The Green Line by Ashley Paton

The Green line: OPPORTUNITIES & CONSTRAINTS final report December 3 rd , 2015

The Green Line Linear Park: Opportunities & Constraints P rep ared For :

By:

P a ol o Bri n dl ey-P a n talo ne M i chael Dzi eki ewicz Chri s top her Barri en tos Ferr ar i N i col e Ha usman Jam es Hu nt er N adi n e Kho u r i Am a n da Kn ut so n A n dy Lam Kerby M acInnis Ai l een MU an As hl ey P at o n Jeffrey Takeu chi S u b m i t t e d D e ce m be r 3 r d , 2015 P L G 7 2 0 A d v anced Planning Studio II R y e r s o n U n i versity F a c u lt y A d vi s o r : To m O s TL e r *U n le s s s t a te d o the r wi s e , al l pho to s are the p roperty of Greenlinx 1

Table of contents 1.0 Executive Summary........................................................................................................................ 4 2.0 Introduction & Purpose................................................................................................................. 6 2.1 Client - Park People........................................................................................................... 6 3.0 Locational Context & Phases........................................................................................................ 7 3.1 Surrounding Area & History............................................................................................ 8 3.2 Existing Parks & Amenities.............................................................................................. 8 3.3 Local Parkland Provision & Area Population .............................................................. 9 3.4 Regeneration Area............................................................................................................ 10 3.5 Development Projects....................................................................................................... 11 4.0 Constraints & Challenges.............................................................................................................. 12 4.1 Contaminated Lands......................................................................................................... 12 4.2 Disconnection.................................................................................................................... 14 4.3 Power Lines & Electromagnetic Fields........................................................................... 16 4.4 Pedestrian & Cyclist Collisions........................................................................................ 17 4.5 Ward Boundaries............................................................................................................... 17 5.0 Stakeholders.................................................................................................................................... 18 5.1 Schools & Community Centres....................................................................................... 18 6.0 Principle Themes........................................................................................................................... 19 6.1 Connectivity....................................................................................................................... 19 6.2 Safety ................................................................................................................................. 20 6.3 Accessibility........................................................................................................................ 20 6.4 Identity................................................................................................................................ 20 6.5 Renewal.............................................................................................................................. 21 6.6 Community Partnerships................................................................................................. 22 7.0 Opportunities................................................................................................................................. 23 Phase I...................................................................................................................................... 24 Phase II..................................................................................................................................... 34 Phase III................................................................................................................................... 38 Throughout............................................................................................................................... 46 8.0 Beyond the Green Line................................................................................................................. 51 9.0 Funding Options............................................................................................................................. 52 10.0 Sources.......................................................................................................................................... 53

Table of figures Figure 1: General map of the Green Line......................................................................................... 7 Figure 2: Fire Insurance Plan 1913.................................................................................................... 8 Figure 3: Local parkland provision..................................................................................................... 9 Figure 4: Household population 2011 by census tract..................................................................... 10 Figure 5: 840 Dupont Street................................................................................................................. 12 Figure 6: Historical orthophotography 1940.................................................................................... 15 Figure 7: Parking lot in phase I.......................................................................................................... 15 Figure 8: Fence at Shaw Street............................................................................................................. 15 Figure 9: Primrose Avenue Parkette................................................................................................... 16 Figure 10: Finch hydro corridor multi-use path at Grantbrook Street......................................... 24 Figure 11: Beaver Lightbourn Parkette.............................................................................................. 26 Figure 12: Skatepark idea.................................................................................................................... 27 Figure 13: Potential road crossing...................................................................................................... 28 Figure 14: Transformer station at Dufferin Street............................................................................ 30 Figure 15: Bristol Avenue Parkette...................................................................................................... 31 Figure 16: Potential hops field trail..................................................................................................... 33 Figure 17: Intersection bump-out....................................................................................................... 34 Figure 18: Toronto Community Housing parking lot..................................................................... 36 Figure 19: Pedestrian underpass......................................................................................................... 38 Figure 20: Benches adjacent Tarragon Theatre................................................................................. 39 Figure 21: Willcocks Street at University of Toronto....................................................................... 41 Figure 22: Gould Street at Ryerson University.................................................................................. 41 Figure 23: Example of a short hedge.................................................................................................. 42 Figure 24: Example of a green fence.................................................................................................. 43 Figure 25: Living wall in Surrey, BC.................................................................................................. 43 Figure 26: Dupont Station.................................................................................................................... 44 Figure 27: Winning entry for the Green Line Ideas Competition................................................. 46 Figure 28: Underpass lighting in Birmingham, Alabama............................................................... 47 Figure 29: Chicagoâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s 606 trail............................................................................................................... 48 Figure 30: Legal wall in Berlin, Germany.......................................................................................... 49 Figure 31: Future eastern connection................................................................................................. 51 Figure 32: Future western connection................................................................................................ 51

1.0 Executive summary Park People, a Toronto-based non-profit charitable organization and park advocacy group, has retained Greenlinx, a group of twelve urban and regional planning students from Ryerson University, to develop a comprehensive list of opportunities and constraints associated with the implementation of the Green Line. This report is the final product, complete with the deliverables outlined by Park People in the Terms of Reference attached as Appendix N. The Green Line is a proposed five-kilometre linear park and multi-use trail that would run between Earlscourt Park and Spadina Road, and immediately north of the Dupont rail corridor. It is a transformative vision to link underutilized hydro corridor lands with nine existing local parks, in order to form a continuous and cohesive linear open space. The areas through which the Green Line would run have been identified as parkdeficient by the City of Toronto, providing strong rationale for the development of the Green Line. The Green Line seeks to accomplish several goals that are consistent with Torontoâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Official Plan and other policy documents, including: the connection and expansion of existing parkland; the encouragement and facilitation of physical activity and active transportation; the renewal, revitalization, and utilization of secondary uses in hydro corridors; and the establishment and promotion of stewardship initiatives, including community gardens. The hydro corridor lands are owned by Infrastructure Ontario, operated by Hydro One, and licensed by the City for public open space. New licensing agreements are being negotiated to develop additional public open space. The Green Line is surrounded by a variety of built form and land uses, including low and mid-rise residential, lowrise commercial and mixed-use. The character of Dupont Street, immediately south of the Green Line, is dynamic, with proposed developments and policy amendments currently under appeal to the Ontario Municipal Board.

Ongoing consultation with the community, as well as partnership with appropriate stakeholders, are important for building support for the Green Line and ensuring the projectâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s success. Strategic phasing of opportunities identified in this report will critical for building awareness and momentum, with the most efficient use of limited financial resources being invested throughout the implementation process. Greenlinx has assigned priority levels and approximate costs associated with each of the opportunities identified. In addition to financial limitations, Greenlinx has identified other constraints associated with the Green Line, such as environmental contamination. We offer possible solutions for dealing with such constraints. Key opportunities that could be implemented quickly and with minimal cost include a pedestrian pilot project on Bridgman Avenue, between Kendal Avenue and Dartnell Avenue. This represents an opportunity to improve the safety and overall quality of experience for George Brown students on their Casa Loma campus. Another opportunity would be to install curb cuts or road bumps in order to allow cyclists to travel through the area without having to dismount. These types of low-cost opportunities are expected to act as a catalyst for public awareness and will garner the political support necessary to realize opportunities that require larger investment, but are absolutely necessary for the successful implementation of the Green Line.

2.0 introduction & purpose Park People has retained Greenlinx â&#x20AC;&#x201C; a team of twelve fourth-year urban and regional planning students from Ryerson University â&#x20AC;&#x201C; to develop a comprehensive list of opportunities and constraints associated with the development of the Green Line - a proposed continuous linear park along the Dupont hydro corridor. These opportunities and constraints have been identified through analyses of the existing infrastructure of the Green Line. Greenlinx has created six principal themes, or objectives: connectivity, safety, accessibility, identity, renewal, and community partnerships. These will be addressed in this report and applied to each individual opportunity. Each opportunity in this report is labeled with one or more of these themes and is divided into either a geographic phase delineated by Park People or assigned to the Green Line as a whole.

2.1 Client: park people Park People is a non-profit, charitable organization that works in partnership with communities, city staff, and private companies. They facilitate citizen engagement, providing resources and information on best practices to bring attention to issues affecting parks. They also highlight the benefits of public parks to the social, health, environmental, and economic well-being of the people of Toronto (Park People, 2015). As part of their mandate, Park People, in partnership with Friends of the Green Line and Workshop Architecture, is currently promoting the Green Line. The Green Line is a vision to transform the Dupont hydro corridor, which runs five kilometers from Earlscourt Park to Spadina Road, into a linear park and multi-use trail. It would connect various communities including Davenport Village and the Annex. The areas surrounding the Green Line have been identified as being under-served in terms of parkland area per capita. 6

3.0 locational context & phases Park People has divided the Green Line into three geographic phases, which Greenlinx has maintained for the duration of the project. The first phase begins near the intersection of Davenport Road and Lansdowne Avenue and ends at Dovercourt Road. Moving eastward, the second phase commences at Dovercourt Road and extends to Christie Street. The third and final phase begins at Christie Street and continues towards Davenport Road and Macpherson Avenue. Because there already exist parks within the first phase of the Green Line, opportunities that have been identified are generally simpler and less costly there. In phases two and three the elements and opportunities become more complicated and more costly.

Source: City of Toronto

Figure 1: General Map of the Green Line

3.1 Surrounding Area & History Notable locations around the Green Line include a George Brown College campus, Tarragon Theatre, Casa Loma, the Toronto Transit Commissionâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s (TTC) Hillcrest Yard, and Dupont Subway Station. Greenlinx has researched the resources of City of Torontoâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s archives, including fire insurance plans dating as far back as 1880 and aerial photography dating as far back as 1947. Maps and photos that were found showed that the Figure 2: Fire Insurance Plan 1913 hydro corridor was entirely unused until at least 1913, when it was first identified as a hydro corridor on a fire insurance plan as seen above in figure 2.

3.2 Existing Parks and Amenities Nine city parks exist along the hydro corridor, each with various amenities such as splash pads, community gardens, cement pads, and basketball courts. However, many of these parks are in poor condition and are disconnected due to barriers presented by parking lots, fences, and grade changes. The land along the hydro corridor is owned by the Province of Ontario and operated by Hydro One. Certain parcels are licensed out for secondary use to other parties, including the City of Toronto, for the purposes of creating more parks and open spaces. Existing parks, from west to east, include: Primrose Avenue Parkette, Beaver Lightbourn Parkette, Chandos Park North, Chandos Park South, Brandon Avenue 8

Parkette, Bristol Avenue Parkette, Geary Avenue Parkette, Garrison Creek Park, and Frankel Lambert Park. Appendix C, Existing Amenities, outlines the existing infrastructure in these parks. These parks also provide access to green space, recreation, and community gardens for both residents and visitors. The development of the Green Line will improve connectivity and accessibility to these existing amenities.

3.3 Local Parkland Provision & Area Population There are several policies and recommendations in both the City of Torontoâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Official Plan and 2013-2017 Parks Plan that the Green Line supports, but one in particular calls for updating the parkland acquisition strategy in order to prioritize parkland acquisition in under-served areas. Figure 3 demonstrates that the areas in the vicinity of the Green Line have a shortage of parkland and therefore demonstrates that these neighbourhoods are under-served. There is also a current wait list of over 80 community gardens throughout the city, which again demonstrates the need for flexible green space.

Source: Parks Plan 2013-2017 Figure 3: Local parkland provision 9

Looking at 2011 census data, figure 4 below shows the ranges of total population in the census tracts either touching or adjacent to the Green Line. It shows that more than 65,000 people live within these boundaries which represent an approximate walking distance of between 10 and 15 minutes from any point along the Green Line. Figure 4: Household population 2011 by census tract

Source: Geospatial Portal, 2015

3.4 Regeneration Area The City has issued the Dupont Street Regeneration Area Study in 2014, which involved official plan and zoning by-law amendments, as well as the development of urban design guidelines. This regeneration area is located between Ossington and Kendall Avenues, north of Dupont Street and south of the railway. The official plan and zoning by-law amendments were site specific and identified additional land use 10

permissions, opportunities for increased density, defined appropriate built form and streetscape details, and recommended appropriate setbacks and mitigation measures from the rail corridor. Although the official plan and zoning by-law amendments are under appeal to the Ontario Municipal Board, the study recommends the implementation of specific rail safety mitigation measures that would drastically restrict land use permissions within 30 metres of the rail corridor and directly impact the development of the Green Line. The study supports an improved pedestrian realm, including improvements to the underpasses located between Ossington and Kendall Avenues, as well as the expansion of parkland, specifically north of the rail corridor. The development of new playgrounds and off-leash areas for dogs are also supported. According to the report, one issue is that any part of a property that is used for rail safety and noise and/or vibration mitigation measures will not be accepted by the City as parkland. This would result in the 30 metre buffer along the rail corridor being unused.

3.5 Development Projects There are several open development applications in the area surrounding the Green Line, with many of them introducing mixed-use developments. Several of these projects are concentrated along Dupont Street. Notable applications include 840 Dupont Street, where a Sobeys is currently located. The site is proposed to be a mixed-use development, including office, retail, and residential uses as seen in figure 5. Another development, 740 Dupont Street, includes a proposed two-storey retail podium and an 11-storey mid-rise residential tower. Official plan and zoning by-law amendments are currently under review for both projects. Although some concerns have been raised about these developments, they have the potential to increase the areaâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s population and density and, therefore, should be taken into account when determining the future users of the Green Line.

Green Line

Flack, 2013 Figure 5: 840 Dupont Street

4.0 Constraints & challenges 4.1 contaminated lands Due to the former and continuing use of the lands for hydroelectric facilities, parking areas, and other uses, such as the maintenance of TTCâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s fleet, there exists a high probability of environmental contamination throughout the Green Line. The Provincial Policy Statement (2014) (PPS) defines brownfield sites as â&#x20AC;&#x153;undeveloped or previously developed properties that may be contaminated (and) are usually, but not exclusively, former industrial or commercial properties that may underutilized, derelict or vacantâ&#x20AC;? (p. 39). The PPS includes policies supporting the redevelopment of brownfields, including for parks and recreation uses like the Green Line. 12

Toronto’s Official Plan (2006, as amended) reflects the policies of the PPS and also includes the set of actions outlined in the City’s Environmental Plan, including policies for the remediation of contaminated soils, groundwater and sediments. The Official Plan provides that “to support strong communities, a competitive economy and a high quality of life, public and private city-building activities and changes to the built environment, including public works, will be environmentally friendly, based on (among other matters) protecting and improving the health of the natural ecosystem, by cleaning-up contaminated soils, sediment, groundwater, rivers and buildings” and by “reducing the risks to life, health, safety, property, and ecosystem health that are associated with flooding, unstable slopes and erosion and contaminated lands” (p.334, 3-34). Known and suspected contaminated parcels are indicated on the attached “Known and Suspected Contaminated Parcels” map. These parcels were identified by Park People as being contaminated and include Beaver Lightbourn Parkette, TTC’s yard, and all lands east of Spadina Road. Other lands are flagged by Greenlinx as having the potential for contamination. These include parking areas where salt and fossil fuels are potential contaminates, and primarily vacant parcels currently used strictly for hydroelectric transmission. These are indicated on the attached “Parcels at Risk of Contamination” map. Expanding on the historical maps and documents mentioned briefly above, beyond 1913, fire insurance plans consistently identify the lands within the Green Line as a hydro corridor. With the exception of the TTC’s yard, various parking areas, and some unknown use at the southeastern quadrant of Beaver Lightbourn Park, as seen in figure 6, there is no archival evidence to suggest that there were any significant industrial or commercial uses present along the hydro corridor, such as gas stations or manufacturing facilities.

Bea ver Ligh tbo urn Par ket te Cha ndo s Par k Nor th Source: City of Toronto Archives Figure 6: Historical orthophotography 1940

4.2 Disconnection Disconnections in the first phase appear as a result of the lack of curb cuts along local residential street crossings and small parks. Disconnections in the second phase appear as a result of the lack of formal pedestrian and cyclist crossings along major arterial roads. Other disconnections that are noted are fences or edges that act as barriers and limit continuous access. The third phase consists of multiple parking lots that are heavily used. Many of the pathways that make up the Green Line are too narrow or are inadequately surfaced. The existing underpasses located north of Dupont Street also create a visible barrier for pedestrians, as the existing sidewalks do not accommodate all modes of 14

transportation. The underpasses also pose a safety concern for cyclists, as there is not enough adequate lighting. Additional, vehicular traffic can be intimidating for even the most confident cyclists.

Figure 7: Parking lot in phase I

Figure 8: Fence at Shaw Street

4.3 Power Lines and Electromagnetic Fields The transmission of electricity creates electromagnetic fields (EMF). The potential health impacts of EMF came into public attention in the 1970s when a study found a correlation between childhood leukemia and living close to transmission lines. Since then, several studies have reproduced similar results, leading the City of Toronto to adopt a policy of “prudent avoidance” in the 1990’s. Despite the established correlation between EMF exposure and childhood leukemia, the statistics consistently show that the probability of developing such a disease is still low, even with regular exposure to normal EMF levels found beneath a hydro corridor. EMF exposure in the Green Line can be limited with proper management and planning; play structures and areas where it is expected that people will spend longer amounts of time can be strategically placed away from areas where EMF levels are highest, such as next to the main electrical circuits. The opportunity for different types of physical activity that is facilitated and provided by the Green Line has important health benefits as well. The correlation between physical activity and good physical and mental health is long established and well understood. Therefore, while the amenity space beneath hydro corridors poses potential health risks, it also provides the means for health benefits. The relatively low risk of adverse health impacts combined, with the potential health benefits of amenity space leads to the conclusion that the benefits appear to outweigh the potential risks. This conclusion is echoed in the 2008 study on the health effects of EMF exposure in the City of Toronto, commissioned by Toronto Public Health (McKeown, 2008).

Figure 9: Primrose Avenue Parkette 16

4.4 Pedestrian and Cyclist Collisions Collisions are frequent along and around the Green Line where the existing trails intersect with several major and minor arterial roads, as the volume and speed of vehicles can be dangerous for cyclists and pedestrians. As shown in Appendix G, collisions have occurred mainly along Dupont and Bathurst Streets. Between 1986 and 2013, the streets surrounding the Green Line have seen several pedestrian and cyclist collisions with a few fatalities. Improvements are necessary here in order to create a safe environment and to encourage active forms of transportation, such as walking and cycling. There is a lack of adequate road markings, crosswalks, and signals at points such as at Shaw Street.

4.5 Ward Boundaries The Green Line passes through three wards: Davenport (17), St. Paul’s (21), St. Paul’s (22). An additional three wards are located south of the rail corrdior: Davenport (18), Trinity-Spadina (19), Trinity-Spadina (20). Without the full and unified support of all wards councillors, the Green Line is at risk of piecemeal development and may not rise to its potential as a cohesive, connected linear park and multi-use trail. The City is currently undergoing a ward boundary review and the project’s consultants are expected to deliver their final report in March 2016 with submission to Executive Committee and City Council in May 2016. The boundary review could result in fewer wards surrounding the Green Line, thereby decreasing the potential for political disagreement. These options can be viewed online at http://www.drawthelines.ca/theoptions/.

5.0 Stakeholders Ongoing communication with the community and various stakeholders about building and operating the linear park is an essential factor for the successful realization of the project. There are several stakeholders with differing views, but some of the major stakeholders include: the Province of Ontario; Hydro One; property owners; residents; Toronto Community Housing; George Brown College; Tarragon Theatre; the Davenport Neighbourhood Association; the Davenport Village Community Association; Friends of Earlscourt Park; the Regal Heights Residents’ Association; the Annex Residents’ Association; Unit Park; and the corresponding City Councillors. Ensuring that the community’s needs and desires are respected is a necessary and integral part of planning, building, and maintaining the Green Line. There are opportunities to engage stakeholders using a variety of methods and technologies, including the use of an accessible and interactive online platform such as Metroquest. Open houses, design charettes, and youth engagement are other appropriate public consultation platforms.

5.1 Schools and Community Centres There are a number of existing schools and community centres located in close proximity to the Green Line, as shown in Appendix I. An existing partnership with St. Bruni School provides students with the opportunity to maintain planter boxes in Garrison Creek Park. There are opportunities to involve more students from other schools in the area. Partnerships such as these builds a sense of identity and promotes stewardship, in line with the strategic goals and initiatives of the City of Toronto’s Parks Plan (2013).

6.0 principle themes Greenlinx has developed six themes to highlight strategic objectives for the development of the Green Line. These themes are be addressed through the use of specific interventions or opportunities, each of which fulfills multiple objectives. Herein, the terms theme and objective are used interchangeably. The corresponding policies and recommendations for each theme are outlines in greater detail in Appendix M.

6.1 connectivity The first key objective developed by Greenlinx is connectivity. Obvious gaps along the Green Line impede a user’s seamless travel from one end of the open space system to the other. Policies and recommendations in the City of Toronto’s Official Plan (2010) and the Parks Plan (2013) stress the importance of expanding and connecting existing parks or acquiring lands to create linkages. With the small inventory of parks within the city and high land values, acquiring new lands is typically unfeasible. Certain parcels of land are currently unlicensed or in the process of being licensed as open space. Priority should be given to acquire these lots through licensing agreements with Hydro One and the Province, which would improve connections between existing parks. The Green Line, as a connected linear park, would be a valuable addition to the City of Toronto’s Green Space System. The Green Line also has the potential to connect to the City’s extensive trail system. This is discussed further in the Opportunities section of this report.

6.2 Safety The theme of safety encompasses the creation of a welcoming and comfortable environment throughout the Green Line. Conflicts between Green Line users and motor vehicles are frequent. There also exists the inherent danger associated with the adjacent Canadian Pacific rail corridor. Strategic improvements, including adequate lighting, fencing, and more formalized intersection crossings will create an environment where pedestrians and cyclists feel secure - regardless of the time of day or where they are along the Green Line.

6.3 Accessibility The theme of accessibility aims to create a user-friendly environment by improving access to and along the Green Line. Users of all ages and abilities must be accommodated. There are a number of existing barriers that inhibit full access and utility of the park for both cyclists and people with mobility challenges. The Green Line should be fully accessible â&#x20AC;&#x201C; have multiple access point, and paths of sufficient widths and radii so as to not require cyclists to dismount along its length.

6.4 Identity The theme of identity aims to support the development of the Green Lineâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s character, while recognizing and respecting the individual identities of existing neighbourhoods. These neighbourhoods help to define the eclectic character of the Green Line. Through its plans and policy documents, the City of Toronto recognizes the importance of identity and placemaking. Way-finding, for example, presents an opportunity to both 20

support the overall identity of the Green Line and celebrate the unique identity of each neighbourhood. More cities around the world are looking for ways to unlock potential value in underutilized space through adaptive reuse, and cities that invest in successful projects distinguish themselves as innovative leaders. The Green Line is an opportunity to build the Cityâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s own identity, and strengthen its reputation in environmental leadership and quality of life.

6.5 renewal Renewal is focused on aspects of environmental and ecological restoration, as well as recreational infrastructure improvements throughout the Green Line. This theme is supported by opportunities that enhance existing assets and introduce environmentally friendly and aesthetically pleasing projects. The Green Line is situated in a heavily urbanized area of Toronto, which puts pressures on specific parcels of land and has caused environmental degradation. The City of Torontoâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Parks Plan (2013) stresses the importance of green space within the city and provides direction for the improvement and management of natural areas that have been negatively affected by urban activities. As part of the public consultation process for the Parks Plan, residents and other stakeholders expressed a desire for environmental education, planting events, more outdoor environmental planning, and a need for increased maintenance of park infrastructure.

6.6 Community partnerships This theme aims to recognize and support existing community partnerships and to establish new ones. Improved connectivity and a strengthened identity are seen as potential catalysts for new community partnerships in the area, as well as stewardship of the Green Line. The Cityâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Parks, Forestry and Recreation Department facilitates partnership, donation, and revenue opportunities.

7.0 Opportunities The opportunities provided in this report have been divided into the three geographic phases delineated by Park People. Other opportunities are seen as being relevant throughout the Green Line. Each opportunity is labeled with one or more circular symbols - each representing a specific theme or objective being supported. Priorities are established based on the cost of a project and the feasibility of installation. Opportunities assigned a priority level 1 are seen as the most tangible or affordable, while opportunities assigned a priority level 3 are more costly and therefore longerterm goals. Lastly, dollar signs signify the estimated costs associated with each opportunity. One dollar sign represents the least costly opportunities, and five dollar signs represents the most costly. A more detailed feasibility analysis is attached as Appendix L.

$ $$ $$$ $$$$ $$$$$

$0 - $49,999 $50,000 - $99,999 $100,000 - $499,999 $500,000 - $999,999 $1,000,000+

High Priority

Medium Priority

Low Priority 23

Phase I 1. Intersection Improvements at Davenport and Primrose

Existing A pedestrian crosswalk exists along the south side of Davenport Road, at the intersection of Primrose Avenue. Primrose Avenue Parkette, located in the southwest quadrant of this intersection, includes a splash pad and playground, and is completely fenced along its perimeter. Signage is lacking. Opportunity

There is an opportunity to install dedicated bicycle signals and road markings along Davenport Road in order to guide cyclists travelling along the Green Line. Signals and reflective road markings would make the intersection at Primrose Avenue more visible at night. A crosswalk would not only address pedestrian safety, but also increase accessibility to Primrose Avenue Parkette. Signage and wayfinding would complement these improvements. The Finch Hydro Corridor multi-use trail is a good example of how road markings, dedicated signals, and signage can eliminate confusion for cyclists and drivers at points where Figure 10: Finch hydro corridor multi-use path at the trail intersects a road. Grantbrook St

2. Extension of Beaver Lightbourn Parkette

$$$

Existing An undeveloped parcel of land exists between Beaver Avenue and Primrose Avenue, providing an obvious disconnection between Beaver Lightbourn Parkette and Primrose Avenue Parkette, although there is no physical path at this time. The space consists of open lawn, a concrete parking area used by landowners to the north, and a large piece of hydro infrastructure. Opportunity At minimum, a hard-surfaced pathway and curb cuts are needed here to connect the parcels of land between Beaver Lightbourn Parkette, the vacant parcel, and Primrose Avenue Parkette. There is sufficient room in the vacant parcel alone to incorporate a multi-use path, signage, lighting, seating, trees and other plantings, contributing to the overall identity of the Green Line. Fencing should be considered to screen the residential uses to the south and parking area to the north.

3. Beaver Lightbourn Parkette

Existing Beaver Lightbourn Parkette is an underutilized open space bisected by one pedestrian path. A portion of the parkette is cordoned off with knee-high fencing to discourage users from dwelling in areas that are known to be contaminated.

Figure 11: Beaver Lightbourn Parkette

Opportunity There are opportunities to increase connectivity and accessibility here by replacing the existing path with a wider, hard-surfaced one and by constructing a curb-cut at Lightbourn Avenue to allow better access between this parkette and Chandos Park to the east. These improvements, in addition to signage, will increase connectivity throughout the Green Line and encourage more east-west movements between separate parcels. New fencing along the southerly lot line would improve aesthetics. The space would also benefit from amenities like a water fountain, seating, and additional fixed waste collection areas. While there are many opportunities to improve the usability of the site, this 26

is constrained by the issue of contamination. Until the necessary environmental studies are completed, it is difficult to envision how the space can be redeveloped for better use in the future. Options may include removing contaminated soil for total redevelopment of the area as a green Source: www.faithlafayette.org space; capping contaminates to allow Figure 12: Skatepark idea for development of a hard surface recreation space; or perhaps utilizing phytoremediation as a longer-term remediation option. This involves planting and harvesting certain plant species known to draw contaminates up through the soil through the growth cycle. It would also improve aesthetics, support pollinator populations, and foster ecological and environmental renewal. Capping the contamination may be feasible, however this would signify a loss of green space. Notwithstanding, there are opportunities for hard-surfaced uses, such as a skatepark or other facilities such as basketball, tennis, or ball hockey courts. Existing skateparks such as those that exist at the southeast corner of Dundas and Bathurst Streets, and the northwest corner of Woodbine Avenue and Lakeshore Road, are frequently used by skateboarders and rollerbladers throughout the spring, summer and fall months. They are dual-purpose - used as skating rinks during the winter months. Beaver Lightbourn Parkette is located a sufficient distance from the two above examples to serve a different area of the city.

4. Curb Cuts or Bump-Outs

Existing Pathways between existing parks on Primrose Avenue, Lightbourn Avenue, Chandos Avenue, and Bartlett Avenue are disconnected by sharp sidewalk edges. These prevent Green Line users from enjoying a continuous path of travel. Opportunity

Figure 13: Potential road crossing

There are opportunities to improve the connectivity and accessibility of these locations by adding signage in addition to road bumps, curb cuts, or bump-outs. These are relatively simple and inexpensive solutions, but would have a significant impact. Not only do they increase connectivity and accessibility, but also safety; signaling to vehicles to reduce speeds.

5. Chandos Park Avenue North and South

Existing These two existing parks are divided by Chandos Avenue. Chandos Park South is an open space with trees and a fine-gravel path, physically connected with Brandon Avenue Parkette. Brandon Avenue Parkette has benches and stones for seating, but Chandos Park South, which is much larger, does not. Chandos Park North is fitted with benches, a ball hockey pad, a drinking fountain, and gravel path. The pathways of the two parks are currently disconnected by full barrier curbing along Chandos Avenue. Opportunity Pathways in both parks should be widened and paved, with appropriate markings for lanes and wayfinding. Curb cuts or bump-outs should be employed on Chandos Avenue. Chandos Park South would benefit from picnic tables or benches, as there are currently no seating options. The installation of a water fountain in either Chandos Park South or Brandon Avenue Parkette is also recommended.

6. Transformer Station

Existing

Figure 14: Transformer station at Dufferin Street

A large transformer station occupies the parcel of land between Dufferin Street and Bristol Avenue Parkette. There are traffic lights at this point on Dufferin Street, bringing path users from Brandon Avenue Parkette, across Dufferin Street. The transformers are cordoned off with two separate perimeters of fencing that create a de facto narrow path.

Opportunity Municipal and Provincial agencies should negotiate with Hydro One for the removal or relocation of existing fencing. This would permit the installation of a wider, permanent path that would ideally be hard-surfaced and lined with landscaping. The fencing around the transformers present an opportunity for public art. Wooden or plexiglass boards could be affixed to the public side of the fencing, providing a canvas surface for murals or other art forms.

7. Bristol Avenue Parkette

Existing Currently, the east and west green spaces that make up Bristol Avenue Parkette are fenced along their perimeters, restricting the desired continuous path of travel along the Green Line. The existing playground west of Bristol Avenue is sparsely equipped.

Figure 15: Bristol Avenue Parkette

Opportunity The identity of Bristol Avenue Parkette would be strengthened through creative art initiatives, such as the integration of art canvases into existing hydro infrastructure. Increased connectivity and accessibility would be achieved by removing fencing along Bristol Avenue, thus creating a perceived expansion of public open space. Alternatively, fencing could be greened through the addition of climbing plant species, such as ivy. The installation of additional playground equipment is suggested.

8. Bartlett Parkette

Existing The location of Bartlette Parkette signals the point at which the Green Line begins to veer away from the Canadian Pacific rail corridor. Two existing paved pathways crisscross the space: one running from Geary Avenue to Bartlett Avenue, and the other from Geary Avenue to Salem Avenue. The parkette includes an underutilized concrete pad intended for recreation, a water fountain, and several shade trees. Opportunity Opportunities are numerous in this area. Widened pathways would achieve improved connectivity and accommodate a wider variety of users, including cyclists. Road crossings and curb cuts at Geary Avenue and Bartlett Avenue would provide physical connections between separate parcels of land and increase safety. Dedicated signals, road markings, and wayfinding would help to create a sense of place here.

9. Partnership with Bellwoods Brewery

Existing An underutilized swath of land exists on the south side of Geary Avenue, commencing at Salem Avenue North and extending eastward beyond Dovercourt Road to Delaware Avenue. This area is comprised of open lawn, hydro infrastructure, and a fenced parking area. It is understood that the City is currently in negotiations to license parts of this area for public use. Opportunity Bellwoods Brewery has shown interest in partnering with the Green Line to use these lands to grow hops for their business. The local brewery is planning to expand their production facility to the northeast corner of Dupont Street and Dovercourt Road. A hops field would be an appropriate use of this area; pedestrian and vehicular traffic are low and existing land uses are compatible. Existing trees and sidewalks within the Geary Avenue boulevard should be retained to maintain the Source: Alex Gaio flow and connectivity of the Green Line. Figure 16: Potential hops field trail

Phase II 10. Bump-outs on Geary Ave at Delaware Ave N and Somerset Ave

Existing The stretch of the Green Line between Deleware Avenue North and Ossington Avenue is well developed as a park and playground and is observed to be well used. Opportunity There is opportunity to better connect the residential neighbourhood to the north, providing residents with safe and easy access across Geary Avenue. Bump-outs with crosswalks are suggested at the intersections of Geary and Somerset Avenues, and Geary Avenue and Delaware Avenue North. These physical improvements to the streetscape would signal to motorists that the area is Madison, 2015 pedestrian-oriented, prompting them to Figure 17: Intersection bump-out slow down.

11. Geary Avenue Parkette

$$$

Existing Geary Avenue Parkette contains a playground with a sand base, a derelict volleyball court, and a small seating area. The trail running through the parkette ends abruptly at Ossington Avenue, with no crosswalk or other such indication for vehicles that there are pedestrians crossing. The sidewalk along Geary Avenue has spatial constraints due to electrical poles obstructing the sidewalk. Building facades along Geary Avenue are evidence of a former main street. Opportunity There are opportunities to improve connectivity, accessibility, and safety here through the installation of a pedestrian and cyclist crossing from Garrison Creek Park to Geary Avenue Parkette. Providing flexible and programmable public open space could include a new public square south of Geary Avenue and west of Ossington Avenue. This public square could include a small pond or fountain that doubles as a skating rink, strengthening the identity of both the Green Line and the surrounding neighbourhood. Seasonal food trucks and local vendors could also use Geary Avenue as temporary retail space. Creating wider sidewalks on the south side of Geary Avenue would improve safety and avoid existing electrical poles.

12. Toronto Community Housing Parking Lot at Shaw Street

Existing

Figure 18: Toronto Community Housing parking lot

This parking lot is located between Frankel Lambert Park and Garrison Creek Park. The lot is fenced along Shaw Street, presenting a barrier for pedestrians traveling to or from the parks on either side. There is a makeshift path, or â&#x20AC;&#x153;desire lineâ&#x20AC;?, used by pedestrians. This demonstrates the need for an improved connection.

Opportunity Establishing a multi-use trail that runs along the parking lot from Frankel Lambert Park to Shaw Street would improve connectivity and provide a safe route for all users. This would require the removal of fencing and the installation of an adequate pedestrian and cyclist crossing at Shaw Street.

13. Partnership with Christie Gardens Apartments and Care

Existing Frankel Lambert Park is a well-developed public space. It includes a community garden, pollinator garden, playground structure, and water fountain. Artwork in the form of murals are found in the area - along both the cement wall adjacent the rail corridor as well as the Christie Street underpass. Opportunity There is an opportunity to establish a new partnership with Christie Gardens Apartments and Care, which is adjacent to the park. By partnering with the Green Line to expand the existing Frankel Lambert community garden or to create a new garden, residents of Christie Gardens will be afforded a sense of ownership while tending tend to their own gardens. There is also an opportunity for Christie Gardens to coordinate with the local schools in order to encourage intergenerational stewardship and relationships.

Phase III 14. TTC Hillcrest Yard

$$$

Existing The Toronto Transit Commissionâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Hillcrest Yard presents a barrier along that portion of the Green Line located between Christie and Bathurst Streets. The area is gated and often locked to prevent access by the public. The TTC facility requires a connection to the railway tracks in order to receive deliveries, including the new streetcars being built by Bombardier. However, it has been observed that this rail connection is infrequently used. Opportunity Option 1: To create a pedestrian underpass located where the rail tracks split at the TTC facility. This will provide a seamless route for Green Line users and prevent long delays for pedestrians and cyclists waiting for train crossings. This underpass would include adequate lighting to ensure a secure environment for Green Line users. Option 2: To create an at-grade path that connects Figure 19: Pedestrian underpass Christie Street to Bathurst Street, commencing at the existing parking lot east of Christie Street and continuing eastward along the rail corridor. At the rail crossing, fencing, gates, signals and lights would be employed to maintain safety for users of the Green Line. Hembrow, 2012

15. Tarragon Theatre Parking Lot

Existing

Figure 20: Benches across the street from Tarragon Theatre

Tarragon Theatre is located at the northwest corner of Bridgman Avenue and Howland Avenue. The theatreâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s parking lot is located off-site, on the south side of Bridgman Avenue, and is used by both theatre patrons and George Brown College students. The northern limits of the parking lot is lined with benches, which are built into low brick walls adjacent Bridgman Avenue.

Opportunity There is opportunity to improve the identity of the area by extending the line of brick walls and seating to both the east and west. These low walls could be enlarged, creating surfaces for decoration by local artists. Another opportunity would involve coordination with Tarragon Theater for use of their parking lot for community events when there is no scheduled production. A challenge for the theatre is the lack of public space where patrons can gather before and after a production and it isnâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t feasible for the theatre to sacrifice valuable parking space. A possible solution may be for theatre goers to use the adjacent George Brown College parking areas; peak theater times likely do not align with peak class times. This would require cooperation from Unit Park.

16. Pedestrianization of Bridgman Avenue

Existing Bridgman Avenue is a collector road that is heavily used by George Brown College students, area residents, Julia West Home patrons and employees, as well as trucks making deliveries to the George Brown campus. Opportunity The Green Line runs directly south of George Brown College campus, which presents great mutual opportunities. George Brown College has stated in their master campus plan that the Casa Loma Campus is in need of student spaces: “There is a general lack of accessible green space associated with this campus” (George Brown Master Campus Plan, 2014, p. 26). Restricting motorist traffic on Bridgman Avenue between Kendal Avenue and Dartnell Avenue would result in the creation of a large gathering space for students, strengthening the identity of the campus in the neighbourhood context. Pedestrian safety would also improve. If implemented there would be space for seating areas, patio tables and chairs, outdoor collaborative study spaces, bicycle parking, farmers markets, andrecreational uses. A precedent case is the successful pedestrianization of both Gould and Victoria Streets on Ryerson University’s campus. As is the case there, motor vehicles would be permitted to access Bridgman Avenue for special events and necessary deliveries. Access to the parking lot south of this building would not be affected. Partnering with George Brown would spur attention and put valuable momentum behind the Green Line. This is important for attracting the larger investments required in the third phase.

Hanigsberg, 2010 Figure 21: Willcocks Street - University of Toronto

Figure 22: Gould Street - Ryerson University

17. George Brown Parking Lots (Fences & Lighting)

Existing The George Brown parking lots are operated by Unit Park Parking. The parking lots on Macpherson Avenue, between Spadina Road and Kendal Avenue have tall wooden fences blocking off the view from drivers and pedestrians. Aside from the main parking entrance, there are only two pedestrians entrances into the parking lots. The small number of lamp posts in and around the parking lot poses a safety problem, especially at night. Opportunity Option 1: Remove the fence between the parking lot and the sidewalk. Removing the fences would create more â&#x20AC;&#x153;eyes on the streetâ&#x20AC;? in the parking lots. Also, removing the fences would allow more light from the existing light standards to shine in the parking lots. This option would also create the opportunity to eventually widen the sidewalks and improve the connectivity of the Green Line.

Source: https://guillermobarron.wordpress.com

Figure 23: Example of a short hedge

Option 2: Cut the fence in half to improve the viewline to the parking lots and green the fence by adding flowering vines or short hedges.

18. Rail Line Chain link fence

Existing From the beginning of the Green Line, there are chain link fences between the parking lots and the railway. These fences are for the safety of the students and other pedestrians that use the railway as a shortcut to Dupont Station and the surrounding area south of the railway. In some areas, the fences have been cut by users to create shortcuts. Opportunity There is an opportunity to use these existing chain link fences and plant green walls. These walls would help create living works of art and would make these parking lots aesthetically pleasing. It would also aid in dampening noise pollution when trains are passing through. Overall, these green fences would contribute to the sustainability of the environment. A long term idea is to re-use these chain link fences and build self-sufficient green and living walls. This would be long term as the initial construction of these walls can be expensive.

Source: http://sweetsoutherndays.blogspot.ca/

Figure 24: Example of green fence

Source: sweetsoutherndays.blogspot.ca/

Figure 25: Living wall in Surrey, BC

19. Dupont Station

Existing Dupont Station is the only subway station in close proximity to the Green Line. TTC bus routes 26 and 127 also have stops at this intersection, making it a well-used area for transit riders. The proximity to George Brown Collegeâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Casa Loma Campus also contributes to the areaâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s high transit, pedestrian, and cyclist usage. Opportunity There are opportunities to introduce wayfinding that could draw potential users from the station and lead them towards the underpass, and into the Green Line. Below-ground, on the station platforms, signage and art could be used to draw attention to and market the Green Line. There is also a longerFigure 26: Dupont Station term opportunity to incorporate the Green Line into a potential City Sightseeing hop-on hop-off tourist bus stop. The bus currently travels north on Spadina Road, west on Davenport Road, south on Kendal Avenue through George Brown College, east on Macpherson Avenue and then south on Spadina Road again.

20. Madison Avenue and Macpherson Avenue

Existing There is a condominium building located north of Macpherson Avenue between Madison Avenue and Huron Street, at 380 Madison Avenue. There are highly contaminated and vacant lots located south of Macpherson Avenue as well as west of Madison Avenue. Opportunity There are opportunities to improve connectivity and renewal in this area. The residents association from this condominium building has expressed interest in converting the vacant lots south of Macpherson Avenue to a public park. This would increase the amount of public open space in the area for residents.

Throughout 21. Pedestrian & Cyclist Bridges

$$$$$

Existing There are currently no signalized crossings or crosswalks at any point along the trail. This creates unsafe and inconvenient conditions for those wanting to travel east-west between existing parks. Opportunity There are currently seven possible locations for these bridges: Dovercourt Road, Ossington Avenue, Shaw Street, Christie Street, Bathurst Street, Howland Avenue, Spadina Road. Source: Brown & Storey The addition of pedestrian bridges presents the Figure 27: Winning entry for the Green Line Ideas Competition opportunity to improve accessibility, connectivity and the safety of these areas. This would create better connections to the Green Line, improving accessibility and connectivity, as it would allow users to cross the street without jaywalking or having to travel south to Dupont Street to cross safely. This would also improve safety as it would minimize the contact pedestrians have with traffic on the main streets.

22. Underpass lighting

Existing There are existing light standards attached to the cement walls, closest to the sidewalks at all of the underpasses: Dufferin Street, Dovercourt Road, Ossington Avenue, Shaw Street, Christie Street, Bathurst Street, Howland Avenue, Spadina Road. These do not provide adequate lighting at night and are not welcoming or inviting for pedestrians or cyclists. Opportunity

There is the opportunity to create identity through the use of lighting. Improved lighting will enhance the safety of the area by making pedestrians and cyclists more visible to Holmes, 2013 vehicles. It would create Figure 28: Underpass lighting in Birmingham, Alabama identity for the Green Line if developed in a creative or artistic way, like what was done in Birmingham, Alabama, as seen in figure 28. Improving connectivity to the Green Line will benefit both commuters and recreational users travelling through the area. New lighting features would open the space under the railway and would help to create a continuous, unhindered path of travel from Dupont Street north to the Green Line.

23. Consistent fencing

Existing The fence types that exist along the Green Line vary in height and material. Opportunity

To build on the industrial nature of the utility corridors the use of a modern, galvanized product, as is seen along Chicagoâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s 606 multiuse rails to trails project, could be used. This new product would complement the existing muraled concrete walls and newer powdercoated fencing. Wherever possible, wood-board fencing, Figure 29: Chicagoâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s 606 trail chain link fencing, and barbed wire should be removed and replaced. There may be additional opportunities to incorporate greening and wayfinding into fencing. Some existing fencing can also be removed in order to create more accessible spaces.

24. Legal Walls

Existing Out of the eight underpasses, four of them already contain artwork. The remaining five underpasses have bare cement walls. The ones without artwork include the underpasses at Dufferin Street, Shaw Street, Howland Avenue, and Spadina Road. Opportunity

An idea to liven the underpasses and to attract people to the area is to designate these walls and surfaces as â&#x20AC;&#x153;legal wallsâ&#x20AC;?. Legal walls are walls where anyone is entitled to paint, or otherwise decorate, the space. Legal walls are used in other cities, including Montreal and Berlin. They are understood to attract young artists, provide an outlet for their creativity, and an opportunity to develop their talents in a safe and legal context. If they are painting the Figure 30: Legal wall in Berlin, Germany legal wall, they are not vandalizing private property or endangering themselves. This could potentially remove the incentive to trespass on the train tracks in order to find an area to paint. Additionally, this would establish an identity for the Green Line and make it a destination for artists and art-enthusiasts. Legal walls are dynamic and colourful spaces that have the potential of engaging young people in current affairs. Rules are established with clear signage in the immediate area.

25. Gateways

Existing In recognizing that the intersection at Spadina Road and Dupont Street as a major point of access, or a “gateway” to the Green Line, other potential gateways can be identified. There is currently no signage for pedestrians or cyclists to direct people to the Green Line at Spadina Road, Shaw Street, Christie Street, and Davenport Road. Opportunity Gateways would serve as points of entry to the Green line for both pedestrians and cyclists and would attract people from south of the rail to the Green Line. By improving connections to Spadina Road, Shaw Street, Christie Street, and Davenport Road, there is potential to attract more people to the Green Line who regularly use the existing bike lanes, bus stops, and local businesses. These gateways could incorporate additional signage and wayfinding. Creating these connections would better integrate the Green Line with the City’s existing transportation networks.

8.0 Beyond the Green Line The Green Line is a project about connecting public open spaces and the scope of these connections should not end within the boundaries of the Green Line. There are opportunities for the Green Line to connect with other existing parks and trails. Accomplishing this would improve the usability and increase the number of people that can use the park. There are two potential eastern connections for the Green Line. Using Boulton Drive, the Green Line could connect with Roycroft and Sir Winston Churchill Parks. Using the Davenport Road bike lane, there is an opportunity to connect to Ramsden Park Trail. To the west , there is the potential to connect the Green Line to Earlscourt Park and to the West Toronto Railpath.

East Connection

Google maps, 2015 Figure 31: Future eastern connection

West Connection

Google maps, 2015 Figure 32: Future western connection

9.0 Funding options For the Green Line project to happen, there needs to be large financial commitments to fund infrastructure costs and park improvements. Partnerships, grants, private donations and other funding sources will be required in order to make the Green Line a reality. The Planning Act establishes the authority for municipalities to require parkland dedication or cash-in-lieu payments as a condition of development or redevelopment of land under s. 42. The amount of funds required depends on the type of development. On May 14, 2015 the Planning and Growth Management Committee, at the City of Toronto, considered a proposed amendment to the Planning Act, introduced though Bill 73: Smart Growth for Our Communities Act 2015. The proposed changes to section 42 of the Planning Act would alter the allocation of funding and would allow for a broader use of these funds. There were two key suggestions proposed by Dave Harvey of Park People to Bill 73: 1. Amending Section 42 to allow funds collected through cash-in-lieu provision to be spent on licensing lands within hydro corridors to create new parks. 2. Amending Section 42 to allow more flexibility in how parkland reserve account funds can be spent. These proposed amendments to Section 42 would allow the City to use these reserved funds to direct moneys to capital costs associated with parks such as improvements, in addition to the acquisition of land. Currently, section 42 funds cannot be used to pay for licensing agreements between the City of Toronto and Hydro One which are required if the City wishes to use parcels within hydro corridors as public open space.

10.0 Sources Berman, S. (2015). Geary Ave.: The secret life of an ugly street. Retrieved from http://www.thestar.com/entertainment/music/2015/02/04/geary-ave-thesecret-life-of-an-ugly-street.html City of Markham. (2014). User Fees. Retrieved November 5, 2015, from http:// www.markham.ca/wps/portal/Markham/Residents/Water/RatesBills/ UserFees/!ut/p/a1/hZDLboMwEEW_hq095mWnO9dJHBOooSoJ9aYiE SVIASKg5fdLHptKbTK7kc7RvTPY4AybJv-uynyo2iY_nnfjf7jslYvlCyR UvhFQi3ixjGkU2NqbgPcJEJKvXBoCQCrnoGjynOpo7YDyL36gQBChkBHEQO1CWwVzkLQxL358 City of Toronto. (June 1, 2001) Bike Plan. Retrieved November 6, 2015, from http://www1.toronto.ca/City Of Toronto/Transportation Services/Cycling/ Files/pdf/B/bike_plan_full.pdf City of Toronto. (2015). Development applications. Retrieved from http://app. toronto.ca/DevelopmentApplications/mapSearchSetup.do?action=init City of Toronto. (2014). Dupont street regeneration area study: Official plan amendment and zoning amendment. Retrieved from http://www.toronto. ca/legdocs/mmis/2014/pg/bgrd/backgroundfile-71895.pdf City of Toronto. (2012). Future options for casa loma. Retrieved from http://www. toronto.ca/legdocs/mmis/2012/ex/bgrd/backgroundfile-49692. pdf Flack, D. (2013). Get to know a street: Geary Avenue. Retrieved from http://www. blogto.com/city/2013/02/get_to_know_a_street_geary_avenue/

Flack, D. (September 25, 2013). Huge condo development proposed for dupont & shaw. Retrieved from http://www.blogto.com/city/2013/09/huge_condo_ development_proposed_for_dupont_shaw/ Flack, D. (2011). The slow fade of industry on Geary Avenue. Retrieved from http://www.blogto.com/city/2011/02/the_slow_fade_of_industry_on_ geary_avenue/ George Brown College. (n.d.) History. Retrieved from http://www.georgebrown.ca/ about/boardofgovernors/history/ Government of British Columbia. (2012).Transportation and infrastructure: Construction and rehabilitation cost guide. (2015, July 1). Retrieved November 3, 2015, from https://www.th.gov.bc.ca/Publications/const_ maint/Cost_Guide_July2012.pdf Harvey, D. “Bill 73: Proposed smart growth for our communities act.” (n.d.): n. pag. Park People, 2015. Web. 16 Nov. 2015. <http://www.toronto.ca/ legdocs/mmis/2015/pg/comm/communicationfile-52693.pdf>. McKeown, D. (June 2008). An assessment of health implications associated with exposures to electromagnetic fields in and next to hydro corridors in the city of Toronto. Toronto Public Health: Toronto. Retrieved from City of Toronto: http://www1.toronto.ca/City%20Of%20Toronto/Toronto%20 Public%20Health/Healthy%20Public%20Policy/PDF%20Reports%20 Repository/emf_backgrounder.pdf Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing. Retrieved from Government of Ontario website: http://www.mah.gov.on.ca/AssetFactory.aspx?did=9077 Government of Ontario. “Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, C. P.13.” Ontario.ca. Ontario. ca, 1990. Web. 16. Retrieved Nov. 2015.

Oxford County (December 2014). Trails Master Plan. Retrieved November 6, 2015, from http://www.oxfordcounty.ca/Portals/15/Documents/Trails/ Documents/FinalPlan/Appendix F - December 2014.pdf Patterson, Brenda. (May 2010). City of Toronto parkland acquisitions from 19982009.City of Toronto,. Web. 28 Nov. 2015. Playfall Tiles. (2015). Retrieved November 10, 2015, from https://www. rymarrubber.ca/product-category/playfall-tiles/ Salt Lake City Corporation Parks and Public Lands Division. (2012). Retrieved November 3, 2015, from http://www.slcdocs.com/council/ agendas/2013Agendas/Jan15/011513A7.pdf Skateparks $100K and under - skaters for public skateparks. (2012, June 30). Retrieved November 3, 2015, from http://www.skatepark.org/parkdevelopment/fundraising/2012/07/skateparks-under-100k/ Tarragon Theatre. (2015). Mandate. Retrieved from http://tarragontheatre.com/ about-us/mandate/ Town of Barrhead. (2015). Retrieved November 3, 2015, from http://www. barrhead.ca/sites/default/files/Contribution pamphlet Barco.pdf Typical Site Development Costs. (2015). Retrieved November 5, 2015, from http:// buildingadvisor.com/buying-land/budgeting/typical-site-developmentcosts/

11.0 Appendices & Maps Appendix A: The Green Line Appendix B: Existing Licensing Agreements Appendix C-1: Existing Amenities Phase I Appendix C-2: Existing Amenities Phase II Appendix D: Development Projects Appendix E: KnownÂ and Suspected Contaminated Parcels Appendix F: Parcels at Risk of Contamination Appendix G: Pedestrian and Cyclist Collisions: Phases I-III Appendix H: City of Toronto Ward Boundaries Appendix I-1: Schools and Community Centres Phase I Appendix I-2: Schools and Community Centres Phase II Appendix I-3: Schools and Community Centres Phase III Appendix J: Road Classification Appendix K-1: Cycling Network Phase I Appendix K-2: Cycling Network Phase II Appendix K-3: Cycling Network Phase III Appendix L: Detailed Cost Estimates Appendix: M: Related Policies Appendix N: Terms of Reference

Phase I

0 105 210 420 metres Phase II Phase III

Spa dina Rd

How lan d Ave

Bath ur st St

Ch ris tie St

Shaw St

Dav e n p o r

Ossingt on Ave

Doverc ourt Rd

Bart lett Ave

Dufferin St

Appendix A: The Green Line

t rD

Dup ont St

Appendix B: Existing licensing agreements

Bath ur st St

Shaw St

Ch ris tie St

t rD

Ossingt on Ave

Dav e n p o r

Doverc ourt Rd

Bart lett Ave

Dufferin St

SOURCE: Park People

Phase I

0 105 210

420 metres

Phase II

No license / License under negotiation

Other licenses

Spa dina Rd

How lan d Ave

Dup ont St

Phase III

Existing City license for recreation

Green space

Appendix C-1: Existing amenities Phase I

Drinking fountain

baseball diamond

community garden

ball hockey pad

pollinator garden

off leash dog park

wading pool

basketball court

Chandos park north

baseball diamond

Dufferin St

Primose Avenue Parkette

Chandos park South

Doverc ourt Rd

Salem Ave

Bartl ett Ave

West more land Ave

Lightbou rn Ave

Chandos Ave

bristol avenue parkette

Brandon Ave Ge ar y Av e

Gladstone Ave

brandon Avenue Parkette

Prim rose Ave

St clar ens Ave

Beaver Ave Lan sdo wne Ave

beaver Lightbourne parkette

Brist ol Ave

Dave npor t Rd

HalL am St

105

210

420 metres

SOURCE: CITY OF TORONTO

Appendix C-2: existing amenities Phase II

Drinking fountain

baseball diamond

community garden

ball hockey pad

pollinator garden

off leash dog park

wading pool

basketball court baseball diamond

some rset ave

Dav e Marc

npor

hmou

t Rd

nt Rd

Carus Ave

geary avenue parkette

Acores Ave

Gea ry Av e

frankel lambert park

Dupont St

Ossington Ave

Conc ord Ave

Delaw are Ave

Doverco urt Rd

Me lit a Cr es

Chr ist ie St

Shaw St

Melita Ave

HalL am St

garrison creek park 0

105

210

420 metres

SOURCE: CITY OF TORONTO

Bath ur st St

Ch ris tie St

Shaw St

t rD

Ossingt on Ave

Dav e n p o r

Doverc ourt Rd

Bart lett Ave

Dufferin St

Appendix D: Development projects

Phase I

0 105 210

420 metres

Phase II

Open development applications

Spa dina Rd

How lan d Ave

Dup ont St

Phase III

SOURCE: CITY OF TORONTO

Bath ur st St

Ch ris tie St

Shaw St

t rD

Ossingt on Ave

Dav e n p o r

Doverc ourt Rd

Bart lett Ave

Dufferin St

Appendix E: Known and Suspected Contaminated Parcels

Phase I

0 105 210

420 metres

Phase II

Spa dina Rd

How lan d Ave

Dup ont St

Phase III

SOURCE: CITY OF TORONTO archives

Bath ur st St

Ch ris tie St

Shaw St

t rD

Ossingt on Ave

Dav e n p o r

Doverc ourt Rd

Bart lett Ave

Dufferin St

Appendix F: Parcels at Risk of Contamination

Phase I

0 105 210

420 metres

Phase II

Spa dina Rd

How lan d Ave

Dup ont St

Phase III

SOURCE: CITY OF TORONTO archives

Bath ur st St

Shaw St

Ch ris tie St

t rD

Ossingt on Ave

Dav e n p o r

Doverc ourt Rd

Bart lett Ave

Dufferin St

Appendix G: PEDESTRIAN AND CYCLIST COLLISIONS: Phases I - III 1986-2013

Phase I

0 105 210

420 metres

Phase II

1-2 collisions

3-4 collisions

5+ collisions

Spa dina Rd

How lan d Ave

Dup ont St

Phase III

SOURCE: CITY OF TORONTO & THE GLOBE AND MAIL

0 105 210

420 metres

Phase II

Spa dina Rd

Dup ont St How lan d Ave

Bath ur st St

Shaw St

Phase I

Ch ris tie St

t rD

Ossingt on Ave

Dav e n p o r

Doverc ourt Rd

Bart lett Ave

Dufferin St

Appendix H: City of Toronto ward boundaries

Phase III

SOURCE: CITY OF TORONTO

Appendix I-1: Schools & Community centres Phase I

Dufferin St

Brandon Ave Ge ar y Av e

Gladstone Ave

HalL am St

105

210

420 metres

S School (Public or private)

community centre

Doverc ourt Rd

Salem Ave

West more land Ave

Chandos Ave Lightbou rn Ave

Prim rose Ave

St clar ens Ave

Lan sdo wne Ave

Beaver Ave

Bartl ett Ave

Dave npor t Rd

Brist ol Ave

Appendix I-2: Schools & Community centres Phase II

Marc

npor

hmou

t Rd

nt Rd

Carus Ave

Shaw St

Melita Ave

Acores Ave

Gea ry Av e

Dupont St

Ossington Ave

Conc ord Ave

Delaw are Ave

Doverco urt Rd

Me lit a Cr es

HalL am St

105

210

420 metres

S School (Public or private)

community centre

Chr ist ie St

some rset ave

Dav e

community centre

St Ge or ge st

Mad ison Ave

Spad ina Rd

Wa lme r Rd

Ken dal Ave

Brun swi ck Ave

Pop

Hur on St

lar

Dar tne ll Ave

Pla

How lan d Av e

Alb any Av e

Bat hu rst St

ort

S School (Public or private)

ins

enp

420 metres

Dav

210 How land Ave

br idg ma n av e Dr

105 port

ton

0 PALM ERTS ON AVE

Dav e n

Boul

MAN NING AVE

Ch ris tie St

Appendix I-3: Schools & Community centres Phase III

Macpherson Ave

Dupont St

Bath ur st St

Ch ris tie St

Shaw St

t rD

Ossingt on Ave

Dav e n p o r

Doverc ourt Rd

Bart lett Ave

Dufferin St

Appendix J: Road Classification

Phase I

0 105 210

420 metres

Phase II

Major arterial

minor arterial

Collector

Spa dina Rd

How lan d Ave

Dup ont St

Phase III

SOURCE: CITY OF TORONTO

Dufferin St

Appendix k-1: Cycling network phase I

Doverc ourt Rd

Salem Ave

Bartl ett Ave

West more land Ave

Chandos Ave

Brandon Ave Ge ar y Av e

Gladstone Ave

Lightbou rn Ave

Prim rose Ave

St clar ens Ave

Lan sdo wne Ave

Beaver Ave

Brist ol Ave

Dave npor t Rd

HalL am St

105

210

420 metres

Bicycle Lane

Contra-Flow Bicycle Lane

Shared Roadway SOURCE: CITY OF TORONTO

Appendix K-2: Cycling network phase II

some rset ave

Dav e Marc

npor

hmou

t Rd

nt Rd

Carus Ave

Acores Ave

Gea ry Av e

Dupont St

Ossington Ave

Conc ord Ave

Delaw are Ave

Doverco urt Rd

Me lit a Cr es

Chr ist ie St

Shaw St

Melita Ave

HalL am St

105

210

420 metres

Bicycle Lane

Contra-Flow Bicycle Lane

Shared Roadway SOURCE: CITY OF TORONTO

St Ge or ge st

Mad ison Ave

Spad ina Rd

Wa lme r Rd

Ken dal Ave

Brun swi ck Ave

Contra-Flow Bicycle Lane ort

Bicycle Lane Pop

Hur on St

lar

Dar tne ll Ave

Pla

How lan d Av e

Alb any Av e

Bat hu rst St

ins

enp

420 metres

Dav

210 How land Ave

br idg ma n av e Dr

105 port

ton

0 PALM ERTS ON AVE

Dav e n

Boul

MAN NING AVE

Ch ris tie St

Appendix K-3: Cycling network phase III

Macpherson Ave

Dupont St

Shared Roadway SOURCE: CITY OF TORONTO

Appendix L: Detailed Cost Estimates Unit Price Schedule (Feasibility) ITEM

UNIT

DESCRIPTION

VALUE (CAD)

MEASURING VALUE

1.0 CONCRETE BARRIER COSTS (Average cost to supply and install)

1.1

Concerete Roadside Barrier (CRB - 690mm)

Metre

$175/m

1.2

Shoulder preparation (Supply material, haul and place)

Metre

$135/m2

1.3

Concrete Median Barrier (CMB - 810mm)

Metre

$165/m

1.4

Concrete Transition Barrier (CTB - 690mm to 460mm)

Metre

$135/m

1.5

Concrete Drainage Barrier (CDB - 690mm)

Metre

$190/m

1.6

Concrete Bull Nose (CBN - 460mm)

Metre

$225/m

1.7

Bridge Parapet Transition (BPT - 810mm)

Metre

$380/m

$315.00/m2 - $1100/m2

2.0 BRIDGE STRUCTURE COATING (Future Costs)

2.1

Depending on Surface

Metre

3.0 STRUCTURE CONSTRUCTION COSTS (Based on bridge deck surface area)

3.1

Low Level

Metre

$2,100/m2 - $4,100/m2

4.0 CONSTRUCTION OF A PEDESTRIAN BRIDGE 4.1

Bridge Construction Cost

N/A

$716,736

$$$$

4.2

Engineering

N/A

$238,000

$$$

4.3

Miscellaneuous

N/A

$91,000

4.4

Bridge Construction - Costs/m2

Metre

$2,261

4.5

Total Construction Cost

N/A

$1,045,736

$$$$$

The project includes replacing the existing 29.5m timber bridge and replace with a 30m3 span bridge consisting of timber superstructure and a steel and timber sub-structure. Includes a bicycle rail and approach tie-ins to the new bridge. On average, you are looking in the ballpark of $500 to over $2000 a linear foot depending on type of bridge desired.

5.0 FENCING COSTS 5.1

Type A, B Wire Fabric

Metre

$25/m - $40/m

5.2

Type C Barbed Wire

Metre

$15/m - $20/m

5.3

Type D Chain Link

Metre

$95/m - $125/m

Unit Price Schedule (Feasibility) ITEM 5.4

DESCRIPTION Install = Flat to rolling terrain with no rock out croppings cost

UNIT

VALUE (CAD)

Metre

$37/m - $47/m

MEASURING VALUE $

6.0 LANDSCAPING

(Landscaping items: include supply and planning costs)

6.1

Un-irrigated Grass

Metre

$9.50/m2 - $11.50/m2

6.2

Irrigated Lawn

Metre

$20/m2 - $22/m2

6.3

Irrigated Lawn with Boulevard Trees

Metre

$28.50/m2 - $33.50/m2

6.4

Unirrigated Plantations

Metre

$22.00/m2 - $28.50/m2

6.5

Irrigated Plantations

Metre

$40/m2 - $57/m2

6.6

Decorative Stamped Concrete/Pavers

Metre

$84.00/m2 - $95.50/m2

6.7

Hydro-Seeding

Metre

$0.75/m2 - $0.85/m2

$2.00 - $5.00 (base)

7.0 PAVING (Cost/Lane KM)

7.1

Pavement/ per sqft

Square Feet

8.0 RAILWAY CROSSING COSTS (Two Lane Level crossing are an average 12m in width)

Level Crossing Surface (Single Track) 8.1

Softwood Planked

N/A

$5,250 - $7,350

8.2

Paved

N/A

$7,350 - $9,500

8.3

Concrete

N/A

$11,350 - $15,750

8.4

Full Depth Rubber

N/A

$12,600 - $18,900

Track Reconstruction for Level Crossings (Not including surface) 8.5

Simple Reconstruction

N/A

$9,500 - $12,600

8.6

Upgrade Rail Components

N/A

$20,000 - $30,500

Underpass Structures (Rail over road, single track) 8.7

2 Lane Hwy

N/A

$2,100,000 - $2,835,000

$$$$$

8.8

4 Lane Hwy

N/A

$2,730,000 - $3,675,000

$$$$$

N/A

$3,675/m2 - $4,935/m2

Overhead Structures (Road over rail) 8.9

2 Lane Overhead, No Sidewalk

Unit Price Schedule (Feasibility) ITEM

UNIT

DESCRIPTION

VALUE (CAD)

MEASURING VALUE

9.0 GROOVED RUMBLE STRIPS 9.1

Shoulder

Linear Kilometre

$575/lin.km

9.2

Centre Line with Median Barrier

Linear Kilometre

$613/lin.km

9.3

Double Solid Centre Line

Linear Kilometre

$647/lin.km

Grooved Rumble strips are on the paved shoulder of the road. Generally 8-10 mm deep with a 300 mm radius by140 mm wide, 300-400 mm apart. average cost including traffic control

10.0 GRADING CONSTRUCTION COSTS 2- Lane Low Volume Road Construction 10.1

Easy Conditions

Kilometres

$525,000/km $840,000/km

$$$$

10.2

Moderate Conditions

Kilometres

$840,000/km $1,000,000/km

$$$$

10.3

Difficult Conditions

Kilometres

$1,000,000/km $2,100,000/km

$$$$$

10.4

Very Difficult Conditions

Kilometres

$2,100,000/km $3,150,000/km

$$$$$

Kilometres

$840,000/km $1,470,000/km

$$$$$

2- Lane High Volume Road Construction 10.5

Easy Conditions

10.6

Moderate Conditions

Kilometres

$1,470,000/km $2,620,000/km

$$$$$

10.7

Difficult Conditions

Kilometres

$2,620,000/km $3,150,000/km

$$$$$

10.8

Very Difficult Conditions

Kilometres

$3,150,000/km $5,000,000/km

$$$$$

Kilometres

$1,500,000/km $2,750,000/km

$$$$$

4- Lane High Volume Road Construction 10.9

Easy Conditions

10.10

Moderate Conditions

Kilometres

$2,750,000/km $3,500,000/km

$$$$$

10.11

Difficult Conditions

Kilometres

$3,500,000/km $5,000,000/km

$$$$$

10.12

Very Difficult Conditions

Kilometres

$5,000,000/km $10,500,000/km

$$$$$

Note: The above range of costs for highway construction include construction, contingencies, engineering, materials supplied by MOT, miscellaneous and utility relocation but does not include engineering design or property acquisition

11.0 PUBLIC RESTROOMS: COST OF CONSTRUCTION 11.1

Permit Fees

N/A

3% of Construction Costs

11.2

Impact Fees

N/A

1% of Construction Costs

11.3

Design, Consultant Fees, and Construction Administration Costs

N/A

18% -20% Construction Costs

Unit Price Schedule (Feasibility) ITEM

UNIT

DESCRIPTION

VALUE (CAD)

MEASURING VALUE

11.4

Special Inspections and Testing Costs

N/A

Around 1.5% of Construction Costs

11.5

Construction Contingency

N/A

10% of Construction Costs

Utility services, flatwork, and landscaping is typically $40,000 to $60,000 but if utilities exist these costs could be less.

12.0 RECREATIONAL Average Skatepark

12.1

N/A

$45,000 - $70,000

12.2

Playfall Tiles - 10” Fall Rating – 2.5” Tile + Pad

Inches

$59.99

12.3

Playfall Tiles - 8” Fall Rating – 1.75” Tile + Pad

Inches

$52.99

12.4

Rubber Flooring - Armour Rubber 3/4” Crossfit Mats (4’X6”)

Inches

$79.00

12.5

Rubber Flooring - Armour Rubber 3/8” Rubber Rolls – 4’X25” (100sq/Ft)

Square Foot

$378.00

12.6

New Bicycle Lane (Includes signs and pavement markings)

Kilometres

$20,000

12.7

Signed Bicycle Routes (Includes signs and pavement markings)

Kilometres

$2,000

12.8

Signed Bicycle Routes: With signalized road crossings

Signalized Road Crossing

+$80,000

New Off-Road Bicycle Path 12.9

New 4.0m Wide*

Kilometres

$225,000

$$$

12.10

With Lighting Every 40m

Kilometres

+$125,000

$$$

Signalized Road Crossing

+$80,000

With Signalized Road Crossings

12.11

* includes minor structures such as culverts , retaining walls, etc. Major new structures (e.g. bridges, underpasses, etc.) are costed separately

Existing Bicycle Path Upgrade 12.12

Widening to 4.0m wide asphalt

Kilometres

$150,000

$$$

12.13

With Lighting Every 40m

Kilometres

+$125,000

$$$

12.14

With Signalized Road Crossings

Signalized Road Crossing

+$80,000

Two Way Cycle Track - Retrofit Exising Roadway

Linear Kilometre

$500,000 - $800,000

$$$$

Cycle Tracks 12.15

Structures and Crossings 12.16

Pedestrian Boardwalk (Light-Duty)

Linear Kilometre

$1,500,000

$$$$$

12.17

Metal Stairs with Hand Railing and Gutter To Roll Bicycle

Vertical Metre

$3,000

12.18

Mid-block Pedestrian Signal

Each

$75,000 - $100,000

Unit Price Schedule (Feasibility) MEASURING VALUE

ITEM

DESCRIPTION

UNIT

12.19

Below Grade Railway Crossing

Each

$500,000 - $750,000

$$$$

N/A

10% of Construction Costs

12.20

Construction Contingency

VALUE (CAD)

13.0 SIGNAGE 13.1

Pathway Directional Sign

Each

$500 - $750

13.2

Pathway Marker Sign

Each

$250

13.3

Pathway Marker Sign

Linear Kilometre

$1,500

13.4

Signage

Each

$20 - $60

14.0 OTHER 14.1

Bicycle Rack (Post and Ring Style)

Each

$150 - $250

14.2

Bicycle Rack (Holds 6 Bicycles)

Each

$1,000 - $1,200

14.3

Bicycle Rack

Each

$500 - $700

14.5

Drinking Fountain for Outdoor Use with Installation

Each

$1064 - $3326

14.6

Drinking Fountain with Mounts and Wall Plates

Each

$133 - $532

14.7

Water Pump

Each

$300 - $800

14.8

Benches (Varies on Size and Style)

Each

$1,000 - $2,000

14.9

Outdoor Trash Cans

Each

$200 - $600

14.10

Concrete Planters

Each

$600 - $2,100

14.11

Awnings

Each

$1,900 - $3,600

14.12

Solar Lamp Posts

Each

$700

14.13

ADA Pads (Depending on Size)

Each

$140 - $230

14.14

Speed Bump

Each

$600

14.15

Park BBQ with install

Each

$600 - $800

14.16

Solar Path Lights with install

Each

$4,000

Unit Price Schedule (Feasibility) MEASURING VALUE

ITEM

DESCRIPTION

UNIT

14.17

Gazebo with install

Each

$10,000 - $15,000

14.18

Pet Waste System

Each

$1,200

14.19

Electrical Connection

N/A

$1,000 - $5,000

14.20

Parking Lot Costs

Each

$18,258/space $41,941/space

14.21

Soil Test

Each

$100 - $500

14.22

Temporary Speed Bump

Each

$600

N/A

$1,000 - $5,000

$250,000

$$$

14.23 14.24

Water Treatment Two Way Active Transportation Multi-use path within road right-of way

Linear Kilometre

VALUE (CAD)

Appendix M: Related Policies Connectivity Policies City of Toronto Official Plan (2010) Section 2.3.1 Healthy Neighbourhoods 6. Community and neighbourhood amenities will be enhanced where needed by: a. improving and expanding existing parks, recreational facilities...and other community services Section 2.3.2 Toronto’s Green Space System and Waterfront 3. The Green Space System will be expanded by linking additional parks and open space by: a. acquiring such linkages, where feasible; and b. acquiring lands, or easements over lands, associated with private development which can be connected to the System for the extension of recreational trails or which have important natural heritage value Section 3.2.3. Parks and Open Spaces 2. Parkland acquisition strategies, including decisions about whether to accept parkland or cash as a condition of development, will take into account a range of factors: … i) opportunity to link parks and open spaces… Section 4.3. Parks and Open Space Areas Development Criteria in Parks and Open Space Areas 6. Any development provided for in Parks and Open Space Areas will: ...c) maintain, and where possible create linkages between parks and open spaces to create continuous recreational corridors… Section 4.4. Utility Corridors 1. Utility Corridors are hydro and rail corridors primarily used for the movement and transmission of energy, information, people, and good.

4. Where Utility Corridors are declared surplus, they may be acquired or leased by the City or other public agencies for public services and amenities, such as public transportation routes, bicycle and pedestrian trails, community and allotment gardens, linear parks and open space or shared parking facilities. City of Toronto’s Parks Plan (2013) Improve system planning 10. Develop a plan to guide facility provision and land acquisition 10.2. Update the strategy for the acquisition of parkland to continue to prioritize parkland acquisition in underserved areas and address City priorities. 11. Develop tools to guide and enhance the use of parkland 11.3 Improve and coordinate trail mapping, classification, maintenance, wayfinding and connections to other public realm elements Safety Policies City of Toronto Official Plan (2010) Section 2.2.4 Employment Districts: Supporting Business and Employment Growth 5. Walking and cycling will be encourage by creating safer and more attractive conditions in Employment Districts. Section 2.4 – Bringing the City Together: A Progressive Agenda of Transportation Change 13. Policies, programs and infrastructure will be introduced to create a safe, comfortable and bicycle friendly environment that encourages people of all ages to cycle for everyday transportation and enjoyment including: a) an expanded bikeway network; b) provision of bicycle parking facilities in new developments; c) provision of adequate and secure bicycle parking at rapid transit stations; and

d) measures to improve the safety of cyclists through the design and operation of streets and through education and promotion programs. 14. An urban environment and infrastructure will be created that encourages and supports pedestrian movement throughout the City, for people of all ages and abilities, by: a) ensuring safe, universally accessible, direct, comfortable, attractive and convenient pedestrian conditions, including walking routes to workplaces, schools, recreation areas, transit and other important community destinations; Section 3.1.1 The Public Realm 5. City streets are significant public open spaces which connect people and places and support the development of sustainable, economically vibrant and complete communities. New and existing City streets will incorporate a Complete Streets approach and be designed to perform their diverse roles by: a) balancing the needs and priorities of the various users and uses within the rightofway, including provision for: iii) ensuring the safety of vulnerable groups such as women, children, seniors and people with disabilities by implementing the Toronto Safer City Guidelines, or an updated version thereof; b) improving the quality and convenience of active transportation options within all communities by giving full consideration to the needs of pedestrians, cyclists and public transit users; 14. Design measures which promote pedestrian safety and security will be applied to streetscapes, parks, other public and private open spaces, and all new and renovated buildings. 20. New parks and other public open spaces such as schoolyards should front onto a street for good visibility, access and safety 3.2.3 Parks and Open Spaces

1. Toronto’s system of parks and open spaces will continue to be a necessary element of citybuilding as the City grows and changes. Maintaining, enhancing and expanding the system requires the following actions: b) designing high quality parks and their amenities to promote user comfort, safety, accessibility and yearround use and to enhance the experience of “place”, providing experiential and educational opportunities to interact with the natural world; Accessibility Policies Accessibility Design Guidelines (2004) Section 1.1 Exterior Routes The accessibility guidelines for Toronto state that all pedestrian routes should be safe and easy to use by a wide range of persons with disabilities. Generally, such routes should be easily identifiable, clearly separated from vehicular routes, and free of obstacles at all times of the year. The accessibility guidelines puts emphasis on pedestrian bridges, crosswalks, curb cuts, and ramps which we aim to increase in the green line with focus on time dimension in order to make the area accessible yearround. City of Toronto Official Plan (2010) Section 2.2 Structuring Growth in the City: Integrating Land Use and Transportation This section seeks to create a stronger urban environment by increasing accessibility throughout the city by taking advantage of combined travel benefits afforded by improved mobility and increased mobility. The plan states that accessibility has two components: mobility (transportation) and proximity (land use). Increasing mobility by providing modal choice, and/or increasing the speed of travel allows more trips to be made within a given time, whereas increasing proximity through greater mixing of uses and/or higher densities achieves the same effect by shortening trip lengths. Two aspects of the green line that we aim to improve is having multiple uses within proximity to each other and increasing

means of transportation throughout the area such as improving the pedestrian realm and making the green line more bike friendly. Section 2.3.2 Toronto’s Green Space System and Waterfront A key citybuilding principle is that public buildings, parks and open spaces should be open and accessible to all members of the public, including people with disabilities. New development and ongoing maintenance and improvements of public buildings, parks and open spaces should recognize this goal. According to the official plan, providing universal accessibility is one of the public expenditure priorities for the city. Most of the expenditures that are being proposed are to increase accessibility or improve the uses in the green line. Identity Policies City of Toronto Official Plan (2010) Toronto’s Official Plan recognizes established Neighbourhoods, and the importance of ensuring that the effects of nearby development or change respect the existing character of Neighbourhoods so that they may remain static in terms of identity. The Green Line is bookended by two of Toronto’s established Neighbourhoods: The Annex, and Davenport Village. The policies listed in the Official Plan, section 2.3.1 Healthy Neighbourhoods, recognize the important roles of environmental sustainability, landscaping improvements, and expansion of parks and recreational facilities in buildings and celebrating the identity of local neighbourhoods. One clear way to foster identity and heritage is through public art, also outlined in the policies of the Official Plan. Section 3.1.4 Public Art states that public art will be promoted by facilitating it on property within the City’s jurisdiction. 3.1.4 1. The creation of public art that reflects our cultural diversity and history will be promoted by: a) adopting a Public Art Master Plan; b) promoting the Toronto Public Art Reserve Fund and actively soliciting gifts of cash, and gifts inkind to the City to implement the Public Art Master Plan;

c) encouraging public art initiatives on properties under the jurisdiction of the City, its agencies, boards and commissions; d) dedicating one per cent of the capital budget of all major municipal buildings and structures to public art 5.4.2 City of Toronto Wayfinding Strategies Toronto has two separate but related wayfinding strategies: one for the entire City and one specifically for parks and trails. Both strategies recognize the importance of distinct visual identity and provide suggestions for accomplishing or enhancing identity with relatively simple measures. Placemaking methods outlined in the two strategies include the use of historic names wherever possible, employment of simple colour schemes on signage and park infrastructure, location of wayfinding details at gateways or entrances, and consultation with the local public for design preferences that enhance the existing character. 3.1.1 4. The natural features of the City, such as the Lake Ontario shoreline, the Lake Iroquois escarpment, woodlots, ravines and valley lands, will be connected to the surrounding city by improving physical and visual access from adjacent public spaces and by designing these into a comprehensive open space network 5. City streets are significant public open spaces which connect people and places and support the development of sustainable, economically vibrant and complete communities. New and existing City streets will incorporate a Complete Streets approach and be designed to perform their diverse roles by: a) balancing the needs and priorities of the various users and uses within the rightofway, including provision for: i) the safe and efficient movement of pedestrians of all ages and abilities, cyclists, transit vehicles and users, goods and services vehicles, emergency vehicles, and motorists across the network; ii) space for other street elements, such as utilities and services, trees and landscaping, green infrastructure, snow and stormwater management, wayfinding, boulevard cafes, marketing and vending, and street furniture; and iii) ensuring the safety of vulnerable groups such as women, children, seniors and people with disabilities by implementing the Toronto Safer City Guidelines, or an updated version thereof

b) improving the quality and convenience of active transportation options within all communities by giving full consideration to the needs of pedestrians, cyclists and public transit users; c) reflecting differences in local context and character; d) providing building access and address, as well as amenities such as view corridors, sky view and sunlight; and e) serving as community destinations and public gathering places. 6. Sidewalks and boulevards will be designed to provide safe, attractive, interesting and comfortable spaces for pedestrians by: a) providing well designed and coordinated tree planting and landscaping, pedestrianscale lighting, and quality street furnishings and decorative paving as part of street improvements; and b) locating and designing utilities within streets, within buildings or underground, in a manner that will minimize negative impacts on the natural pedestrian and visual environment and enable the planting and growth of trees to maturity. 5.4.2 City of Toronto Wayfinding Strategies Toronto has two separate but related wayfinding strategies: one for the entire City and one specifically for parks and trails. Both strategies recognize the importance of distinct visual identity and provide suggestions for accomplishing or enhancing identity with relatively simple measures. Placemaking methods outlined in the two strategies include the use of historic names wherever possible, employment of simple colour schemes on signage and park infrastructure, location of wayfinding details at gateways or entrances, and consultation with the local public for design preferences that enhance the existing character. 5.4.3 Parks Plan 20132017 Placemaking is one of the seven guiding principles of the Parks Plan. The seven principles were established through public consultation (see figure x) in developing the plan. Participants overwhelmingly agreed that parks and park features were important for local neighbourhoods and the greater City. Far fewer participants agreed that City parks are designed well, however, indicating that design features are important and need improvement. Placemaking methods offered in the Parks Plan are very similar to those in the wayfinding strategies.

Source: City of Toronto Parks Plan (2013) Renewal Policies City of Toronto’s Parks Plan (2013) 2.2 Using Parks The Plan encourages a variety of uses in parks that promote ecological renewal including children’s ecoprograms, community gardens and allotment gardens. 3.3 The effects of a growing city on parks As the population continues to grow rapidly within the City of Toronto there will be high demand for existing and new parkland this signals a need for an overall rethink of the planning, design and management of green space in highdensity areas.

4.2 Communicating and connecting with users Residents express interest in becoming more involved with the development, maintenance, and activities within parks. Residents can become more engaged through parkrelated volunteerism and contribute to cleanups, planting, and even playground construction events. 4.3 Improve communications and outreach 2.2 Create and implement a community engagement framework that provides guiding principles and sets priorities for community engagement in the parks system 5.2 What we heard on preserving and promoting nature Participants value natural area and support their expansion and express concern about the potential impacts of development on natural areas. Participants also expressed an interest in education through outdoor environmental programming. 6.2 What we heard on maintaining quality parks Participants recognized the impact of high levels of park use and reported a need for more waste bins, litter pickup and waste removal. Community Partnerships City of Toronto Official Plan (2010) Chapter 2 – Policies 7. In priority neighbourhoods, revitalization strategies will be prepared through resident and stakeholder partnerships to address such matters as: a) improving local parks, transit, community services and facilities; b) improving the public realm, streets and sidewalks; c) identifying opportunities to improve the quality of the existing stock of housing or building a range of new housing; d) identifying priorities for capital and operational funding needed to support the strategy; and e) identifying potential partnerships and mechanisms for stimulating investment in the neighbourhood and supporting the revitalization strategy.

City of Toronto’s Parks Plan (2013) Executive Summary: 1. Improve communications and outreach 2. Increase opportunities for resident, group and stakeholder involvement 3. Improve the permitting system to enhance park use Direction and Recommended Actions 2. Increase opportunities for resident, group and stakeholder involvement 2.2 Create and implement a community engagement framework that provides guiding principles and sets priorities for community engagement in the parks system. 2.3 Develop a centralized volunteer management system. 2.4 Continue to expand donation, partnership and sponsorship opportunities. 4.4 Direction 2 Partnership Parks, Forestry and Recreation partnership relationships can be informal or formal, short or long term. They can involve community, public or private sector partners and address programming, services, volunteerism, park improvement, fundraising, sponsorship or any combination of these activities.

PLGAppendix 720 Fall 2015 N: Terms

of Reference

PROJECT: A GREEN LINE LINEAR PARK SYSTEM CHALLENGES AND OPPORTUNITIES

Advanced Planning Studio II

INSTRUCTOR: TOM OSTLER tostler@ryerson.ca

CLIENT: PARK PEOPLE Client Contact: Jake Tobin Garrett Manager, Policy and Research | Park People jgarrett@parkpeople.ca | office: 416-583-5776 | mobile: 416-316-3234 | @Park_People City Builder's Lab | 401 Richmond St. W., Studio 119, Toronto, ON M5V 3A8 BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE Green Line Project High voltage hydro lines bring power to the downtown through a corridor that runs from the Manby Transformer facility in Etobicoke through to The Annex just north of the CP rail tracks where the power lines then run underground to service the heart of the city. The Green Line is a vision to transform the Dupont hydro corridor between Davenport Village and the Annex into a 5km linear park and trail. The Green Line is a project of Park People, in partnership with the Friends of the Green Line and Workshop Architecture. Background Currently, the hydro corridor contains nine city parks with the rest of the land sitting vacant or used for parking lots. The land is owned by Infrastructure Ontario and operated by Hydro One. It is licensed out for secondary use to other parties, including the City of Toronto for parkland. The City has expressed interest in obtaining the licensing for several parcels of land in the corridor to create new parks. The Mayor, City staff, and local councillors have expressed support for The Green Line. This project would fall under the initiative of “Improve Systems Planning” under the City of Toronto’s Parks Plan for 2013 - 2017. Specifically, that recommendation guides the work of staff in Parks, Forestry and Recreation in working with City Planning staff on identifying places and opportunities to expand the park system. Park People envisions The Green Line as a three phase project: Phase One, from Lansdowne to Dovercourt, contains almost all parkland with all road crossings at grade. Phase Two, from Dovercourt to Christie, contains almost all parkland with three road crossings below grade. Phase Three, from Christie to Spadina, contains almost all parking lots and vacant land with four road crossings below grade. 1

PLG 720 Fall 2015

Advanced Planning Studio II

Each phase contains specific opportunities and challenges for realizing The Green Line vision of one connected linear park.

Your team will: 1. Produce a Challenges and Opportunities document that examines each phase of the Green Line as well as the route as a whole. This document is not a master plan and so will not detail a specific design for the route, but lay out a framework from which a master plan could be created. The document should examine: State of land in the corridor currently, including an inventory of park amenities and the quality of those amenities Potential problem sites or issues Key items that need to be addressed, ranked in order of difficulty/cost Opportunities, including potential programming or partnerships with surrounding organizations/businesses and links to other community infrastructure (surrounding parks, bike lanes, schools, Metrolinxâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Davenport Diamond project, West Toronto Rail Path, etc.) Potential sites for wayfinding and identity-creation for the Green Line (art murals, signage, etc.) Interim measures/pilot projects that could be developed quickly, especially in the case of elements where permanent solutions may be more costly or longer term 2. Produce a proposed Action Plan based on the three phase approach for the Green Line that prioritizes elements based on the Challenges and Opportunities document. This should take into consideration timeframe for completion, cost, and difficulty.

PLG 720 Fall 2015

Advanced Planning Studio II

DELIVERABLES Work Plan In consultation with the client, your group will develop a work plan documenting a common understanding of the scope of work, expectations regarding deliverables, expectations for dealing with the client and the local community, and timing. It should specify the division of labour among team members. Your work plan is due September 24th. Interim Report / Presentation An interim report and/or presentation will document your research to date, and reaffirm with the client the remaining tasks and deadlines toward the preparation of a final report. Your interim presentation will be due October 29th. Final Report and Presentation You will deliver a draft report to the client by November 23rd and a presentation of your research and findings will be made on either November 25th or 26th. A panel of 4 or 5 experts will be assembled for the presentation that includes the client and other interested parties. The panel will comment on your draft report as well as your presentation. You will then have a week to finalize your report. Your final report, incorporating feedback from the client, the panel and myself must be submitted by 4:00 pm on December 3rd.

RESOURCES Greenline website: http://www.greenlinetoronto.ca/ Competition website: http://greenlinetorontoca.netfirms.com/index.html Press coverage: https://greenlinetoronto.wordpress.com/press-coverage/ Newsletter archive: https://greenlinetoronto.wordpress.com/green-line-newsletter/ City of Toronto Parks Plan: http://www.toronto.ca/legdocs/mmis/2013/pe/bgrd/backgroundfile-57282.pdf

PLG 720 Fall 2015

Advanced Planning Studio II