvenience to motorists and therefore provides less incentive for automobiles to travel through local neighbourhoods. Application It was observed that Hastings Avenue is already being used as a yield street. During the winter months, the snow narrows the width of the road, and all year round certain circumstances cause travel lanes to be blocked by services such as garbage pick up or mail delivery. Myrtle Avenue in Upper Leslieville is one-way traveling east. Myrtle Avenue has the potential to become a successful yield street as it has been identified that automobiles already tend to drive the wrong way on the street. If Myrtle Avenue was changed to be a two-way yield street the issue of disobeying the one way sign would be eliminated. Also, the yield street would reduce traffic speeds as motorists will become more cautious of automobiles driving the opposite way. The yield street concept can work in tandem with other traffic calming measures such as bump-outs (as proposed in Intervention #5 and #6), to calm traffic on Chatham Avenue, as the high speeds of motorists are of concern. Concerns were raised regarding implementing a yield street as motorists may not understand the concept. However, as observed during site visits, motorists naturally understand the concept, as many streets are already used as unofficial yield streets when lanes are blocked by cars, snow, or services such as garbage pick up or mail delivery. The City of Toronto Traffic Calming Policy recommends that traffic calming measures should avoid having major impact on emergency service. Yield streets may pose as an impediment to such services. Due to the constraining nature of some streets, site specific reviews would be required.


117

Short Term: The yield street concept can be implemented on Myrtle Avenue simply by taking down the no entry sign at the Myrtle Avenue and Leslie Street intersection. This way the street will operate as a two-way road and will act as an unofficial yield street. Creating an official yield street by implementing the appropriate yield signage to direct automobiles to yield to oncoming traffic in designated road shoulders is also a short term option for Myrtle Avenue. On two lane streets with existing parking space, the parking should be arranged in a staggered pattern to allow cars to yield. Another way of piloting the yield street concept is to implement bollards. On three lane streets with one lane for parking the street design can be as follows: lane of parked cars remain with paint indicating boundary of parking space, centre lane for driving should be 1 ½ width of standard lane, bollards should be placed ½ lane from curb without parking, bollards should be placed at intersections and spaced in a 4 car length interval along street. Long Term: The long term implementation of yield streets should involve the installation of permanent bollards. Street renovations should be added to the Transportation Services budget and be implemented when funding is available. Note implementation is not dependant on the road repaving schedule because no physical change to the street is required.

Figure 108: Example Yield Street with Parallel Parking

F1 F2 F3


118

Intervention #9 Play Streets A play street is created when a local street is closed to traffic to provide space for children for recreational purposes. Play streets, although not a conventional traffic calming measure will work to reduce speed and through traffic as motorists will be more cautious since there is the expectation that children are likely to be present on the street. Therefore it will also increase pedestrian safety and the street will be a positive active space. Application

F1 F2 F3 Figure 109: Play Street Activities

Permanent play streets can be implemented year round on dead end roads within the Pocket and Upper Leslieville. An allowance to play on the streets will encourage children to partake in physical activities and will increase the amount of pedestrian activity on local roads. More activity on the street and sidewalk will help encourage the shared street concept, where automobiles are not the only user. Allowing space for pedestrians and motorists will foster an understanding between the two users and minimize conflict. The implementation of play streets within selected areas of the Pocket and Upper Leslieville will encourage the City to look further into the opportunity of implementing other shared street measures such as woonerfs in residential areas. Designated play streets can be implemented on the following dead end roads; Queen Victoria Street and Harriet Street dead end. All of the dead ends listed are flanked by residential homes and can provide the children and families in the neighbourhood with play space.

Figure 110: Play Street Activities

The current law does not allow the road to be used for play, the City enforces bylaw 522-78, which prohibits ball and hockey play on all Toronto Streets. This bylaw would need to be changed in order to allow for the legal implementation of play streets. The City of Kingston, prior to 2008 had a similar bylaw but altered it to allow for road hockey to occur between the hours of 9am and 8pm when and where visible (Rider, 2010). Kingston’s bylaw also enforces that the parents assume the risk, not the City - this removes the constraint of liability (Rider, 2010). This by-law amendment has set a precedence, and a similar amendment can be applied to Toronto’s by-law, although there are concerns on heavily trafficked roads, alterations to allow for play streets, and road hockey on local, dead end streets can prove beneficial. Short Term: There is no need for a pilot project as ball and hockey play occurs on roads regardless of the regulations. Ball and hockey play is recognized as a National pastime in Canada and such activities should be encouraged to promote healthy active living. Short term, play streets can be facilitated by simply removing the current “No Ball or Hockey Play” signs throughout the study area. Additionally, target dead-end streets can be designated for play to minimize conflict between children and motorists and the designation will assert the importance of the National pastime within the study area.


119

Long Term: The long term recommendation is to permanently amend bylaw 52278 to allow for play on all residential streets from 9am to 8pm similar to Kingston, Ontario’s initiative. Consequently, all of the City’s “No Ball and Hockey” signs would be removed.

F1 F2 F3

Figure 111: Play Street Rendering


120

Intervention #10 Parklets A parklet is a small space that serves as an extension to the sidewalk in order to provide additional amenities and green space for pedestrians. A parklet is essentially a bump-out. Parklets replace formal on street parking spots with a levelled platform which acts as an extension of the public realm. This levelled platform, is a self regulated public space for pedestrians. Parklets can be active or passive public spaces, that facilitate pedestrian engagement along the street. Though parklets do not directly calm traffic, they extend the public realm into a space otherwise dominated by vehicles, are accessible, self-regulated, and maintain visibility of pedestrians on the street. Through design techniques and public accessibility of parklets, the principles outlined are successfully fulfilled.

F1 F2

Application

F3

Parklets are commonly used along major and minor arterial roads, with a higher presence of commercial and retail stores. As parklets extend the public realm, they work best alongside busy streets that lack furniture as a way to entice pedestrians and passerby to engage in the complete street. Parklets work best alongside businesses, particularly those in the cafe and food service industries. A target street for parklets would be Danforth Avenue; though beyond the scope of this current study, it is a possible measure to encourage walkable streets in and around the study area. Figure 112: Residential Parklet, San Francisco, CA

Although not commonly applied, parklets can also be used in residential, neighbourhood streets. For example, in San Francisco, a residential parklet currently exists on Valencia Street. Residential Parklets may act as a bump-out to reduce traffic speed but most importantly, it serves as a place for people in the community to meet and mingle, which would overall contribute to a more close-knit and lively neighbourhood. Parklets can also be constructed to serve as garbage bin storage. Private sector parklets are only permitted in Toronto, through an Appeal to City Council. If approved, parklets are subject to the terms in Chapter 743 and 441 of the Toronto Municipal Code. Parklets are also subject to satisfy twelve criteria set out by the City of Toronto. It must also be recognized that because parklets replace formal on street parking spaces, the applicant must submit financial requirements of the revenue that would have otherwise been made from the Toronto Parking Authority. As parklets are sensitive to weather, they are seasonal structures, and only permitted from May 1st and September 31st. Local BIAs must also be in support of the addition of parklets. Though permanent parklets have not yet been established in the City of Toronto, pilot projects have been undertaken and deemed successful. If parklets were to be implemented in the study area, a pilot project would be the optimal way of achieving the annual presence of parklets along major and minor roads. A pilot project would give residents the opportunity to utilize parklets and evaluate their appropriateness with the character of the neighbourhoods, while also gauging the effects on the heavy pedestrian flow along major and minor arterials surrounding the study area. Parklets also work well in tandem with other traffic calming measures such as bollards.


121

The aim of parklets is not to slow traffic in itself, but rather to reclaim the public space that is lost by heavy volumes of traffic. Slow signs to keep driving speeds safe, as well as bollards should be used in combination alongside parklets. Since parklets are extending public space into a roadway dominated by vehicles, it is important to maximize the safety surrounding them by keeping the structures visible as well as the users. Short Term: In Toronto, there have been pilot projects of parklets that have been successful in garnering attention and a wide user base. These parklets were tested out during closed events, so that pedestrians and residents were able to get a feel for the new concept. Recognizing that within the vicinity of the study area many festivals are held such as Taste of the Danforth, perhaps a parklet set up during that time would be one way to gauge the success of this measure. Residential Parklets, as pilot projects can also be applied to local, residential street where high motorist speeds occur and where residents find is a suitable place for interaction or for garbage storage. Further consultation with the residents will determine the exact location. Long Term: Toronto currently does not have any long term parklets. As mentioned previously, the weather is not conducive to the permanent fixture of parklets. Parklets are also costly features, and must be maintained daily if removable street furniture is part of the design concept. Support from the BIAs, and residents would be important for the long term functioning of parklets, as well as secure resources for funding, including maintenance and missed revenue from the Toronto Parking Authority.

Figure 113: Church Street Parklet, Toronto, CAN

F1 F2 F3


122

Intersections

Intersections are critical elements of both the pedestrian network and motorist network. All road users meet at these nodes. Attributes of Successful Intersection A functional intersection will allow pedestrians and motorists to travel safely along and across roadways. Therefore, a unsuccessful intersection will not allow pedestrians and motorists to travel safely along or across roadways as user conflicts are likely to occur.

F1 F2 F3

There are several attributes of successful intersection. Such attributes can be achieved through the implementation of a number of traffic calming measures, which will discussed in the recommendations below. Self Regulated: Functional intersections regulate through design. Good intersections do not rely solely on the presence of enforcement for example signage, cameras, or law enforcement. An effective intersection would allow automobiles to approach an intersection cautiously and aware at all times. Conflict Minimization: Functional intersections take into account pedestrian safety. To maximize pedestrian safety, successful intersections maintain maximum visibility for pedestrians while at the same time, promoting design elements that would give motorists sufficient reaction time to slow down. In turn, if accidents do occur, the likelihood of serious injury will be reduced. Reduce Speed: A functional intersection is one that through design techniques and other traffic calming measures works to reduce automobile speed, for example street treatments and raised intersections. Safe for Pedestrians: A functional intersection is one that prevents bodily harm and injury of pedestrians.

Figure 114: Functional Intersection, Toronto, ON, CA


123

F1 F2 F3

Figure 115: Successful Intersection, Toronto, ON, CA


124

Intervention #11 Street Treatment: Mural Intersection Paintings Mural intersection paintings are pieces of artwork that act as visual cues, to essentially let motorists know that the neighborhood they are driving through is a lived-in neighborhood where pedestrians are present and where street activity may occur. Consequently, automobiles then approach the intersection more cautiously as they travel through. Application A street treatment; for example a mural, can be applied to the intersection of Chatham Avenue and Euston Avenue. A 2010 Staff Report regarding the Chatham Avenue and Euston Avenue intersection determined that 77 vehicles approached this intersection during an 8 hr period. The combined vehicle and pedestrian volume crossing this intersection is 321 and there is an average of 0.3 collisions annually (City of Toronto, 2010). During an 8 hour period the pedestrian counts showed that 1750 pedestrians crossed Chatham Avenue (City of Toronto, 2010).

F1 F2 F3

Figure 116: Mural Intersection, North 49th Street and Burke, Seattle, WA

All of these factors led to the installation of an all-way stop (City of Toronto, 2010). The intersection acts as a pedestrian link between Eastern Commerce Collegiate Institute and the Danforth and Donlands subway station (City of Toronto, 2010). The intersection is heavily used by pedestrians, including teenagers and young adults. Transportation Services determined that an all-way stop was warranted in 2010 but instead of continuing to use a conventional traffic mitigation measure the intersection can become increasingly safe if a mural was painted. Instead of relying on signage and enforcement to regulate motorist behavior the mural intersection would act as a visual cue to entice motorists to slow down and drive cautiously. The mural intersection, although a traffic calming measure, can be representative of the community and can prove to add an aesthetic value to an otherwise conventional road.

Figure 117: Mural Intersection Plan, Black Street and Northwood Terrace, Halifax, NS, CAN

Books 11 and 15 of the Ontario Traffic Manual are used as reference for the possible policy constraints for installing mural intersection paintings. OTM Book 11 provides guidance for the uniform application of design and implementation of curb markings and delineation in Ontario. Book 11 states: “Markings and delineation serve an advisory or warning function, and do not have legal force of their own. They may be used to complement other traffic control devices enforceable under the Highway Traffic Act (HTA), its Regulations, or a municipal by-law, but their enforceability derives from the main regulatory traffic control device, not from the markings or delineation.� (OTM, 2000). However, it is important to note that the Ontario Traffic Manual books serve only as guidelines to standardize transportation design within the Province. As an example, the City of Kitchener examined OTM books 11 and 15, as well as the HTA and concluded from its interpretation that mural paintings are not prohibited on the roadway (personal communication, 2015). As a result, the City of Kitchener is now currently undergoing a one-year feasibility pilot project for the installation of a mural intersection painting at Wilhelm and Ahrens.


125

The implementation of mural intersections should be coordinated with the City’s road repaving schedule as the mural will be removed in the process. The repainting of mural intersections should also be coordinated with the City’s road repaving schedule to avoid wasting resources. In order to implement mural intersections as a long term traffic calming measure within the City of Toronto it is necessary to start off with short term options; these will be discussed below. Short Term: Mural paintings can be implemented on a short term basis in the form of a pilot project. As an example, the City of Kitchener, Ontario is currently testing a pilot project to examine the feasibility of a mural intersection painting in a certain part of the City. Council will then report back after one year of implementation for recommendations and policies. The City of Toronto, although limited by the regulations outlined in the Ontario Traffic Manual, can implement a similar pilot project to test the feasibility of mural intersections on roads within the the Pocket and Upper Leslieville. The automobile volumes reported by Transportation Services, on the Chatham Avenue and Euston Avenue intersection are far below the maximum daily volumes to warrant a mural intersection, making this an ideal location for the pilot project. The concept can be tested for effectiveness and community acceptance prior to implementing them permanently within the study area. It is recommended that the local community be involved in the process as mural intersections are more than just a traffic calming measure, they are a method of place-making. Long Term: Mural intersection paintings usually start off as pilot projects in fact, the very first mural intersection painting was established in Portland, Oregon as an experiment. The project led the City of Portland to introduce an ordinance that made it possible for future intersection painting projects to be organized and implemented. Other cities like Seattle and Minnesota-St.Paul have created programs like Paint-thePavement as a response to neighborhood interest and encouragement from City Council, and now mural intersections have been implemented City-wide. If a pilot proved successful within the Pocket and Upper Leslieville there is the opportunity to continue to paint and re-paint murals on intersections regularly. The mural intersections would only be available in the warm seasons but when in place would provide the neighbourhoods with a creative and aesthetically pleasing solution to some of their traffic concerns.

Figure 118: Mural Intersection, Black Street and Northwood Terrace, Halifax, NS, CAN

F1 F2 F3


126

Intervention #12 Street Treatment: Change in Surface Material Street treatments will aid in improving pedestrian safety as they provide clear markings for pedestrians and are a clear indication for automobiles to drive cautiously when approaching. Installing a change in surface material can aid in slowing motorists as they will notice the change in material, any change in colour and will notice the change in transition and will adjust their driving behavior accordingly. Overall street treatments have the potential to minimize conflicts amongst intersection users and increase visibility which all translates into improved pedestrian safety.

F1 F2 F3

Application All intersections in the study area can benefit from the installation of a change in surface material in the form of stop line. If a strip of textured or unconventional material is used as a stop line or indicator at all stop signs and intersections, motorists will recognize the transition over the material as a cue to slow down when approaching. The textured street treatment method is a suitable alternative to painting stop lines, as Toronto winters often cover or remove the paint entirely. The intersection of Harriet Street and Leslie Street would be a suitable area to implement this street treatment as the vehicles on Leslie would feel a natural speed reduction as they approach Harriet Street, giving them more time to acknowledge the “Dead End” approaching, and make a decision as to where to go next, in a timely manner. In addition, automobiles along Harriet Street will feel the natural sloping topography as they approach Leslie Street and with the added street treatment at this intersection, it will provide motorists with more time to acknowledge the “No Left Turn” onto Leslie Street, allowing the driver to make a slower, safer, right-hand turn onto Leslie Street. As there is no stop sign on Harriet Street at Leslie Street, this intersection would greatly benefit from a uniquely textured street treatment to promote slower speeds. Textured street treatments such as using different materials at intersections has been implemented throughout the City of Toronto. For example when approaching the Logan Avenue and Gerrard Street intersection there is red brick pavers to delineate the upcoming intersection. Therefore, a precedence has been set within the City of Toronto for the use of street treatments. It is important to note, that according to the Ontario Provincial Standards for Roads and Public Works, surface treatments cannot be carried out during the winter season and are only permitted between May 15th and September 30th (Spring to Fall). It is important to engage the community in the process of implementing street treatments. In accordance with the Toronto Traffic Calming Policy a petition should be conducted in order to determine which location is best suited for the installation of street treatments, and what material would be best suited for the study area.


127

Long Term: Long term, after an initial petition of the study area residents, the appropriate street treatment can be implemented on all identified intersections to improve pedestrian safety. The long term implementation of street treatments requires coordination with the City’s road repaving schedule, and is reliant on the allocation of funding. The intersection at Chatham Ave and Byron Ave has potential for street treatments to be applied. The fire station is located at this intersection therefore it is crucial that the intersection be clear and drivers follow the posted speed limit. Implementing street treatments on the whole intersection will warn drivers to be aware of incoming and outgoing fire trucks as well as help reduce overall speed.

F1 F2 F3

Figure 119: Logan Avenue and Gerrard Street Intersection, Displaying Change in Surface Material


128

Intervention #13 Raised Intersection A raised intersection is when the elevation of the whole centre of an intersection, including the pedestrian crossing, is raised to the same height as adjacent curbs and sidewalks. A raised intersection improves visibility of pedestrians whilst providing both a visual and physical cue for motorists that they are approaching an intersection. The raised intersection would minimize conflict amongst users as motorists would slow down before traveling over the intersection which in turn provides increased levels of safety for pedestrians.

F1

Application

F2

Issues identified on Chatham Avenue include speed violations and motorists driving the opposite direction on the one way portion of the street. A raised intersection at Chatham Avenue and Byron Avenue would reduce speed on the two streets.

F3 Figure 120: Example of Raised Intersection

A raised intersection does not typically interrupt or impede the operations of emergency services, but as the fire station located at that intersection it is important to consider any implications the traffic calming measure may cause. As recommended in the Toronto Traffic Calming Policy, consultation with emergency services must take place prior to the installation to ensure that the operations of the 323 Fire Department are not negatively affected. The Gerrard Street and Leslie Street intersection is dangerous, and as a result is in need of a design intervention. In addition to adding a traffic signal at Gerrard Street and Leslie Street, this intersection can benefit from the installation of a raised intersection.

Figure 121: Example of Raised Intersection

According to City of Toronto By-law No. 602-89, the City has the authority for “the construction, widening, narrowing, alteration and repair of sidewalks, pavements and curbs at various locations.� A further amendment to the by-law will be required for the construction of raised intersections at the proposed site. Short Term: Changes to the surface materials such as raised intersections can be implemented at the proposed intersection of Chatham Avenue and Byron Avenue as a pilot to determine the whether the measure is effective. Street painting may also be used as a cost-effective, short term implementation strategy as street paint creates a visual cue, in lieu of the sensory cue driving over a raised intersection presents. Long Term: Implementing raised intersection street treatments in the long term requires projects to be added to the City’s existing street repavement schedule, creating a second schedule for street updates would be redundant and waste City resources.


129

3.0

Implementation

Practical Application The City of Toronto’s Traffic Calming Policy sets out a criteria for the implementation of traffic calming measures. traffic calming measures must meet 3 warrant criteria; 1 Petition, 2 Safety Requirements, 3 Technical Requirements. Each criteria must be met for Transportation Services to add the project to their budget of traffic calming installations. Petition Physical traffic calming measures must be initiated by the local councillor after receiving feedback from residents or after petition of at least 25% of affected household. Councillor Fletcher assigned this report in response to feedback from Ward 30 residents which would fulfill warrant 1. Safety Requirements Sidewalks, road grade and emergency response must be considered for safety requirements to be met. Affected areas must have at least one side of continuous sidewalk or installation of a sidewalk will be the first measure implemented. Road grade traffic calming measures should be implemented at or near streets of a grade %5 to %8. Traffic Calming measures should not be implemented if they proposed measure significantly impedes the response time of emergency services in the affected area. Technical Requirements On streets designated for traffic calming measures the minimum above speed limit of 85% of traffic should be more than 10 km/h over the speed limit and less than 15 km/h over limit if this criteria is not meet the traffic volume should be between 1,000-8,000 vehicles/day but less on local roads and 2,500-8-000 vehicles/day on collector roads. Mid block traffic calming measures should only be considered on streets exceeding 120 metres. Traffic Calming measures should not be implemented if they significantly impacts the regularly scheduled delivery of TTC service in the affected area. Pilot Project Timelines and Measure of Effect The implementation of street reconfigurations in the study area will be a phased approach. By launching pilot projects, road users and residents have the opportunity to experience the recommendations made by this report.

F1 F2 F3


130

Pilot projects allow residents to gauge the effectiveness of the recommendations in addressing the problems affecting of the neighbourhood. It is important that changes to the existing urban fabric are tested and tried before becoming permanent additions. Pilot projects in the study area affect sensitive nodes of travel, with users interacting in a spectrum of road uses, in peak times of the day.

F1 F2 F3

For physical alterations to be considered the residents must be polled with a minimum 50% support from at least 60% of the affected population. The effectiveness of pilot projects can be evaluated at the midpoint and end of the pilot project through means of surveys. Surveys can be administered door to door or be made available on the City of Toronto website (www.toronto.ca) as other pilot projects have effectively done. Online surveys are recommended for changes that are new strategies to the City of Toronto, as that gives feedback for a design precedence. A common short fall of door to door surveys is a low level of participants, which means a complete public response of the effects of changes can not be completely quantified. Recommended timeframe for pilot projects should include time when road use is both frequent and lull to assess the overall effectiveness of the traffic calming measures implemented, throughout different times of the day. By having a lengthy time frame, the amount of interaction in the newly designed realm increases exponentially and the changes can be grounded in experiences. Signage Updates Updates to signage must be approved by Toronto and East York Community Council then brought to transportation services and added to the budget, installation will occur when adequate funding is available.


131

F1 F2 F3


132

G


Conclusion

133

1.0 Concluding Remarks

G1


134

1.0

G1

Concluding Remarks

There is an increasing acceptance among the residents, that current approaches to traffic calming are inadequate and have contributed to neighbourhood streets that are unconducive to pedestrian activity. In order to solve the problems associated with increased traffic congestion and other traffic related impacts on local roads, it is essential to think beyond the current methods set forth by the Province and the City of Toronto. As illustrated in this report, there are numerous strategies used elsewhere that the City of Toronto can learn from. Through case studies of several traffic calming measures around the world, we hope to lay the foundation for the expansion of the City’s current traffic calming toolkit. This guide will stimulate new thinking and practice and encourages professionals and stakeholders to build on what is offered here. Fully adopting the design interventions advocated in this report may have major administrative implications for local authorities. Many of the proposed traffic calming measures are subject to policies and guidelines at the provincial and municipal level. Provincial and municipal policies pose a barrier to the implementation of some of these measures. Changes in attitude, as well as policy and management practices, are essential for the successful implementation of the strategies outlined in this report. There is also scope for engaging with a much wider range of professionals, including police, fire departments, medical services, Public Works, City departments, and Business Improvement Areas throughout the decision making processes. However it is recognized that this report represents the start rather than the end of a process, and encourage others to further develop the ideas set out here by considering costs and how the recommendations will be implemented.


135

G1


136

References All About Roundabouts. (2010, January 1). Retrieved February 8, 2015, from http://www.regionofwaterloo.ca/en/ gettingAround/All-About-Roundabouts.asp Bates, D. (2009). Pictured: the child bollards that are so life like they’re scaring motorists. Daily Mail. Retrieved January 22, 2015 from www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1205821/Drivers-scared-life-like-child-bollards- aimed-slowing-speeders.html Ben-Joseph, E. (1995). Changing The Residential Street Scene: Adapting The Shared Street (Woonerf) Concept to the Suburban Environment. Retrieved February 9, 2015, from http://trid.trb.org/view.aspx?id=451515 Bialick, A. (2011). City’s First Residential Parklet Springs Up on Valencia Street. The Bay Citizen. Retrieved from https://www.baycitizen.org/news/bikes/citys-first-residential-parklet-spings/ Bray, T.L., & Rhodes, V.F. (1997). In Search of Cheap and Skinny Streets. Places, 11(2), 33-39. Retrieved from http://nacto.org/docs/usdg/in_search_of_cheap_and_skinny_streets_bray.pdf Bristol Post. (2013). Pencil shaped bollards to keep our children safe. Retrieved January 22, 2015 from http:// www.bristolpost.co.uk/Pencil-shaped-bollards-children-safe/story-19783133-detail/story.html Church Wellesley Village BIA. (2015). Parklets. Retrieved 01 20, 2015, from Proud of the Village: http://proudoft hevillage.ca/parklets/ City of Halifax. (2014). Halifax Neighbourhood Placemaking. Retrieved from http://www.halifax.ca/culture/Com munityArts/documents/NeighbourhoodPlacemakingApplication20142015.pdf City of Kitchener. (2014) . Staff Report: Infrastructure Services Department. Retrieved from https://kitchener.ca/ en/Calendar/Download.ashx?Id=34a24827-e4aa-49d3-8a17-c28c7356f1fe The City Repair Project. (2002). Intersection Repair: Program Information. Retrieved from http://academic.ever green.edu/curricular/artofplace/CityRepairIntersections.pdf City of Rochester. (n.d). Neighborhood Traffic Management Program. Retrieved January 27, 2015 from https:// www.rochestermn.gov/departments/publicworks/hottopics/Traffic%20Calming/Rochester_NTMP%20Ap pendix2.pdf City of San Francisco. (2013, 02). San Francisco Parklet Manual. Retrieved 01 2015, from Pavement to Parks: http://pavementtoparks.sfplanning.org/docs/SF_P2P_Parklet_Manual_1.0_FULL.pdf City of Surrey. (2015). Local Roads. Retrieved from http://www.surrey.ca/city-services/13369.aspx City of Toronto. (2010). Avenues and Mid-rise Buildings Study. Retrieved February 14, 2015 from www1.toronto.ca/static_files/CityPlanning/PDF/chapters1_5_dec2010.pdf

http://

City of Toronto. (2012). About the Road Classification System. Retrieved February 16, 2015 from http:// www1.toronto.ca/wps/portal/contentonly?vgnextoid=8a8d2118b7412410VgnVCM10000071d60f89RCR D&vgnextchannel=6f2c4074781e1410VgnVCM10000071d60f89RCRD City of Toronto. (2010). All-Way Stop Control - Chatham Avenue at Euston Avenue, Staff Report. Retrieved from http://www.toronto.ca/legdocs/mmis/2011/te/bgrd/backgroundfile-34335.pdf City of Toronto. (2007a). Carlaw Avenue between Danforth Avenue and Riverdale Avenue - Traffic Calming, Staff Report. Retrieved February 15, 2015 from http://www.toronto.ca/legdocs/mmis/2007/te/bgrd/back groundfile-2196.pdf


City of Toronto. (2015). City Of Toronto. Toronto Cycling Statistics. Retrieved February 11, 2015 from http://www1. 137 toronto.ca/wps/portal/contentonly?vgnextoid=caa5970aa08c1410VgnVCM10000071d60f89RCRD City of Toronto. (2014, 03 14). City of Toronto. Retrieved 01 20, 2015, from Guidelines for Parklets: http://www1. toronto.ca/City%20Of%20Toronto/Transportation%20Services/Walking/Files/pdf/Parklet%20Guideline.pdf City of Toronto. (2015). Complete Street Guidelines. Retrieved February 14, 2015 from http://www1.toronto.ca/wps/portal/contentonly?vgnextoid=4339e30dfc638410VgnVCM10000071d 60f89RCRD City of Toronto. (2010). Cycling Map. Retrieved February 17, 2015 from http://www1.toronto.ca/wps/portal/con tentonly?vgnextoid=42b3970aa08c1410VgnVCM10000071d60f89RCRD City of Toronto. (2005). Development Infrastructure Policy and Standards . Retrieved February 14, 2015 from http://www1.toronto.ca/static_files/CityPlanning/PDF/chapters1_5_dec2010.pdf City of Toronto. (2010). Official Plan. Retrieved February 4, 2015 from http://www1.toronto.ca/static_files/CityPlan ning/PDF/chapters1_5_dec2010.pdf City of Toronto. (2012). Proposed Stop Sign - Queen Victoria Street at Condor Avenue, Staff Report. Retrieved February 15, 2015 from http://www.toronto.ca/legdocs/mmis/2012/te/bgrd/backgroundfile-44594.pdf City of Toronto. (2014). Speed Hump Poll Results - Ivy Avenue, Staff Report. Retrieved February 15, 2015 from http://www.toronto.ca/legdocs/mmis/2014/te/bgrd/backgroundfile-67574.pdf City of Toronto. (2002). Summary of Traffic Calming Policy, Transportation Services. Retrieved from https://www1. toronto.ca/city_of_toronto/transportation_services/traffic/files/pdf/traffic_calming_policy_summary.pdf City of Toronto. (2007b). Traffic Calming-Ivy Avenue, Item. Retrieved February 15, 2015 from http://app.toronto. ca/tmmis/viewAgendaItemHistory.do?item=2007.TE4.70 City of Toronto. (2013a). Traffic Calming-Ivy Avenue, Staff Report. Retrieved February 15, 2015 from http://www. toronto.ca/legdocs/mmis/2013/te/bgrd/backgroundfile-61878.pdf City of Toronto. (2013b). Traffic Calming-Riverdale Avenue, Staff Report. Retrieved February 15, 2015 from http:// www.toronto.ca/legdocs/mmis/2013/te/bgrd/backgroundfile-58717.pdf City of Toronto. (2015). The Streetscape Manual. Retrieved February 10, 2015 from http://www1.toronto.ca/wps/ portal/contentonly?vgnextoid=0e88036318061410VgnVCM10000071d60f89RCRD City of Toronto. (2009). Toronto Walking Strategy. Retrieved February 4, 2015 from http://www1.toronto.ca/ City%20Of%20Toronto/Transportation%20Services/Walking/Files/pdf/walking-strategy-highres.pdf The Corporation of the City of London. (2014). Traffic Calming Policy for Existing Neighborhoods. London. Retrieved January 21, 2014 from https://www.london.ca/residents/Roads-Transportation/traffic-manage ment/Documents/FINAL%20TC%20Policy.pdf Collarte, N. (2012). The Woonerf Concept “Rethinking a Residential Street in Somerville”. Retrieved February 10, 2015, from http://nacto.org/docs/usdg/woonerf_concept_collarte.pdf Collarte, N. (2014). The American Woonerf: Creating Livable and Attractive Shared Streets. Retrieved February 9, 2015, from http://search.proquest.com/docview/1508276677 Data Management Group. (2012). Transportation Tomorrow 2011 Survey Area Summary. University of Toronto, Toronto. Retrieved February 14, 2015 from http://www.dmg.utoronto.ca/pdf/tts/2011/travel_sum maries_by_ward/toronto_wards11.pdf Davies, C. (2011, May 11). A Brief History of Roundabouts: Once Bitten, Twice Shy - Miovision Technologies. Retrieved February 6, 2015, from http://miovision.com/blog/a-brief-history-of-roundabouts-once- bitten-twice-shy/


138

Del Giallo, S. (2013, January 28). Info Booth: What exactly is a woonerf, anyway? Retrieved February 7, 2015, from http://news.nationalpost.com/2013/01/28/info-booth-what-exactly-is-a-woonerf-anyway/ Djurhuus, O. (n.d.). Danish Planning and Design Procedures for Traffic Calming`. Danish Road Directorate. Eckerson, Clarence. (2010). Portland’s Bike Boulevards Become Neighborhood Greenways. Retrieved February 10, 2015 from http://www.streetfilms.org/portlands-bike-boulevards-become-neighborhood-greenways/ EKOS Research Associates Inc. (2007, 11). Driver Attitude Toward Speeding and Speed Management: A Quan titative and Qualitative Study - Final Report. Transport Canada. Retrieved February 13, 2015 from https://www.tc.gc.ca/media/documents/roadsafety/TP14756E.pdf Emling, S. (2005). Street to go ‘naked’ London will try free-style traffic. The Atlanta Journal- Constitution. Fanfair, R. (2014). Driver Nearly Triples Speed Limit. Toronto Police Service. Retrieved from http://tpsnews.ca/ stories/2014/07/driver-nearly-triples-speed-limit/ Fehr & Peers. (n.d). Traffic Calming: Diagonal Diverters. Retrieved January 22, 2015 from http://trafficcalming. org/volume-control/diagonal-diverters/ Fehr & Peers. (n.d). Traffic Calming: Half Closures. Retrieved January 22, 2015 from http://trafficcalming.org/ volume-control/half-closures/http://news.nationalpost.com/2013/01/28/info-booth-what-%09exactly-is-a- woonerf-anyway/ Garcia, A., Moreno, A. T., & Romero, M. A. (2012). A New Traffic-Calming Device: Speed Kidney. Institute of T ransportation Engineers , 82 (12), 28-33. Greater Toronto Transportation Authority. (2008). The Big Move. Retrieved February 17, 2015 from http://www. metrolinx.com/thebigmove/Docs/big_move/TheBigMove_020109.pdf Hamilton-Baillie, B. (2013). Naked Street Presentation. Highways Roundabout. (2014, May 27). Retrieved February 8, 2015, from http://www.mto.gov.on.ca/english/ engineering/roundabout/faq.shtml Horgan, E. (2012). Courtesy Streets. Calm Streets Boston. Retrieved from http://calmstreetsboston.blogspot. ca/2012/04/courtesy-streets_25.html Hume, C. (2014, September 19). With first ‘woonerf’ in West Don Lands, Toronto is learning to share its street. Retrieved February 9, 2015, from http://www.thestar.com/news http://www.thestar.com/news/ gta/2014/09/19/with_first_woonerf_in_west_don_lands_t%09oronto_is_learning_to_share_its_streets_ hume.html Ichikawa, K., Tanaka, K., & Kamiya, H. (2000, January 1). Living environment and design of “Woonerf” - Tokyu Dwell Okegawa Village. Retrieved February 11, 2015, from http://www.safetylit.org/citations/in dex.php?fuseaction=citations.viewdetails&citationIds[%20%20%20%20%20%20]=citjournalarti cle_29091_19 Ionova, M. (2013, 06 25). Church Street parking spots await transformation into “parklets”. Retrieved 01 20, 2015, from Toronto Star: http://www.thestar.com/news/gta/2013/06/25/church_street_parking_spots_ await_transformation_into_parklets.html ITE. (2005). Europe: Naked Streets. Institute of Transportation Engineers. Lakey, J. (2014, March 31). North York traffic circles went nowhere with area residents | Toronto Star. Retrieved February 4, 2015, from http://www.thestar.com/yourtoronto/the_fixer/2014/03/31/north_york_traffic_circ les_went_nowhere_with_area_residents.html# Leicester City Council. (2014). More ‘child bollards’ to aid school road safety. Council News. Retrieved January 22, 2015 from http://news.leicester.gov.uk/newsArchiveDetail.aspx?Id=f2819


Leicester Mercury. (2014). Child shaped bollards re-painted in colours of Evington School. Leicester Mercury. 139 Retrieved January 22, 2015 from http://www.leicestermercury.co.uk/Child-shaped-bollards-repainted-co lours-Evington/story-20978301-detail/story.html Manix, J. (n.d.). Us Department of Transportation: Federal Highway Administration. Retrieved February 8, 2014 from Speed Cushions for the Evergreen Corridor Bike Lane Project: http://www.pedbikesafe.org/ BIKESAFE/casestudies_detail.cfm?CM_NUM=27&CS_NUM=504 Max, A., Bushell, B., Poole, C., Rodriguez, D. (2013). Pedestrian and Bicyclist Infrastructure Improvements. Retrieved February 5, 2015 from http://www.wsdot.wa.gov/NR/rdonlyres/B17848CF-3D69-4151- 972A-2C66DECDC2EC/0/CountermeasureCosts_Report_Nov2013.pdf Mess, P., & Milroy, B. (2006). Making Toronto’s Streets. Toronto: University of Toronto. Retrieved February 13, 2015 from http://www.cuhi.utoronto.ca/research/supportingdocs/Toronto%20Streets%20Report%20 Sept%202006.pdf Metrolinx. (2008). The Big Move: Transforming Transportation in the Greater Toronto and Hamilton Area. Re trieved from http://www.metrolinx.com/thebigmove/Docs/big_move/TheBigMove_020109.pdf Ministry of Environment. (2010). Environmental Assessment Act. Retrieved from https://www.google.ca/ url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0C B0QFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2 Ministry of Infrastructure. (2006). Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe. Retrieved from https://www. placestogrow.ca/content/ggh/2013-06-10-Growth-Plan-for-the-GGH-EN.pdf Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing. (2011).Planning Act. Retrieved from http://www.e-laws.gov.on.ca/html/ statutes/english/elaws_statutes_90p13_e.htm Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing. (2014). The Provincial Policy Statement. Retrieved from http://www. mah.gov.on.ca/AssetFactory.aspx?did=10463 Ministry of Transportation. (2014). Ontario Provincial Standards for Roads and Public Works. Retrieved from http://www.raqsb.mto.gov.on.ca/techpubs/OPS.nsf/OPSHomepage Mobushar, P. (1999). Traffic Calming Within Metropolitan Toronto. Retrieved February 15, 2015 from https:// tspace.library.utoronto.ca/bitstream/1807/13167/1/MQ45593.pdf Nahm, B. (2011). Mural Painted on Mpls. Street to Help Slow Traffic. Retrieved from http://hennepin.kstp.com/ news/news/98989-mural-painted-mpls-street-help-slow-traffic National Association of City Transportation Officials. (n.d.). From Pilot to Permanent: Case Studies: Willough by Plaza, Brooklyn. Retrieved January 24, 2015 from http://nacto.org/usdg/interim-design-strategies/ from-pilot-to-permanent/ National Association of City Transportation Officials. (2012). NACTO Urban Street Design Guide. Retrieved from http://www.nyc.gov/html/dot/downloads/pdf/2012-nacto-urban-street-design-guide.pdf National Association of City Transportation Officials. (2012). Yield Streets. Retrieved from http://nacto.org/usdg/ streets/yield-street/ National Association of City Transportation Officials. (2013). Design Controls: Urban Street Design Guide. Urban Street Design Guide. Retrieved February 13, 2015 from http://nacto.org/usdg/ Neighborhood Revitalization Program. (n.d.) Paint the Pavement: The Intersection of Art and Community. Retrieved from http://plannet.nrp.org/prjimg/cor/129057/129057.html


140

Ontario Traffic Manual. (2005). Retrieved from http://www.directtraffic.ca/new-ontario-traffic-manual-book-7-2014/ Ontario Traffic Manual Book 12 (2001). Direct Traffic Management. http://www.directtraffic.ca/wp-content/up loads/2014/02/Book-121.pdf Ontario Traffic Manual. (2000). Ontario Traffic Manual Book 11. Retrieved from http://www.directtraffic.ca/wp-con tent/uploads/2014/02/Book-111.pdf Paint the Pavement. (2009). Frequently Asked Questions. Retrieved from http://www.paintthepavement.org/fre quently-asked-questions Parkhill, M., Sooklall , R., & Bahar, G. (n.d.). Updated Guidelines for the Design and Application of Speed Humps . USA. Planning and Transportation Committee. (2005). Civic Improvement Program - Selection of Streetscape En hancement Projects for 2006. Retrieved February 15, 2015 from http://www.toronto.ca/legdocs/2006/ agendas/committees/plt/plt060109/pltdd.pdf Planning and Transportation Committee. (2002). Toronto Pedestrian Charter. Report No. 6, Clause No. 5. Toronto City Council. Retrieved February 15, 2015 from www.toronto.ca/legdocs/2002/agendas/council/ cc020521/plt6rpt/cl005.pdf Planning and Transportation Committee. (2004). The Civic Improvement Program and its Relationship to the City Beautification Initiative. Retrieved February 15, 2015 from http://www.toronto.ca/planning/urbdesign/pdf/ staff_report_sep0704.pdf The Pocket. (n.d.). Who We Are. Retrieved February 15, 2015 from http://www.thepocket.ca/who-we-are/what-is- the-pca/ Portland Bureau of Transportation. (n.d). Diagonal Diverters. Retrieved January 22, 2015 from https://www.port landoregon.gov/transportation/article/83901 Portland Bureau of Transportation. (n.d). Semi Diverters. Retrieved January 22, 2015 from https://www.portlan doregon.gov/transportation/article/83903 Project for Public Spaces. (2003). Share-it-Square. Retrieved from http://www.pps.org/great_public_spaces/ one?public_place_id=505# Project For Public Spaces. (n.d). Traffic Calming 101. Retrieved January 25, 2015 from http://www.pps.org/refer ence/livememtraffic/ Pucher, J., & Buehler, R. (2008). Making Cycling Irresistible: Lessons from the Netherlands, Denmark and Ger many. Transport Reviews: A Transnational Transdisciplinary, 495-528. Radarsign. (2004). Radarsign. Retrieved 02 08, 2014, from Why Municipalities are Moving Away from Speed Humps as a Traffic Calming Solution. Retrieved January 28, 2014 from http://www.radarsign.com/why- municipalities-are-moving-away-from-speed-humps/ ReStreets. (2013). Case Studies: Share-it-Square. Retrieved from http://www.restreets.org/case-studies/ share-it-square-sunnyside-piazza Rider, D. (2010). Street Hockey Illegal? Maybe Not for Long. Toronto Star. Retrieved from http://www.thestar.com/ news/gta/2010/06/15/street_hockey_illegal_maybe_not_for_long.html Seattle Department of Transportation. (2011) . Painting the Intersection in Your Neighborhood. Retrieved from http://www.seattle.gov/transportation/cams/CAM2506.pdf Sheldrick, G. (2011). Rebellion over child-shaped road bollards. Express. Retrieved January 22, 2015 from http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/254833/Rebellion-over-child-shaped-road-bollardshttp://news.sky. com/story/716620/child-shaped-bollards-to-slow-fast-drivers


Sopko, M. (2012). Courtesy Streets. Calm Streets Boston. Retrieved from http://calmstreetsboston.blogspot. 141 ca/2012/04/courtesy-streets Statistics Canada. 2012. 5350072.02, Ontario (Code 5350072.02) and Toronto, Ontario (Code 535) (table). Cen sus Profile. 2011 Census. Statistics Canada Catalogue no. 98-316-XWE. Ottawa. Released October 24, 2012. http://www12.statcan.gc.ca/census-recensement/2011/dp-pd/prof/index.cfm?Lang=E (accessed February 17, 2015). Statistics Canada. 2012. 5350073.00, Ontario (Code 5350073.00) and Toronto, Ontario (Code 535) (table). Cen sus Profile. 2011 Census. Statistics Canada Catalogue no. 98-316-XWE. Ottawa. Released October 24, 2012. http://www12.statcan.gc.ca/census-recensement/2011/dp-pd/prof/index.cfm?Lang=E (accessed February 17, 2015) Statistics Canada. 2013. 0073.00, Ontario (Code 1084) (table). National Household Survey (NHS) Profile. 2011 National Household Survey. Statistics Canada Catalogue no. 99-004-XWE. Ottawa. Released Septem ber 11, 2013.http://www12.statcan.gc.ca/nhs-enm/2011/dp-pd/prof/index.cfm?Lang=E (accessed February 11, 2015). Statistics Canada. 2013. 0072.02, Ontario (Code 6113) (table). National Household Survey (NHS) Profile. 2011 National Household Survey. Statistics Canada Catalogue no. 99-004-XWE. Ottawa. Released September 11, 2013.http://www12.statcan.gc.ca/nhs-enm/2011/dp-pd/prof/index.cfm?Lang=E (accessed February 9, 2015). Statistics Canada. (2013). 0072.02, Ontario (Code 6113) (table). National Household Survey (NHS) Profile. 2011 National Household Survey. Statistics Canada Catalogue no. 99-004-XWE. Ottawa. Retrieved February 11, 2015 from http://www12.statcan.gc.ca/nhs-enm/2011/dp-pd/prof/index.cfm?Lang=E Statistics Canada. (2013). 0073.00, Ontario (Code 1084) (table). National Household Survey (NHS) Profile. 2011 National Household Survey. Statistics Canada Catalogue no. 99-004-XWE. Ottawa. Retrieved February 11, 2015 from http://www12.statcan.gc.ca/nhs-enm/2011/dp-pd/prof/index.cfm?Lang=E Traffic Calming Policy For Existing Neighbourhoods. (2014). London: London Canada. Transportation Alternatives. (2007). Rethinking Bollards: How Bollards can Save Lives, Prevent Injuries and Relieve Traffic Congestion in New York City. Retrieved January 24, 2015 from http://www.transalt. org/sites/default/files/news/reports/rethinking_bollards.pdf StreetPrint. (2013). About StreetPrint Genuinely Stamped Asphalt. Retrieved on March 18, 2015 from http://www. streetprint.com/pages/project-gallery Toronto Association of Business Improvement Areas. (2014). What is TABIA? Retrieved February 15, 2015 from http://www.toronto-bia.com/what-is-tabia/7-overview Toronto Cycling Think & Do Tank. (2013). Mapping Cycling Behaviour in Toronto. Toronto. Retrieved February 14, 2015 from http://www.torontocycling.org/uploads/1/3/1/3/13138411/mapping_cycling_behaviour_in_to ronto_final_23_may_printer_tl.pdf Toronto Cycling Think & Do Tank. (2013). Mapping Cycling Behaviour in Toronto. Retrieved February 17, 2015 from http://www.torontocycling.org/just-released-new-report-mapping-cycling-behaviour-in-toronto.html The Toronto Pedestrian Committee. (2010). Terms of Reference. Retrieved February 15, 2015 from www.toronto. ca/legdocs/mmis/2010/pg/bgrd/backgroundfile-32690.pdf Toronto Public Health. (2012). The Walkable City: Neighbourhood Design and Preferences, Travel Choices and Health. City of Toronto. Retrieved February 10, 2015 from http://www1.toronto.ca/city_of_toronto/toron to_public_health/healthy_public_policy/hphe/files/pdf/walkable_city.pd Transportation Association of Canada. (2014). Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices for Canada. Retrieved February 16, 2015 from http://tac-atc.ca/en/5th-edition-manual-uniform-traffic-control-devic es-canada


142

Transportation Association of Canada. (1998). The Canadian Guide to Neighbourhood Traffic Calming. Re trieved February 16, 2015 from http://tac-atc.ca/en/projects/seeking-funding/traffic-calming-guide Transportation Association of Canada. (1995). Urban supplement to the Geometric design guide for Canadian roads. Ottawa: Transportation Association of Canada. Retrieved February 16, 2015 from http://ottawa.ca/ cs/groups/content/@webottawa/documents/pdf/mdaw/mdu2/~edisp/con040685.pdf Transport Canada. (2008). Traffic Calming in Urban Canadian Areas. Retrieved February 16, 2015 from http:// www.tc.gc.ca/media/documents/programs/cs35e_trafficcalming.pdf Transportation Services. (2011). Signalized Intersection traffic and Pedestrian Volume. City of Toronto Retrieved February 16, 2015 from http://www1.toronto.ca/City_Of_Toronto/Information_&_Technology/ Open_Data/Data_Sets/Assets/Files/signalizedTrafficPedestrianVolumes.xls Transportation Services. (2010). Traffic Calming Policy. City of Toronto. Retrieved February 4, 2015 from https:// www1.toronto.ca/city_of_toronto/transportation_services/traffic/files/pdf/traffic_calming_policy_summary. pdf Toronto Transit Commission. (2015) 31 Greenwood. Retrieved from http://www.ttc.ca/Routes/31/Northbound.jsp Toronto Transit Commission. (2015) 83 Jones. Retrieved from http://www.ttc.ca/Routes/83/Northbound.jsp Works Committee. (2002). Traffic Calming Policy. Report No. 4, Clause No. 1. Toronto City Council. Retrieved February 15, 2015 from http://www.toronto.ca/legdocs/2002/agendas/council/cc020416/wks4rpt/ cl001.pdf


Figure References

143

Figure 1: Author. (2015). Gerrard Street and Leslie Street Pedestrian Crosswalk [Photograph]. Figure 2: Author. (2015). Jones Avenue. [Photograph]. Figure 3: Author. (2015). Street Activity. [Graphic]. Figure 4: Author. (2015). Riverdale Avenue Traffic Calming Zone. [Photograph]. Figure 5: [Photograph of Danforth Avenue Pedestrian Activity]. Retrieved March 16, 2015 from http://www.artofthedanforth.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/05/1-WalkingJW.jpg Figure 6: Author. (2015). Local Road in the Pocket. [Photograph]. Figure 7: 506-Streetcar. [Photograph]. Retrieved March 15, 2015 from http://wvs.topleftpixel.com/photos/2010/04/ streetcar_506_carlton_biker_01.jpg Figure 8: Gerrard Street East. [Photograph]. Retrieved March 15, 2015 from http://www.boldts.net/TorGg.shtml Figure 9: Author. (2015). Slow sign on Condor Avenue. [Photograph]. Figure 10: Author. (2015). Riverdale Avenue Traffic Calming Zone. [Photograph]. Figure 11: Author. (2015). Logan Avenue. [Photograph]. Figure 12: Author. (2015). Oakvale Avenue Traffic Calming Zone. [Photograph]. Figure 13:Author. (2015). Danforth Avenue and Greenwood Avenue Intersection. [Photograph]. Figure 14: Author. (2015). Speed Control Sign on Condor Avenue. [Photograph]. Figure 15: Author. (2015). Ball and Hockey Prohibited Signs. [Photograph]. Figure 16: Author. (2015). Jones Avenue. [Photograph]. Figure 17: Author. (2015). Jones Avenue. [Photograph]. Figure 18: Author. (2015). Riverdale Avenue. [Photograph]. Figure 19: Author. (2015). Ball and Hockey Prohibited Signs. [Photograph]. Figure 20: Author. (2015). Jones Avenue. [Photograph]. Figure 21: Author. (2015), Gerrard Street Crosswalk [Photograph]. Figure 22: Author. (2015), Gerrard Street and Leslie Street Signage, [Photograph]. Figure 23: Author. (2015), Pedestrian Crosswalk Markings, [Photograph]. Figure 24: Author. (2015), Gerrard Street and Leslie Street Intersection [Photograph]. Figure 25: Author. (2015), Leslie Street and Myrtle Avenue Intersection [Photograph]. Figure 26: Author. (2015). Traffic Calming Zone Signage. [Photograph].


144 Figure 27: Author. (2015). Hastings Avenue. [Photograph]. Figure 28: Author. (2015). Bloomfield Avenue. [Photograph]. Figure 29: Author. (2015). Gerrard Street. [Photograph]. Figure 30: Author. (2015). Logan Avenue Bump-outs. [Photograph]. Figure 31: Author. (2015). Speed Statistics. [Graphic] Figure 32: Author. (2015). Slow Down Kids at Play Signs found throughout Ward 30. [Photograph]. Figure 33: Author. (2015). Confusion of User Priority on Streets. [Graphic]. Figure 34: Author. (2015). Pape Avenue School Yard Playground. [Photograph]. Figure 35: Author. (2015). Pape Avenue and Riverdale Avenue. [Photograph]. Figure 36: Author. (2015). Elements of a Great Street. [Graphic] Figure 37: Toronto Official Plan. [Image]. Retrieved January 29, 2015 from http://urbantoronto.ca/sites/default/ files/imagecache/display-default/images/articles/2012/10/6484/urbantoronto-6484-21025.jpg Figure 38: Toronto Traffic Calming Policy. [Image]. Retrieved January 29, 2015 from https://www1.toronto.ca/ city_of_toronto/transportation_services/traffic/files/pdf/traffic_calming_policy_summary.pdf Figure 39: Ontario Traffic Manual. [Image]. Retrieved January 29, 2015 from http://www.docmines.net/images/38763-01-book-1.pdf.jpg Figure 40: Author. (2015). Local Road in Study Area. [Photograph]. Figure 41: Author. (2015). Minor Arterial Road in Study Area. [Photograph]. Figure 42: Author. (2015). Major Arterial Road in Study Area. [Photograph]. Figure 43: Author. (2015). Riverdale Avenue. [Photograph]. Figure 44: Author. (2015). Boultbee Avenue. [Photograph]. Figure 45: East Danforth Avenue. [Photograph]. Retrieved March 20, 2015 from http://www.sutton.com/listings-on-toronto-east-danforth/ Figure 46: Broadview TTC Streetcar. [Photograph]. Retrieved March 16, 2015 from http://www.thestar.com/ content/dam/thestar/yourtoronto/the_fixer/2014/08/14/a_busy_ttc_streetcar_stop_like_most_places_in_toronto_ needs_a_trash_bin_to_stay_clean_the_fixer/no_trash_can.jpg.size.xxlarge.letterbox.jpg Figure 47: Author. (2015). Gerard Street and Leslie Street Pedestrian Crosswalk. [Photograph]. Figure 48: Author. (2015). Logan Avenue. [Photograph]. Figure 49: Author. (2015). Logan Avenue. [Photograph]. Figure 50: Author. (2015). Logan Avenue. [Photograph].


Figure 51: Author. (2015). Logan Avenue. [Photograph].

145

Figure 52: Author. (2015). Riverdale Avenue Speed Humps. [Photograph]. Figure 53: Author. (2015). Local Traffic Calming Zone. [Photograph]. Figure 54: Author. (2015). Logan Avenue. [Photograph]. Figure 55: Author. (2015). Condor Avenue Speed Bump. [Photograph]. Figure 56: Author. (2015). Jones Avenue and Boultbee Avenue Intersection. [Photograph]. Figure 57: Author. (2015). Logan Avenue. [Photograph]. Figure 58: [Photograph of Bell Bollards, New York City]. Retrieved February 8, 2015 from http://www.transalt.org/ sites/default/files/news/reports/rethinking_bollards.pdf Figure 59: [Photograph of Temporary Bollards, New York City]. Retrieved February 8, 2015 from http://www. transalt.org/sites/default/files/news/reports/rethinking_bollards.pdf Figure 60: [Photograph of Cement Bollards, New York City]. Retrieved February 8, 2015 from http://www.transalt. org/sites/default/files/news/reports/rethinking_bollards.pdf Figure 61: Author. (2015). Logan Avenue Bollards, Toronto. [Photograph]. Figure 62: Speed Bump. [Photograph]. Retrieved February 6, 2015 from http://armourpavement.com/services/ pavement-accessories/ Figure 63: Speed Hump. [Photograph]. Retrieved February 6, 2015 from http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/ File:Speed_hump_with_car.jpg Figure 64: Speed Table. [Photograph]. Retrieved February 6, 2015 from http://diningroomtablesetsx.blogspot. ca/2012/06/kellogg-creek-woodworkingtables-benches.html Figure 65: Speed Kidney. [Photograph]. Retrieved February 8, 2015 from https://twitter.com/curro_lucas/status/471962053016842240 Figure 66: Speed Kidney. [Photograph]. Retrieved February 6, 2015 from http://eadic.com/blog/speed-kidneyun-baden-menos-agresivo/ Figure 67: Speed Cushion. [Photograph]. Retrieved February 8, 2015 from http://rosehillhighways.com/products/ speed-cusions/two-piece/ Figure 68: Bump-out. [Photograph]. Retrieved March 15, 2015 from http://www.surrey.ca/city-services/783.aspx Figure 69: Bump-out. [Photograph]. Retrieved March 15, 2015 from http://nacto.org/usdg/street-design-elements/curb-extensions/ Figure 70: Play Street Signage. [Photograph]. Retrieved March 15, 2015 from http://www.nycitysnaps.com/Images/PlayStreet.jpg Figure 71: Play Street Activities. [Photograph]. Retrieved March 15, 2015 from http://www.cycling-embassy.dk/ wp-content/uploads/2010/12/Roars-Vej-løbende-pige.jpg Figure 72: Play Street Yoga. [Photograph]. Retrieved March 15, 2015 from http://transalt.org/sites/default/files/ news/reports/2011/PlayStreets_BestPractices.pdf


146

Figure 73: Church Street Parklet. [Photograph]. Retrieved January 29, 2015 from http://www.chatelaine.com/ wp-content/uploads/2013/09/October-2013-Church-St-Toronto-parklet.jpg Figure 74: Parklet, Chicago, Illinois. [Photograph]. Retrieved January 29, 2015 from http://nacto.org/wp-content/ themes/twentyten/images/usdg/parklets/carousel/Chicago_NN.jpg Figure 75: [Non-Naked Street Illustration]. Retrieved February 5, 2015 from https://aseasyasridingabike.wordpress.com/2013/10/17/ben-hamilton-baillie-and-motor-traffic/ Figure 76: [Naked Street Illustration]. Retrieved February 5, 2015 from https://aseasyasridingabike.wordpress. com/2013/10/17/ben-hamilton-baillie-and-motor-traffic/ Figure 77: Yield Street with Parallel Parking. [Photograph]. Retrieved January 22, 2015 from http://calmstreetsboston.blogspot.ca/2012/04/courtesy-streets_25.html Figure 78: Yield Street Signage Indicating Two-Way Traffic. [Photograph]. Retrieved January 22, 2015 from http:// nacto.org/usdg/streets/yield-street/ Figure 79: Mural Intersection. [Photograph]. Retrieved February 2, 2015 from http://h.fastcompany.net/multisite_ files/fastcompany/imagecache/slideshow_large/slideshow/2014/08/3035022-slide-s-2-orion-street-art-morganediting.jpg Figure 80: Street Stamping. [Graphic]. Retrieved March 18, 2015 from http://www.streetprint.com/pages/project-gallery Figure 81: Residential Traffic Circle. [Photograph]. Retrieved February 10, 2015 from http://www.thestar.com/content/dam/thestar/yourtoronto/the_fixer/2014/03/31/north_york_traffic_circles_went_nowhere_with_area_residents/ fixer_pic.jpg.size.xxlarge.promo.jpg Figure 82: [Photograph of Diverter]. Retrieved February 8, 2015 from http://www.sanantonio.gov/portals/0/Images/CIMS/FAQs/Traffic/TrafficCalming/tcdiagonaldiverters.jpg Figure 83: Diagonal Diverter. [Graphic]. Retrieved January 25, 2015 from http://www.sf-planning.org/ftp/files/Citywide/green_connections/GC_Final_Report-CH5_Design_Toolkit.pdf Figure 84: [Woonerf, Washington, DC.]. Retrieved February 12, 2015 from https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg. com/236x/98/e0/56/98e0563525e45ad3dee28c1b7999f242.jpg Figure 85: [Rendering Woonerf, Santa Monica]. Retrieved February 10, 2015 http://nacto.org/docs/usdg/ woonerf_concept_collarte.pdf Figure 86: Author (2015). Principles. [Graphic]. Figure 87: Author (2015), Gerrard Street and Leslie Street Crosswalk, [Photograph] Figure 88: Author (2015), Gerrard Street and Leslie Street Crosswalk, [Photograph]. Figure 89: Author (2015), Jones Avenue Crosswalk, [Photograph]. Figure 90: Author (2015) Jones Avenue Crosswalk, [Photograph]. Figure 91: [Photograph of Child Bollards]. Retrieved April 5, 2015 from http://www.lincolnshireecho.co.uk/Bollards-look-like-schoolchildren-slow-drivers/story-25972023-detail/story.html Figure 92: [Pencil Bollards]. Retrieved April 5, 2015 from https://twitter.com/broadway_hannah/status/512269565351723008


Figure 93: Author (2015), Jones Avenue Crosswalk, [Photograph].

147

Figure 94: Author (2015), Jones Avenue Crosswalk, [Photograph]. Figure 95: Author (2015), Showing Textured Pavement, [Graphic]. Figure 96: Author (2015) Crosswalk in the Study Area [Photograph]. Figure 97: Author (2015), Crosswalk in the Study Area [Photograph]. Figure 98: Author (2015), Displaying a Raised Crosswalk in the Study Area [Graphic]. Figure 99: Author (2015), Bump-outs on Logan Avenue [Photograph]. Figure 100: Author (2015), Bump-outs on Logan Avenue [Photograph]. Figure 101: Author (2015), Diagram of Bump-outs [Graphic]. Figure 102: Author (2015), Bump-outs on Logan Avenue [Photograph]. Figure 103: Author (2015) Displaying Bump-outs on a Street [Photograph]. Figure 104: Author (2015), Seymour Avenue [Photograph]. Figure 105: Author (2015), Seymour Avenue [Photograph]. Figure 106: Author (2015), Seymour Avenue Woonerf Rendering Figure 107: Yield Street Signage. [Graphic]. Retrieved April 5, 2015 from http://www.trafficsign.us/r1.html Figure 108: Yield Street Parallel Parking. [Photograph]. Retrieved January 31, 2015 from http:// calmstreetsboston.blogspot.ca/2012/04/courtesy-streets_25.html Figure 109: Play Street Activities. [Photograph]. Retrieved March 15, 2015 from http://www.cycling-embassy. dk/2010/12/14/play-streets/ Figure 110: Play Street Activities. [Photograph]. Retrieved March 15, 2015 from http://www.cycling-embassy. dk/2010/12/14/play-streets/ Figure 111: Author (2015), Play Street on Harriet Street [Rendering]. Figure 112: Residential Parklet, San Francisco. [Photograph] Retrieved April 5, 2015 from http://www.kateharrisonphotography.com/weddings/nm-san-francisco-wedding-just-married.html Figure 113: Church Street Parklet. [Photograph]. Retrieved April 5, 2015 from http://www.blogto.com/ city/2013/07/patios_have_now_replaced_parking_spots_on_church_st/ Figure 114: IMAGE PLACEHOLDER - intersection Figure 115: IMAGE PLACEHOLDER – intersection Figure 116: Mural Intersection, North 49th Street and Burke. [Photograph]. Retrieved April 5, 2015 from http:// www.mywallingford.com/2010/07/13/spotted-in-wallingford-ladybug-is-5-years-old/ Figure 117: Mural Intersection, Black Street and Northwood Terrace Plan. [Rendering]. Retrieved April 5, 2015 from https://theurbangeographer.wordpress.com/category/urban-design-notes/page/2/


148

Figure 118: Mural Intersection, Black Street and Northwood Terrace. [Photograph]. Retrieved April 5, 2015 from http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/kitchener-waterloo/kitchener-traffic-calming-mural-project-gets-ok-from-citystaff-1.2729019 Figure 119: Author (2015), Street Treatment on Logan Avenue [Photograph] Figure 120: [Photograph of Raised Intersection]. Retrieved April 5, 2015 from http://www.yargerengineering.com/ articles/traffic_calming_part-3.html Figure 121: [Raised Intersection Rendering] Retrieved April 5, 2015 from http://nacto.org/usdg/intersections/minor-intersections/raised-intersections/


Profile for Kim Behrouzian

Design for Walkability  

Ryerson University

Design for Walkability  

Ryerson University