Presentation for Metrolinx

M 1

OBILITY HUB IN DOWNTOWN BRAMPTON Historical Research, Site Analysis and Project Description

N ove mb e r 2 0 , 2 0 1 5 Zh e n g ta o Hu M a ste r o f U rb a n D e s i g n Jo h n H . D a n ie ls Fa c u lt y o f A rc h ite c t u re , La n d s ca p e a n d D e s i g n

C O N T E N T

1. STATION AND CITY As Histor ic a l P r ec e de n t of M ob ilit y H ub 5 Railw ay S tat ion 9 Met r o S tat ion 11 Mor e t han S tat ion

2. CITY OF BRAMPTON Bet w e en H e r itag e a n d I n t e n sif ic at ion 15 To be in System 17 To be Intensified 20 To be Cir culated 26 To be Conser ved

3. MOBILITY HUB IN BRAMPTON P roj ec t I n t roduc t ion 32 Met hodology 33 Resear ch Conclusion and Object ives 34 S cenar io P lanning

S TAT I O N A N D C I T Y / A S H I S T O R I C A L P R E C E D E N T O F M O B I L I T Y H U B 1

4

1

S TAT I O N A N D C I T Y

AS HISTORICAL PRECEDENT OF MOBILITY HUB

1.1 RAILWAY STATION

Image Source: Julian Cavalier, “North American railroad stations “

Being Connected by Circulation

Matlock Bath Station Manchester 1849

Menai Bridge railway station Wales 1858

Being Connected by Circulation and Building

Durango Depot Colorado 1882

Pictou Station Nova Scotia 1914

Lexington Station Kentucky

Being Connected by Various Facilities

Liverpool Street station

Musée d’Orsay

Penn Station

Train Sheds

London 1874

Paris 1900

New York 1910

Whitby Station(being Moved) Ontario 1960s

Whitby Station Ontario 1970

1

S TAT I O N A N D C I T Y / A S H I S T O R I C A L P R E C E D E N T O F M O B I L I T Y H U B

London St Pancras 1865 London

Thurston, Suffolk

As highly functional transit facility, early railway station can be also regarded as one architectural expression of the Industrial Revolution. Unlike other industrial buildings,factory for instance, railway station refused to be isolated in peripheral areas but constructed in the center of town. It related with adjacent urban context through circulation, building and landscape.

Station Move

5

1

S TAT I O N A N D C I T Y / A S H I S T O R I C A L P R E C E D E N T O F M O B I L I T Y H U B

In late 19 Century, Railway Station kept evolving through combining other building programs and developing more sophisticated circulation. It is no more just purely functional structures, but representative of local culture and landmarks in engineering development.

In most cases, railway station can be considered as the finest public building no matter in major cities or small towns.

1867 “November: The first section of The St Pancras wrought iron roof truss is erected by the Butterley Company of Derby.

The brickwork and the foundations are

by Warning Brother. Barlow and Ordish’s train shed is the largest single span enclosed space in the world“ stpancras.com/history

6 Weston Place and St. Pancras Railway Station in course of building (1871) Image Source: <http://stpancras.com/>

Farringdon Station London 1863

1

The Farringdon area around the station is hugely enriched in historical value. The station reshaped this area by cutting off the northern community for railway, but not in a negative way. It re-introduced institution into surrounding as well as consolidating block and street pattern originating from Medieval.

“Farringdon had historically been focused on the City, accommodating its overspill functions and acting as the first part of London ‘proper’ encountered by those arriving from the north. However, the coming of the railways at King’s Cross (1850) and their attendant developments promoted new connections: Farringdon’s field of vision was no longer focused entirely on the City.”(East Architecture, landscape and urban design, 5)

Medieval

17th Century

18th Century

S TAT I O N A N D C I T Y / A S H I S T O R I C A L P R E C E D E N T O F M O B I L I T Y H U B

Farringdon Station is the terminus of the London Metropolitan Railway, which was the world’s first underground railway. Its 19 century spatial partition have not been hugely changed till today, although the circulation has been re-routed.

Late 18th Century

7 Image Source: East Architecture,landscape urban design limited, “Farringdon Urban Design Study, Part 1: Baselineline Study”

1852: King’s Cross Station, Lewis Cubitt, London UK

1830: Connecting station to Crown Street, Manchester Liverpool Road Station

1830

1840

1850

1860

1870

St. Pancras Station’s wrought iron roof truss creates largest single span roof (75M)

1868: Midland Grand Hotel, George Gilbert Scott

1830: First Purpose Built Passenger Station, First build of a joint train shed Crown Street Railway Station

1880

1890

1900

1903: Grand Central Station, Reed and Stem and Warren and Wetmore, NYC

1910

1920

1867: St.Pancras Station, William Henry Barlow, London UK

Collision in Park Avenue Tunnel instigates regulation.

1919: Helsinki Train Station, Eliel Saarinen

Werner von Siemens develops first passenger electric train in Berlin

Saarinen Balagengatharadilak Nov/02/2015

2006: Berlin Hauptbahnhof (GMP) Europe’s Largest Train Station

2012: Extension by John McAslan and Partners, London UK 1930 - 1960: Gare Du Nord, Paris expansion, busiest station in Europe. Originally built 1846.

1910: Pennsylvania Station, McKim Mead & White 1889: Amsterdam Centraal Station was built on three artificial islands

1890

1903: Grand Central Station, Reed and Stem and Warren and Wetmore, NYC

1900

1910

Collision in Park Avenue Tunnel instigates regulation.

Werner von Siemens develops first passenger electric train in Berlin

Image Source: Saarinen Balagengatharadilak

1920

1930

1940

1950

1938: Milan Central Station Electrified, Originally built 1864

1938: A4 'Mallard' 4-6-2 Fastest Steam Locomotive 126 MPH 1919: Helsinki Train Station, Eliel Saarinen

1960

1970

1963 - PENN STATION DEMOLISHED

1880

1945 - WORLD WAR II ENDS

1868: Midland Grand Hotel, George Gilbert Scott

1870

1902 - SMOKE GENERATING TRAINS BANNED IN NEW YORK

1860

2012: London Bridge, Station with tallest building attached to it 1979 - MAGLEVS EXCEED 300 MPH JAPAN

1964: Madison Square Garden is built where Penn Station stood, underground continues to operate as train station

1980

2008: Tianjin West Railway Station Expansion (GMP) for High Speed Rail, Originally built in 1910

1990

2000

2006

2008

2010

2012

2018

2020

2007: Shinjuku Station, Tokyo Japan, World’s Busiest Transport Hub @ 3.64 million people per day

2018: Canary Wharf Cross Rails Station, Foster and Partners 1992: Barcelona Franca Station, with high speed rail, originally built in the 19th century

1964: Tōkaidō Shinkansen Bullet Train from Tokyo to Shin-Osaka 175 MPH

2016: Florence Station for High Speed Trains, Foster and Partners 2006 - Southern Cross Station, Grimshaw Architects, London

1930

1938: Milan Central S Electrified, Originally b

1825: Locomotion No.1 24 MPH

1879 - FIRST ELECTRIC PASSENGER TRAIN

S TAT I O N A N D C I T Y / A S H I S T O R I C A L P R E C E D E N T O F M O B I L I T Y H U B

1820

1803: First Steam Locomotive 5 MPH

as Station, ow, London UK

8

1810

1889: Amsterdam Centraal Station was built on three artificial islands

1807: First Passenger Service at Station Swansea Mount Station

1852: King’s Cross Station, Lewis Cubitt, London UK

ras Station’s iron roof truss creates ingle span roof (75M)

1910: Pennsylvania Station, McKim Mead & White

1830: Ellicott City Station, Ellicott City, Maryland

1902 - SMOKE GENERATING TRAINS BANNED IN NEW YORK

Richard Trevithick invents first full scale steam locomotive, UK

1800

1850

2012: Extension by John McAslan and Partners, London UK

1879 - FIRST ELECTRIC PASSENGER TRAIN

1803 - IINVENTION OF STEAM LOCOMOTIVE

Penn Station New York 1910

1

1900

1905

1910

After the war, on the Piccadilly line trains had air-operated sliding doors.

1915

1920

1917 - First World War

In 1903 the Central London line became the first railway in Britain to be worked entirely by multiple-unit trains – meaning the trains no longer needed to be turned around when they reached each end of the line.

In 1909 Selfridges department store lobbied (unsuccessfully) to get Bond Street station renamed after itself

1930

Several stations were rebuilt in a Modernist style influenced or designed by Charles Holden, who called them his 'brick boxes with concrete lids'

1935

1940

1875

1880

New York City Hall station finally closed for good on New Years Eve in 1945 when, to handle increased ridership, new longer trains were created with doors that were an unsafe distance from the extremely curved track of the station

1945

1950

In 1940, the closed Brompton Road station was used as an anti-aircraft control room

1890

From 1886, the City and South London Railway began construction for deep level tubes.

1955

1895

The Tremont Street Subway opened on September 1, 1897, as the oldest subway tunnel in North America.

Canadian Subway is one experimental trainset consisting of the first aluminum subway cars, which reduced weight and therefore operating costs

Union subway station began to construct in 1954, as the first subway station in Canada.

The first underground in the USSR (in Russian метрополитен metropoliten or метро metro) opened in 1935 in Moscow, being famed for the grand designs of its stations

Leslie Green design was massively adopted in London Underground Stations.

1900

Fulgence Bienvenüe project was adopted by Paris city, which was designed from outset as a system of nine lines, and began construction on 1896

1905

1965

1910

The Tube’s world-famous red circle logo, known as the “roundel”, first appeared in 1908.

In 1903 the Central London line became the first railway in Britain to be worked entirely by multiple-unit trains – meaning the trains no longer needed to be turned around when they reached each end of the line.

After the 1980 extension of the Bloor–Danforth line, subway buildings in Toronto came to a standstill.

1970

Yonge Street Subway was the first subway line to replace surface routes completely

After the war, on the Piccadilly line trains had air-operated sliding doors.

1915

1920

During the First World War, women began to make up staff shortages on the Underground

The new cars ordered in 1963 for TTC, at 75 feet/23 m, were at the time the longest in the world

1960

The Tube’s first escalator was installed at Earl’s Court in 1911, featuring a diagonal finish to the stairway, meaning the right foot reached the top moments before the left.

1975

1980

In 1909 Selfridges department store lobbied (unsuccessfully) to get Bond Street station renamed after itself

Cairo Underground Metro Line 1 is the first line of underground in Africa

1985

1923- Stations were built in modernist style

Electric locomotives came to be used for hualing carriages in Waterloo & City Railway.

1885

On November 19, 1871, the General Council of the Seine commissioned a team of 40 engineers to plan an urban rail network for Paris.

American inventor Frank J. Sprague successfully tested his system of multiple-unit train control (MUTC) on the South Side Elevated Railroad in 1897

1

1917 - First World War

1870 - SUBWAY ROUTE PLAN

In the beginning of the Second World War, despite having been previously used as shelters in 1917, the British government felt that the Underground should be used for transport, not shelter.

Posters were put up warning passengers that Underground stations “must not be used as air-raid shelters”

The Underground was funded entirely by private companies until the 1930s.

1925

1874 The first Pullman Train in the UK operates on the Midland Railway.

1870

1863 First Subway Route is developed by Metropolitan Railway to relief traffic congestion in London, Farringdon station was opened as the terminus of the original Metropolitan railway.

A complete Circle line service for London started on 6 October 1884

Police reports of German bomb raids on London in 1917 estimated that 300,000 people were taking shelter in Tube stations.

The Undergrou funded entirely b companies un 1930s.

1925

S TAT I O N A N D C I T Y / A S H I S T O R I C A L P R E C E D E N T O F M O B I L I T Y H U B

The Tube’s first escalator was installed at Earl’s Court in 1911, featuring a diagonal finish to the stairway, meaning the right foot reached the top moments before the left.

During the First World War, women began to make up staff shortages on the Underground The Tube’s world-famous red circle logo, known as the “roundel”, first appeared in 1908.

1865

1939 - Second World War

eslie Green design was massively adopted in London Underground Stations.

1860

Police reports of German bomb raids on London in 1917 estimated that 300,000 people were taking shelter in Tube stations.

1923- Stations were built in modernist style

In 1907 a spiral escalator opened at Holloway Road Tube Station, meanwhile, In a photographic survey was taken of all station exteriors in order to establish ways in which a more uniform design style could be achieved

1911- First Escalator was Introduced to Subway Station

The daily inner-city railway commuting greatly shorten the distance between the metro station and public. The relation between city and metro station is even more intimate compared to its counterpart. Also,the metro station’s interface towards urban scape, is full of diversity and flexibility

The first accidents on the underground occurred within a couple of months of opening in 1863, involving slow-moving collisions at Farringdon Street station

1954- The Toronto Subway opened as Canadian first subway

1860 - FROM RAILWAY TO UNDERGROUND

In mid 19 century, most world major cities suffered from huge traffic congestion due to unprecedented urban intensification. Engineering advancement made underground railway network as a solution to this issue.

In 1907 a spiral escalator opened at Holloway Road Tube Station, meanwhile, In a photographic survey was taken of all station exteriors in order to establish ways in which a more uniform design style could be achieved

1911- First Escalator was Introduced to Subway Station

1.2 METRO(UNDERGROUND) STATION

Several stations were rebuilt in a Modernist style influenced or designed by Charles Holden, who called the his 'brick boxes with concrete lids'

1990

First Maglev Metro System operated in 2004, Shanghai, linking Pudong International Airport with Longyang Road Metro Station.

Montreal Metro was operated on October 14, 1966

9

S TAT I O N A N D C I T Y / A S H I S T O R I C A L P R E C E D E N T O F M O B I L I T Y H U B

1

10

Nollendorfplatz Station 1902 Berlin

Rathaus-Süd Station 2006 Bochum

Nollendorfplatz is one of earliest stations, which interchanged elevated metro line with underground railway tracks.

“The design of this station has created an unmistakable, unusual space characterized by the effect of light and glass. 13 prismatic volumes of precrushed sandwich glass penetrate the street scape and draw daylight into the station below.”

(Lisa,140)

1.3 MORE THAN STATION

“But whether seen as a space, a shell, a triumph of engineering mechanics, or as a solid a mass, an architectonic design, the railroad station in general came to be regarded as the symbolic gateway to the city. It was the real entrance to the metropolis“ The Architecture of Union Station by Douglas Richardson

“Union Station is such a building. For forty-five years it has been the soul and heartbeat of Toronto. There was a time when almost everybody who arrived in the city and almost everybody who left it passed between those familiar columns of Bedford limestone“ The Life of Union Station by Pierre Berton

S TAT I O N A N D C I T Y / A S H I S T O R I C A L P R E C E D E N T O F M O B I L I T Y H U B

1

11 Image Source: John Taylor

S TAT I O N A N D C I T Y / A S H I S T O R I C A L P R E C E D E N T O F M O B I L I T Y H U B

1

Queens Hotel The first elements of the hotel were built in 1844 as four row houses designed by John Howard, who later bequeathed High Park to the city. After a decade housing Knox College, the homes were combined and opened for business as Sword’s Hotel in August 1856. Most of the early clientele were government officials—when the colonial capital was moved to Quebec City the following year, operator Patrick Sword followed. A decade of expansions and name changes followed, with the name “Queen’s Hotel” permanently assumed in 1862.

1844

First Union Station

Second Union Station

Toronto’s first Union Station was built by the Grand Trunk Railway in 1858 at a location just west of the present Union Station train shed. Union Station consisted of three wooden structures and was initially shared with the Northern Railway of Canada and the Great Western Railway, although both railways soon built their own stations along the Toronto waterfront.

By the 1870s, Toronto’s economy and population were booming and the old station was no longer adequate.

The Grand Trunk built a new Union Station on the same site that opened on July 1, 1873. At the time it was the largest and most opulent railway station in Canada and was designed in the Italianate/2nd Empire style by architect Thomas Seaton Scott, who later designed Grand Trunk’s Bonaventure Station in Montreal.

Third City Hall Toronto’s Old City Hall was one of the largest buildings in Toronto and the largest civic building in North America upon completion in 1899. It was the burgeoning city’s third city hall. It housed Toronto’s municipal government and courts for York County and Toronto, taking over from the Adelaide Street Court House. York County offices were also located in Old City Hall from 1900 to 1953. With the establishment of Metropolitan Toronto, the county seat moved to Newmarket, Ontario (and to the Old Newmarket Town Hall and Courthouse).

1856

1858

1873

1890

1899

1904

Great Fire Esplanade

12 Text and Image Source: <Wikipedia>

The presence of the railway caused a dramatic change to the physical state of the shoreline. This began in 1856 with the creation of the Esplanade; a new 30m wide embankment into the harbor. The railway was removed from Front Street and placed upon the Esplanade, allowing Front Street to return to its function as a city street. Shoreline infi lling continued in an effort to support the rapidly increasing rail and industrial activity.

By 1888, the shoreline had moved 650 feet into Lake Ontario, adding many hundreds of acres

Reorganization of DT By the turn of the century,many of the administrative functions and residences centered on Front and John streets moved to the city’s rapidly expanding northern fringe. This shift in land use was synonymous with a western migration of the commercial district,concentrated in the areas of King and Toronto streets. Concurrent with this change in location was the introduction of a new building type, the office building.

The Great Fire of Toronto of 1904 was a great fire that destroyed a large section of Downtown Toronto, Ontario, Canada on April 19, 1904. It was the second of such fires for the city in its then short history. However, the city used the opportunity of the fire to commence a grand re-visioning of Toronto’s downtown.

1910

Beaux-Arts architecture Beaux-Arts architecture depended on sculptural decoration along conservative modern lines, employing French and Italian Baroque and Rococo formulas combined with an impressionistic finish and realism.

In the façade shown to the right, Diana grasps the cornice she sits on in a natural action typical of BeauxArts integration of sculpture with architecture.

Slightly over scaled details, bold sculptural supporting consoles, rich deep cornices, swags[clarification needed] and sculptural enrichments in the most bravura finish the client could afford gave employment to several generations of architectural modelers and carvers of Italian and Central European backgrounds. A sense of appropriate idiom at the craftsman level supported the design teams of the first truly modern architectural offices.

Union Station was a joint venture between the Canadian Pacific Railway and the Grand Trunk Railway (now the Canadian National Railway) to consolidate their services into one facility.

It was designed by a team of architects comprised of John Lyle, the Montreal firm of G.A. Ross and R.H. McDonald, as well as Hugh Jones of the CPR. Though construction began in 1914, its opening was delayed to 1927 as a result of disagreements between

Royal York Hotel The first elements of the hotel were built in 1844 as four row houses designed by John Howard, who later bequeathed High Park to the city. After a decade housing Knox College, the homes were combined and opened for business as Sword’s Hotel in August 1856.

Most of the early clientele were government officials—when the colonial capital was moved to Quebec City the following year, operator Patrick Sword followed.

A decade of expansions and name changes followed, with the name “Queen’s Hotel” permanently assumed in 1862.

John Street Roundhouse Dominion Public Building The Dominion Public Building is a five-storey neoclassical structure built between 1926 to 1935 for the government of Canada at southeast corner of Front and Bay streets in Toronto.The Building was designed by architects Thomas W. Fuller and James H. Craig and originally served as Toronto’s federal customs clearing house. It remains a federal property, currently housing a number of administrative and support functions for Canada Revenue Agency assumed in 1862.

The John Street Roundhouse was built in 1929-31. Following the renovations of the roundhouse in the 1990s, the area to the east of the building became a city owned park named Roundhouse Park in 1997.

The Toronto Railway Museum occupies Roundhouse Park and officially opened in 2010. The Museum occupies three stalls of the John St. Roundhouse and features an indoor display, an indoor restoration facility, a full size diesel cab simulator, an outdoor miniature railway, numerous railway engines and rolling stock as well as a fully restored railway village which includes Don Station, Signal Cabin D (with tool shed), a Watchman’s shanty, a Water Tower and a coaling tower.

1

JOHN LYLE PLAN In 1911 Toronto Architect, John Lyle, was commissioned to create the area’s master plan. The project was undertaken through the auspices of the City Improvement Committee. As the plan’s focal point, Union Station was to be the most monumental structure in the city. It was to be placed on an axis with a new Federal Avenue, which was to run from Front to Queen streets, between York and Bay. This new street would provide access to a new public and administrative area north of Queen Street, between Osoode Hall and the new City Hall.

Queen Street Richmond Street Adelaide Street

King Street

Wellington Street

Front Street

Simcoe

Bay Street Yonge Street

1911

1914

Today Union Station Revitalization The Union Station Revitalization project will focus on the natural light streaming through the new roof and glass atrium that will be built over the passenger platforms and railway tracks. More specifically, the project includes five improvement: 1. A brighter train shed structure 2. A glass atrium 3. Many new staircases and elevators 4. New electrical and communication systems 5. A facility meeting modern standards and with amenities

1970’s CityPlace redevelopment proposal During the early 1970s, CN and CPR proposed a “Metro Centre” development on the south side of Front Street on the site of Union Station and proposed to demolish the structure (which was costing an increasing amount of property taxes but not bringing in revenue). The proposed Metro Centre development was strikingly similar to what occurred with New York City’s Penn Station and would have consisted of an underground fourth Union Station (the terminal trackage would have been buried), a convention Centre, a telecommunications tower, along with complementary office and retail developments.

1929

1935

1929

By 1930

1954 Subway Connection

Harbor Infill

The first major change to Union Station took place in 1954 when the Toronto Transit Commission opened its Union subway station adjacent to Union Station but buried beneath Front Street West.

This subway station acted as the southern terminus of its new subway line.

In 1912, in response to the opening of the Welland Ganal,the Royal Toronto Commission was established to oversee improvements to the industrial port and waterfront. The outbreak of the First World War placed much of the commission’s efforts on hold,but by 1930the commission had successfully created one of the most modern industrial harbors on the continent. This was accommodated by the addition of over 500 acres of new harbor infill,projecting the shoreline nearly half a kilometer further south into Lake Ontario.

S TAT I O N A N D C I T Y / A S H I S T O R I C A L P R E C E D E N T O F M O B I L I T Y H U B

Third Union Station

13 Text and Image Source: <Wikipedia>

C I T Y O F B R A M P T O N / B E T W E E N H E R I TA G E A N D I N T E N S I F I C AT I O N 2

14

2

CITY OF BRAMPTON STUDY

B E T W E E N I N T E N S I F I C AT I O N A N D H E R I TA G E

2.1 TO BE IN SYSTEM As part of Mobility Hub system in GTHA, a clear description of downtown Brampton has already been given by <Metrolinx Mobility Hub Green Paper>, an emerging Centre with medium potential for growth.

Moreover, it has also been defined as an Anchor Hub, mainly focusing on integration of different levels of transit systems.

2

NEWMARKET GO

RICHMOND HIL LANGSTAFF

VAUGHAN

YORK U STEELES WEST

JANE FINCH

MARKHAM CENTER

LESLIE-427

STEELES

FINCH WEST

FINCH

DOWNTOWN BRAMPTON NORTH YORK CENTER

BAMALEA GO

HURONTARIO STEELES

YONGE SHEPPARD

DON MILLS SHEPPARD

SCARBOROUGH CENTER

PEARSON INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT RENFORTH GATEWAY

MISSISSAUGA CENTER

JANE EGLINTON

MT DENNIS EGLINTON

EGLINTON WEST

YONGE EGLINTON

DON MILLS EGLINTON

ST GEORGE

VONGE BLOOR

PAPE

OSGOODE

QUEEN

KENNEDY/ EGLINTON

DOWNTOWN MILTON COOKSVILLE

KIPLING

JANE BLOOR

DUNDAS W BLOOR

MAIN

HIERARCHY OF MOBILITY HUB SYSTEM

Legend(Above) Toronto Center Subway Center Urban Growth Center Emerging Center Inter-Modal Stations Unique Destinations

DOWNTOWN HAMILTON

BURLINGTON GO

MOHAWK JAMES

DOWNTOWN BURLINGTON

MIDTOWN OAKVILLE

PORT CREDIT

UNION

SEATON

PICKERING

OSHAWA DOWNTOWN

OSHAWA

HAMILTON LIUNA

Legend(Right) Anchor Hub Gateway Hub Express and Regional Rail Proposed Rail Subway Proposed Subway Proposed Rapid Transit

C I T Y O F B R A M P T O N / B E T W E E N H E R I TA G E A N D I N T E N S I F I C AT I O N

NEWMARKET CENTER

15 Original Image Source: James Khamsi and Richard Sommer, “Huburbs”

C I T Y O F B R A M P T O N / B E T W E E N H E R I TA G E A N D I N T E N S I F I C AT I O N

2

GTHA is full of diversity. Just as stated in <Mobility Hub Green Paper>, “ Not all of hubs are of equal importance- there is a significant hierarchy of hubs of different sizes“.

The following comparison of Brampton with other six hub sites, will lead to better understanding both Brampton’s potential and constraint as hub site.

Mount Dennis

44 People 13 Jobs

41% Public Transit 55% Automotive 3% Walking 1% Cycling

Kennedy

64 People 8 Jobs

22% Public Transit 71% Automotive 5% Walking 1% Cycling

Pickering

21 People 17 Jobs

17% Public Transit 78% Automotive 4% Walking 1% Cycling

Transit Observation: 1. Public Transit in Downtown Brampton is overwhelmed by private transit, which accounts for 4% and 91% respectively. The proportion of public transit is the smallest compared to other six study hubs.

Employment Observation: 2. The employment succeeds in downtown core Brampton. “Besides, the study of other subjects challenges the caricature that suburbs are the places toliveand the urban core is the place to work.” (James and Richard,50)

Port Credit

20 People 5 Jobs

26% Public Transit 66% Automotive 6% Walking 1% Cycling

Danforth @ Man

95 People 24 Jobs

45% Public Transit 44% Automotive 7% Walking 3% Cycling

Oshawa

28 People 14 Jobs

12% Public Transit 77% Automotive 9% Walking 2% Cycling

Downtown Brampton

67 People 37 Jobs

4% Public Transit 91% Automotive 3% Walking 2% Cycling

GTHA Average

20.2 People 9.5 Jobs

20% Public Transit 73% Automotive 5% Walking 1% Cycling

T

16 Data and Image Source: Metrolinx, James Khamsi and Richard Sommer, “Huburbs”

250m 500m

2.2 TO BE INTENSIFIED Brampton is to be intensified, not only due to the vision set by provincial system, but the support of various local official files ,regional study and public opinion.

â&#x20AC;&#x153; What does Brampton missed? A Walmart! â&#x20AC;?

C I T Y O F B R A M P T O N / B E T W E E N H E R I TA G E A N D I N T E N S I F I C AT I O N

2

17

INTENSIFICATION IN OFFICIAL PLAN

2

18

uv ar dD Bo

Di

xie

HW

Y

41

RD

Brampton Official Plan Schedule 1A Urban Growth Center Schedule 2 Main Street Primary Corridor Primary Corridors Gateway

Qu

ee

nS

TW

0

“The designation of Downtown Brampton as an Urban Growth Centre further attests to the importance of Downtown Brampton in the Regional Urban Structure.

Ke

nn

Brampton GO Station

yR

S

ST

M

cla

Ste e

les

Av eE

ain

The Official Plan also describes the City’s vision for its physical structure which is illustrated in Schedule 1, City Concept. Hurontario/Main Street and Queen Street are identified on this Schedule as Intensification Corridors that links districts and communities with nodes and provides the focus for intensification and transit-supportive development.

ed

D

M

ee

nS TW

ug

Qu

C I T Y O F B R A M P T O N / B E T W E E N H E R I TA G E A N D I N T E N S I F I C AT I O N

RE

Legends

hl

in

RD

S

The designation of these streets as Intensification Corridors and establishment of major transit stations at the identified transit nodes provide further potential for more intensive, transit-supportive, pedestrian-friendly development.” (City of Brampton, City of Mississauga, MMM Group, 60)

REGIONAL LAND USE

2

Di

xie

HW

Y

RD

Brampton Official Plan Land Use Designation Central Area Residential Commercial Business Corridor Industrial Major Institutional Open space

41

Qu

ee

nS

TW

0

Brampton Central Area Community Improvement Plan Primary CIP Area Ke

nn

Brampton GO Station

ed

yR

D

ain

ST

M

cla

Ste e

les

Av eE

M

S

Qu

ee

nS

TW

ug

hl

in

RD

S

“Brampton’s Central Area comprises the historic Downtown core and the area adjoining Queen Street Corridor, stretching from McLaughlin Road to Bramalea Road as depicted in the City Concept plan. Given its scale, concentration and diversity of uses, and the City’s continuous proactive planning and investment over the years, Brampton’s Central Area is unique amongst the GTHA communities. Within Brampton, the Central Area is the major location for a number of important civic, institutional, cultural and entertainment facilities as well as major commercial, retail and employment activities. It is also home to a number of established neighborhoods.”(City of Brampton, 5)

C I T Y O F B R A M P T O N / B E T W E E N H E R I TA G E A N D I N T E N S I F I C AT I O N

Bo

uv ar dD

RE

Legends

19

C I T Y O F B R A M P T O N / B E T W E E N H E R I TA G E A N D I N T E N S I F I C AT I O N

2

2.3 TO BE CIRCULATED Since the first Brampton Station was opened in 1856 between Toronto and London, the transit brought several waves of development in this city, as well as influencing the urban pattern by reshaping circulation system.

Today, the city suffers from the difficulty of rail-cross pedestrian circulation. The commuting between existing Go Station(Entrance/Exit on the South) and the parking lot on the north side is especially inconvenient. Besides, although the public transit network covered the most downtown area, the private transit still accounts for 95%.

The promotion of circulation system in downtown will definitely contribute to expected future intensification process by revitalizing existing “pedestrian unfriendly“ urban space. It also fits the one of the objectives issued

by Mobility Hub, “ creating attractive, pedestrian-friendly,convenient places around stations”.

Old Brampton Station- Top Brampton separated by railway- Bottom

20 Image Source: Julian Cavalier, “North American Station”

Ce Lacrosse Park

St

POINTS OF INTEREST

N

Greenway Reirement Village

ns

Dr

Wise Elephant Family Health Team

Legends Points of Interest Place of Worship Civic Facility Commercial and Office School Open space

Wee Watch Licensed Home Child Care

Un

Av eW

Central Public School

Al ex an de rs

St

Ro se da le

St

ion

ain

M

Brampton Union St. YMCA Centre

N St

Nancy McCredie Park

St. Andrews Presbyterian Church

Da vid St

Sukyo Mahikari

Lacrosse Park

h rc

tW

Political Frame Primary CIP Area Downtown Brampton Special Policy Area Urban Growth Center

Brampton Tennis Club

S

Brampton hu Downtown Post Oï¬&#x192;ce

ar ke tS

t

C

M

M

ar y

S

t Brampton Library - Four Corners Branch

Ln a re The

Rose Theatre Brampton

Academy of Music Brampton

Mill S

CIBC

t

Brampton Board of Trade Algoma University

Ontario Early Years Centre

ABC Driving School

N

St

N

ing to n

St

St

ill

rk

Pa

W ell

St

tS

nS

es

nS

Qu

First Baptist Church

lso N

Gage Park

Oceania Gift ShopPostal Service

Alderlea

N

ve

Peel Mutual Insurance

St

yA

ain

M

Ne

ad

St

tW

ee

t

ch

ur

ilro

Peel Art Gallery Museum and Archives.

Brampton City Hall

tW

W

cm

Ra

St

E

M

St. Paul's United Church

Christ Church

M

Chris Gibson Park

hn

TD Scotia

Jo

RBC

St

th be iza

ge or

Ge

El

ad

Railro Making Waves Swim School

C I T Y O F B R A M P T O N / B E T W E E N H E R I TA G E A N D I N T E N S I F I C AT I O N

Brampton Chapel

Vodden Park

2

lla

tE

nt re

W

hi

Main Street Pharmacy

Vo dd en S

Ken

Songbirds Montessori School Downtown Auto Centres

21

2 Brampton Chapel

C I T Y O F B R A M P T O N / B E T W E E N H E R I TA G E A N D I N T E N S I F I C AT I O N

912m

Greenway Reirement Village 1186m

907m Wise Elephant Family Health Team

Legends

811m Wee Watch Licensed Home Child Care 754m Central Public School St. Andrews Presbyterian Church

1667 m Vodden Park

Nancy McCredie Park 1617m

678m Brampton Union St. YMCA Centre 655m

1684m

Sukyo Mahikari 600m

Lacrosse Park 610m Brampton Tennis Club 561m

Brampton Downtown Post OďŹ&#x192;ce 469m

P

Walking Distance < 400 Meters Walking Distance < 600 Meters Walking Distance < 800 Meters Walking Distance > 800 Meters Buildings within 400 Meters Walking Distance Buildings within 800 Meters Walking Distance Surface Rail Cross Tunnel Main Parking Lot Go Station Entrance and Exist

Brampton Library - Four Corners Branch Academy of Music Brampton 809m

Making Waves Swim School 957m

451m Rose Theatre Brampton

P 374m CIBC

246m Ontario Early Years Centre

651m Brampton Board of Trade 600m Algoma University

ABC Driving School 183m

496m RBC

541m TD

Scotia 523m

654m St. Paul's United Church 807m Peel Art Gallery Museum and Archives.

420m Christ Church

Peel Mutual Insurance 464m

Chris Gibson Park

605m Brampton City Hall 760m First Baptist Church

647m Gage Park

Oceania Gift ShopPostal Service 626m 756m Alderlea

1170m Downtown Auto Centres

22

ACCESSIBILITY

1098m Lacrosse Park

938m m Main Street Pharmacy

Songbirds Montessori School 794m

1. For travelers from Brampton Go Station, north side(including the main parking lot) is harder to get accessed than south side, due to rail crossing inconvenience.

2. The rail-cross of western part of downtown is on grade level, while the eastern part is through tunnel.

3. Main Street and George Street are heavily used by travelers, who are mainly then led to numerous points of interest located in the east south part of the city.

Ce

Ken

nt re S

PUBLIC TRANSIT COVERAGE

tN

W

ns

Vo dd en S

lla

tE

hi

Bus Stop Proposed Rapid Transit LRT Station(Under Debate) AcceleRide Station (Under Debate) Proposed Rapid Transit Alignment (Under Debate) Potential Future Rapid Transit Extension (Under Debate) 200 Meters Radius

Al ex an de rs

St

Ro se da le

St

ion

Da vid St

N St St

W

ar ke tS

t

C

PROPOSED HURONTARIO LRT

M

M

ar y

The

Ln a re

St

Brampton Go

t

Mill S St Jo

N

St

hn

St

th be iza

ge or

Ge

El

ad

Railro

N

ing to n

St

St

ill

E

M

rk

Pa

W ell

St

Qu

nS lso

ain

Ne

M St

N

N

ve

yA

ch

ur

ilro

cm

ad

St

tW

ee

t

tS

nS

es

tW

W

M

C I T Y O F B R A M P T O N / B E T W E E N H E R I TA G E A N D I N T E N S I F I C AT I O N

Av eW

Dr

Legends

Un

ain

M

h rc hu

Ra

2

23 Image Source: “Hurontario LRT Master Plan”

Ce

2

Ken

ns

Vo dd en S

lla

tE

hi

Av eW

Dr

Legends Transit Systems Railway Track Brampton Transit Züm (Brampton Transit’s Bus Rapid Transit) Proposed Hurontario LRT(Under Debate) Trail Dedicated Lanes Key Transit Crossing

Al ex an de rs

St

Ro se da le

St

ion

Da vid St

N St St

W

C

5

ar ke tS

t

4

M

M

ar y

Ln a re The

3

St

t

Mill S

E St

N

W ell tW nS Qu

nS lso

ain

M

Ne

St

tW

ee

t

tS

ad

Bus

ing to n

St

es

ilro

Brampton Transit Rapid

St

ill

St

W

St

N

N

ve

yA

ch

ur

Ra

Cycling

hn

N

St

M

rk

Pa

Hurontario LRT(Under Debate) Jo

St

th be iza

1

ge or

6

Ge

2 El

ad Railro

cm

C I T Y O F B R A M P T O N / B E T W E E N H E R I TA G E A N D I N T E N S I F I C AT I O N

PUBLIC TRANSIT SYSTEMS

tN

Un

ain

M

h rc hu

M

24

nt re S

W

1 4

2 5

3 6

C I T Y O F B R A M P T O N / B E T W E E N H E R I TA G E A N D I N T E N S I F I C AT I O N

2

25

Image Source: Google Street Images

C I T Y O F B R A M P T O N / B E T W E E N H E R I TA G E A N D I N T E N S I F I C AT I O N

2

2.4 TO BE CONSERVED Brampton downtown has numerous heritage properties. Some houses along with Queen or Main Streets, can even date back to 1800s, when Brampton is yet to be a village. It is also impressive that the city is full of buildings with diverse architectural styles of different eras, such as Edwardian, Victorian, Dutch colonial,English Cottage and Georgian.

The heritage significance of downtown core is widely admitted by both government and public. In the plan “Vision Brampton: Six Pillars Supporting Our Great City” issued in 2003, the historical downtown was with “opportunities to be promoted as a tourist destination for its ‘backdrop of 150 years of history and heritage’. At a public information session on June 10, 2008, almost all attendants expressed their preference for heritage conservation district designation for where they lived in.” (George Robb Architect, 1).

For now, the city has one Heritage Conservation Districts(Churchville Heritage Conservation District) and more than 100 properties being designated as Cultural Heritage Resources under the Ontario heritage Act. Meanwhile, there are other 8 prospective Heritage Conservation Districts under study.

Not any hub site is still embedded with such a tremendous heritage value.

26 Text Image Source: <http://www.ashrealestate.ca/neighborhoods/brampton/>

Central School Neighborhood Washington Block and Area Neighborhood

Nelson Street West Neighborhood

Civic, Religious and Commercial Heart of Old Brampton

Main Street South Neighborhood

West Street Neighborhood Elliott Lands Neighborhood

2

C I T Y O F B R A M P T O N / B E T W E E N H E R I TA G E A N D I N T E N S I F I C AT I O N

Concentration of Pre-1946 Buildings in Downtown Brampton

27

Ce

2

Ken

ns

Vo dd en S

lla

tE

hi

Perspective Heritage Conservation District Perspective HCD Priority Perspective HCD

Dr

Av eW

2

Al ex an de rs

2

3

St

Ro se da le

ion

St

Un

M ain

1

4

Da vid St

N St

5 6 ch ur

St

W

7 8

ar ke tS

t

Ch

M

M

ar y

T

n re L hea

t

Mill S

6

Ge

St

N

tW nS ee Qu

tW nS lso

St ad

Ne

ain

M

7

N

N

4

St

ve

yA

ch

ur

ilro

W ell

St

cm

Ra

St

St

rk

Pa

t

tS

es

W

3

ing to n

ill

M

5

E

Jo

N

St

hn

St

th be iza

ge or

El

ad

Railro

M

C I T Y O F B R A M P T O N / B E T W E E N H E R I TA G E A N D I N T E N S I F I C AT I O N

Legends

tN

1

8

28

nt re S

W

St

Washington Block and Aea Neighborhood Central School Neighborhood Nelson Street West Neighborhood West Street Neighborhood Civic, Religious and Commercial Heart of Old Brampton Neighborhood Near the Court House Main Street South Neighborhood Elliott Lands Neighborhood

Cultural Heritage Designated Heritage Resources Under Part IV of the Ontario Heritage Act Class A Heritage Resources Class B Heritage Resources

nS

W ell ing to tE

ad

ilro

Ra

St

hn S

Jo

lso n

Ne

nS tW

Qu ee

St W

t

nS tE

W ell ing to

hn St

Jo

on

Ne ls

St

Qu e

W

en

en

Qu e

o Ra ilro n St W ad St

Ne ls

t

Ra ilro ad S

St

St

t

Ra ilro a ark et S

M

W

W

dS

t

Ne lso n

Da vid

St

Qu ee

W

W ell ing to n

W ell ing to n

St

St

St

E

t

tW

Ale xa nd

dS

E

t

Jo h

nS

t

Ne lso n

ilro

Ra

ers

St

Av eW

W ell ing to n

Ra ilro a

nS

le

Ro se da

St

Qu ee

W

ad

on

E

nS

tW

ilro a

nS tW

Ra

Qu ee

St W

t

nS

Ne ls

Jo h

St

St

hn S

Jo

Ne

t

W ell ing to n

dS

t

lso n

W ell

St

St

E

ee

nS

St E

E

hn S

Jo

W ell ing to n

hn St

tW

Jo

t

M

St

ar ke tS

ar ke tS

M

E

t

ar ke tS t

M

t

d Railroa

ain

M

St

N

N

ve

yA

Image Source: GRA, “Heritage Conservation District Feasibility Study”

Jo h

nS

t

St

Qu

W

ing to n

St

Vo dd en

Da vid

St

ar ke tS t

M

Da vid

St

Da vid

St

M

ar ke tS t

Ro se d

Ale xa nd er s

ale

Ale xa n

t

St

Av eW

de rs S

Ro se da le

Ale xa n

St

Av eW

Da vid

Ro se da le

de rs S

t

Av eW

St

Ro se d

ale

Ale xa nd er s

M ar ke t

Da vid

W

The

Ln a re ar y

C I T Y O F B R A M P T O N / B E T W E E N H E R I TA G E A N D I N T E N S I F I C AT I O N

tW

N

N

N

ee nS

St

St

ve

N

Qu

Ale xa nd er sS

N

ain

ain

M

M

yA

e

N St

Av

ain

M

hy

tW

St

St

ain

St

ch ur

cm

M

urc

nS

N

M

N

t es

N

W

St

N

cm M

ch ur

cm

Ne lso

St

N

yA ch ur cm ve

N

St

ain

ve

yA

St

N St

St rk Pa

ain

M ar ke t

ar y

St

Av eW

Ro se da le

St

Ale xa nd er sS t

Av eW

Vo d

de

tE

Vo d

nS

Da vid

St

M

Av eW

St

ch ur cm

M

ain

ill

M

Da vid

t es W

N St

St

M

St

N St M

ale

ch ur

N St

St rk

ge or

Ge

Pa

St N St

d th be za Eli

Railroa

Ln a re

M

ge or Ge

M ar y

The

Main Street South Neighborhood

Vo d

St

de

de

Vo d

nS tE

de

nS tE

Ro s

nS

tE

Vo dd en

St E

t

Av eW

er sS

ale

Ale xa nd

ed

St

Neighborhood Near the Court House

St

ion

ch ur

Ch

Un

St

Ln a re

N

th be za Eli

M ill M

The

N

St

Mill St

St

St

M

St ain

Ch

Ce

M

ar y

nt re Dr

W

W

St

N

ar y

St

N St ill

t tS es

ge or Ge

th be za Eli

ed

Ken

ion Un

St

M

St rk Pa

W

N St

Ro s

tN

ain

Ln a re

ch ur

Mill St

tE

eS

M

N

de nS

N ns

Dr

W

St

St

ain

Vo d

Ce nt re

ion

St

The

Civic, Religious and Commercial Heart of Old Brampton

M

Mill St

St

M

ve

N St

St

N

N

t

W

lla

ns

St

lla

Un

ch ur Ch

hi

Dr

N St

ge or Ge

d Railroa

Ln a re ge or Ge

St

N St ill

th be za Eli

N St

yA

N St

St

ill M

St

t es W

St

St

St

St

ad S

Ken

hi

ns

The

St

W

ion Un

d

W lla

Dr

Railroa th be za Eli

M

t kS

N

ill

M

ve yA

ch ur

cm

M

e org Ge

th be za Eli

rk Pa

ge or Ge

th be za Eli

ill

M

t

S rk Pa

t es W

M

Ra ilro

Ken hi

ns

St

lla

Ch

West Street Neighborhood St

N

ar y

St

ch ur

St

M

ion

tN

N

Mill St

ntr eS

ain

N

Ce

St

M

St

r Pa

ch

St

St

ary

ur cm

M

Ln a re

t es

St

d Railroa

ain

The

M

Ln a re

St

M

St rk Pa

N The

t es

W

ve yA

Ch

W

W

N St ill

W

N St

St

M

t kS

St

ch

ur cm

Ch

ge or Ge

th be za Eli

d

Mill St

Dr

Railroa St

W

Un

ch ur

M

Ch

Nelson Street West Neighborhood

nt re

hi

Dr

ns

ion

St St

r Pa

Un

M

ad

t es

N St

Railro

W

ain

ar y M

Mill St

Ln a re

ns

lla

Dr h

urc

W

lla

Ken

hi

ntr eS

St

Ce

ion Un

ns

The

N

tN hi

lla

W

St

W

Mill St

hi

N

ad St

St

Mill St

Railro ion

Un

ain M

ch ur St

Central School Neighborhood ain

Ken

M

Washington Block and Aea Neighborhood Ken Ce

Ch W

M St

Elliott Lands Neighborhood 2

29

Ce

2

Ken

ns

Vo dd en S

lla

tE

hi

Av eW

Dr

Al ex an de rs

St

Ro se da le

St

ion

Da vid St

N St St

Obviously the ambition of urban intensification is conflicted with the conservation of Brampton’s precious cultural heritage. There are too much conflicting areas, or overlapped areas between prospective Heritage Conservation District and Urban Growth Center area.

W

ar ke tS

t

Ch

M

M

ar y

Ln a re The

t

Mill S St Jo

N

St

hn

St

th be iza

ge or

Ge

El

ad

Railro

N

ing to n

St

St

ill

E

M

rk

Pa

W ell

St

Ra

Qu

nS lso

ain

Ne

M St

N

N

ve

yA

ch

ur

ilro

ad

St

tW

ee

t

tS

nS

es

tW

W

cm

C I T Y O F B R A M P T O N / B E T W E E N H E R I TA G E A N D I N T E N S I F I C AT I O N

Legends Urban Growth Center Prospective Heritage Conservation District Overlapping(Conflicting) Area Recent Development

tN

Un

ain

M

ch ur

M

30

nt re S

W

St

It is interesting that, as mentioned by “Brampton HOD Feasibility Plan”, “none of recent developments in downtown are within studied HCDs”, which may not be a coincidence. However, “If land use policies remain the same, the market will respond with redevelopment proposals in or out of the prospective heritage conservation district study areas” (George Robb Architect, 25). It is mostly impossible to find a way to locate modern mid-rise or high-rise buildings within a heritage community without spoiling its cultural landscape.

Back to the provincial political framework, being identified as an Anchor Hub with middle level intensification potential, the priority for the hub site on Brampton to be considered might just be the right approach of intensification with minimum impact upon heritage districts.

PEEL YORK DURHAM

TORONTO

HAMILTON

3

3

MOBILITY HUB IN BRAMPTON / PROJEC T INTRODUC TION

HALTON

MOBILITY HUB IN BRAMPTON PROJECT INTRODUCTION

31

3.1 METHODOLOGY

MOBILITY HUB IN BRAMPTON / PROJEC T INTRODUC TION

3

Historical Precedent Research Time Line Urban Relationship Key Case Study Building Typology Building Programs Key Building Elements

Optimizing Circulation Circulation between Platforms and Parking Lot North-South Circulation cross the rail corridor

Assessment

Support Main Street and Queen Street as primary intensification corridors.

Policy and Existing Study

4 Alternative Planning and Design Lens

Site Research

Mapping Existing Points of Interest,Heritage Resources,Existing, Future Transit System and Analyzing Mapping Outcomes (E.g. Calculating Distance between the points of interest and Go Station)

Plan

Design

Land use HCDs Master Plan

Building Size Building Form/Typology Building Program

7

5 6 Altered Built Form/ Programs And Transit Interconnection

Travel Behavior (Proportion of Public ,Private Transit Usage, Walking and Biking in Certain Period of Time)

Deliverable Selected alternatives

Downtown Brampton Urban Growth Centre Minimum Density Target(Neptis)

Alternatives

Approaches Scenario Planning

Inter modal Capability Transit Modal Split Ridership

3

2

Minimize the Disruption on Existing Local Cultural Heritages from the Intensification

Provincial Policy Framework Metrolinx Policy Brampton Policy Existing Transportation System Study Existing Brampton City Study

Consultancy from Experts in Metrolinx

Key Transit Indicator

Support Downtown Brampton as An Urban Growth Centre

Mapping Political Framework and Analyzing Mapping Outcomes (E.g. Overlapping different policy districts)

32

Project Objective

2031 Population and Jobs: 44800 2006-2031 Population and Jobs Increase: 194%

Minimum Intensification Rate Targets, by Municipality 50% in 2026

Effect on Planning and Policy Land Use Designation Prospective HCDs Regional Transit System (Hurontario LRT) Special Policy Districts

Schematic Design for Mobility Hub Technical Drawings Relevant Diagrams Renderings Physical Modeling

Design Report Design Statement Technical Drawings Relevant Diagrams Renderings

Assessment Report Physical Model for Selected Alternatives Downtown Massing Model Mobility Hub Model

4

O�������� M������� R��������Clear, D������� B������� Ease of public movement efficient and safe

MOBILITY HUB OBJECTIVES General Objectives

Promotion of user experience in transit

1 5 2 The Background Research led to the following conclusions: 6 1 3 research of the railway station, reveals the importance of the circula1. The historical 7 tion systems within and to the station in design. The railway station’s role in urban 2 context is 4usually regarded as more than a functional transit facility, but an integral part of the 3 urban fabric. The station, or the mobility hub, has a more profound impact on its adjacent urban fabric compared to other building types. public movement Optimize urban with

between thetime platforms Reduce the and

and nearby high pedestrian priority circulation system distance forparking commuting facility 3.2 RESEARCH CONCLUSION AND PROJECT OBJECTIVES to work and school

Specific Objectives

Seamless integration of

transit modes O��������different M������� Prioritize walking, cycling

1

2 3 4

Clear, efficient and safe public movement with high pedestrian priority

and public transit in Clear, efficient and safe downtown Brampton public movement with high pedestrian priority Improving walking and

Ease of public movement between the platforms and nearby parking facility

cycling experience to Support Brampton as an Mobility Hub. urban growth center of Seamless integration different transit modes

Historical Research

Seamless integration of different transit modes

Promotion of user experience in transit

Improving walking and cycling experience to Mobility Hub.

7

Support Main Street and Queen Street as primary Clarity of north-south intensification corridors. public routes of the rail corridor

employment and shorten R��������Promotion D������� of userB�������

Clarity of north-south public routes of the rail corridor

2.

Site Analysis

Promotion of user experience in transit

4 the railway corridor introduces many waves of development in history, In Brampton, 5 experience in transit Optimize urban circulation system

Optimize urban circulation system

Reduce the time and distance for commuting to work and school

urban infrastructure

6 5 7 Currently, the mobility hubs in GTHA aim to facilitate the connection between dif8 6 modes, and also acts as centres of various activities, stimulating the ferent transit Raise the walking, opportunities Prioritize cycling for Brampton to beinas and public transit tourist destination downtown Brampton

9 7

Policy and Existing Study

its distance to existing Reduce the time housing and and prospective distance for commuting to work and school Revitalize key existing

optimizing breaking up the north-south circulation. Thus, but also separates the city through physically, Prioritize walking, cycling access and circulation public transitB������� in R��������and D������� the Mobility downtown Hub aims Brampton to clarify the circulation system, especially the public route Intensification within Optimize urban Reduce the time and Hub to reduce circulation system distance for the commuting crossing the rail corridor asMobility well connection of the parking lot and platform. development pressure on to work and school Support Brampton as an urban growth center

R�������� D������� B�������

6

opportunities for mixed-use urban space

Foster concentrations of

Improving walking and cycling experience to Mobility Hub.

3.

5

Ease of public movement between the platforms and nearby parking Clarity facility of north-south public of the rail Createroutes pedestrian-friendcorridor ly public realm to create

Create pedestrian-friendurban core ly public realm to create opportunities for mixed-use urban space

Support Main Street and Queen Street as primary intensification corridors.

Create pedestrian-friendly public realm to create opportunities for Foster concentrations of mixed-use urban employment and space shorten its distance to existing Support Main Street and and prospective housing Queen Street as primary intensification corridors.

Revitalize key existing urban infrastructure through optimizing Foster concentrations access and circulation of employment and shorten its distance to existing Intensification within and prospective housing Mobility Hub to reduce development pressure on Revitalize key existing urban core urban infrastructure through optimizing access and circulation

MinimizeBrampton the disruption Support as an intensification ofgrowth its adjacencies.

However, the location of Downtown Brampton is on existing local cultural urban center heritages from the intensification. important due to its heritage resources, which distinguishes it from many other hub sites. The urban effect of the mobility hub, as I have demonstrated in my previous studies, should be carefully planned and designed to help Brampton to strike a balance between intensification and heritage.

Prioritize walking, cycling and public transit in downtown Brampton

The key objectives of this project are to: Support Brampton as an urban growth center

Create pedestrian-friendly public realm to create opportunities for mixed-use urban space

1.

9 8

Support Main Street and Queen Street as primary intensification corridors.

Foster concentrations of employment and shorten its distance to existing and prospective housing

9

8

Raise the opportunities for Brampton to be as tourist destination

9

Minimize the disruption on existing local cultural heritages from the intensification.

Minimize the disruption on existing local cultural heritages from the intensification.

2.

Support Downtown Brampton as an urban growth centre Support Main Street and Queen Street as primary intensification corridors.

3.

Minimize the disruption on existing local cultural heritages from the intensification.

Revitalize key existing urban infrastructure through optimizing access and circulation Intensification within Mobility Hub to reduce development pressure on urban core

8

Raise the opportunities

Brampton to be as system within and outside the Mobility Hub, which includes: Optimize thefor circulation tourist destination Intensification within Mobility Hub to reduce Ease ofMinimize public movement platform and large commuter parking fadevelopmentbetween pressure on the disruption urban core existing local cultural cility. onheritages from the Raise the opportunities intensification. for Brampton to be as Clarity tourist of north-south public routes of the rail corridor in downtown Brampdestination ton.

3

MOBILITY HUB IN BRAMPTON / PROJEC T INTRODUC TION

O�������� M�������

33

3.3 SCENARIO PLANNING AS MAIN APPROACH

MOBILITY HUB IN BRAMPTON / PROJEC T INTRODUC TION

3

Scenario Planning is featured by flexibility, which can raise the opportunity for Mobility Hub design to embrace future uncertainty by means of several alternatives. The objectives listed will be achieved by those alternatives, which apply different tools(Plan: Land use adjustment, HCDs...; Design: build forms, programs...).

Third, given that these external forces are changing , investment, policies and plans can be implemented at various time horizons.

These interventions can be amended as new information about their performance and context becomes available,providing a diversity of possible successful outcomes at different points in time.

Scenario Planning

Fourth, the process of developing and evaluating alternatives fundamental to scenario planning is particularly useful for engaging stakeholders and informing them about the relationships between the many external forces that can shape their communities.

Scenario planning allows designers, planners and decision makers to encounter uncertainty. It allows them to work with the realities of urban space without being shackled by them, and in some applications it allows them to discover hidden opportunities in cities.

Fifth, scenario planning offers the opportunity to better link urban design, transportation,economic development strategies, and land use planning, which are too often each undertaken by separate agencies.

The process often begins with a collaborative exploration of social, economic , environmental, political, and physical data and their extrapolation into the future. This projection of current trends is but one of among many sets of analysis, and it may be a poor indicator of future developments, particularly in situations that involve major and transformative infrastructure investments. Alternatives to current trends are often more speculative, proposing answers to questions that begin “What if...?” Comparisons among the several alternative event sequences and trends can be made and assessed according to a range of criteria.

Last, scenario planning brings practitioners from different urban disciplines,out of their silos to work more closely with one another.

(James and Richard, 28-30)

Scenario Plan Case: Anaheim and Orange County points of interest in relationship to the proposed high-speed rail station at ARTIC.

Port Credit with Mobility Hub

Pickering with Mobility Hub

Mount Dennis with Mobility Hub

Danforth@Main with Mobility Hub

This process of developing alternatives positions scenario planning outside both monolithic,top-down planning paradigms and normative urban design approaches that aim to realize a pre-ordained urban pattern.

Scenario planning offers six distinct advantages in addressing the contingent nature of the future.

First,by beginning with data, scenario planning can describe a place’s comparative advantages and provide a means to inquire into how they might be enhanced through investment, a different policy context, or through interactions with other places.

34

Second, the process of creating and deliberating over internally consistent, plausible alternative scenarios requires participants to recognize that the future is not simply the continuation of existing trends, and that alternatives to doing”business as usual” exist.

Image Source: James Khamsi and Richard Sommer, “Huburbs”

1098m

938m m 1186m 907m 912m

Existing Pedestrian Plan From Go Station towards Points of Interest (Distance from Go Station)

ALTERNATIVE LENS EXAMPLE 1: PEDESTRIAN HUB

811m

754m

1667 m

678m

655m 1617m

1684m 600m 561m 469m

Education 451m

P

809m

Civic

Government

374m

3

651m 600m

246m

Retailing

183m

957m

496m

541m

654m

523m

Commercial

807m 605m

The design with high levels of pedestrian priority, requires to regard Mobility Hub as one key node of the whole downtown Brampton pedestrian system. Planning and designing a new type plan, “pedestrian master plan” of downtown Brampton may be necessary as the key step of process. The re-organizing and clarity of pedestrian network, especially the north-south connection, can also influence its adjacent land use, thus orienting prospective density.

420m

Utility

647m

“PEDESTRIAN”

464m

626m 756m

One Possible Pedestrian Master Plan in Future 1170m

Education

Recreation

ALTERNATIVE LENS EXAMPLE 2: STATION AS A CITY P

B N HU TRIA B PEDESBILITY HU MO

Conventionally, a station serves as an key component, but still only a part of the city. However, the historical trajectory indicates that, the station itself harbours the potential to function just as a city. Even back in Late-nighteen-century, the station began to be designed as a whole system in form and program: ”a massive concourse of entrance atrium and ticket office which was conceived of as an urban promenade” (Alessia, 8) .

Downtown Brampton is a small but compact urban core, the ambition of future Mobility Hub may be not compatible with the city size. Additional distinct issue is the dilemma of intensification and heritage conservation for downtown. The traditional Mobility Hub can hardly control the surrounding intensification it facilitate, not to influence heritage atmosphere.

However, what if we invented a new model for Mobility Hub and reversed the basic relationship between the station and city, to make the city part of the station? What if Mobility Hub evolves from a density orienter to a container?

This very idea is also inspired from one objective description in “Metrolinx Green Paper”: Promote the most sustainable urban structure by reducing pressure for urban sprawl by focusing future growth in mobility hubs. Designing a station as a density container with diverse programs and immense space, to generate and direct intensification process without interference upon outside.

760m

Station As a City Conceptual drawing

Local Housing

Local Housing

Education Government Civic Retailing

Local Housing

794m

MOBILITY HUB IN BRAMPTON / PROJEC T INTRODUC TION

For now, Downtown Brampton is overwhelmed by private transit. 91% people during morning peak period will make trips by car. Very few people choose to walk, bike or take public transit. Future Mobility Hub may be a good opportunity to reverse this situation, if it can be considered not only a Mobility Hub, but more a Pedestrian Hub.

610m

“CITY” Recreation Commercial Education Utility

Local Housing

Local Housing

Local Housing

35

RESOURCES

Metrolinx(2008). Mobility Hub Green Paper #2.

MOBILITY HUB IN BRAMPTON / RESOURCES

Arup, Associated Engineering, LURA(2013). The Big Move Baswline Monitoring Report.

City of Toronto(2014). Mobility Hub Study.

Metrolinx(2012). Downtown Brampton Mobiliy Hub Profile.

Neptis (2013). Implementing the Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe. ISBN 978-0-9739888-6-4 Go Transit’s newsletter for customers(2010). Union Station, it’s time for you. ISSN 0226-5567 City of Brampton(2006). Hurontario/Main Street Corridor Master Plan. ISSN 0226-5567 City of Brampton, City of Mississauga, MMM Group(2010). Hurontario/Main Street Corridor Master Plan. ISSN 0226-5567 City of Brampton(2013). City of Brampton Official Plan.

Brampton Heritage Board(2015). Municipal Register of Cultural Heritage Resources Designated Under the Ontario Heritage Act. City of Brampton. Brampton Economic Review.

City of Brampton(2008). Architectural Control Guidelines for Ground-related Residential Development.

George Robb Architect(2009). Heritage Conservation District Feasibility Study.

Marcus Binney, David Pearce(1979). “Railway Architecture.” London : Orbis Publishing, c1979 Kenneth W. Griffin ; Stephen A. Kliment(2004). “Building type basics for transit facilities” Hoboken, N.J. : John Wiley & Sons, c2004.

Julian Cavalier ; edited with a foreword by Frederick A. Platt(1979). “North American railroad stations”. South Brunswick : A. S. Barnes, c1979.

Lawrence, David(2008). “Bright underground spaces : the railway stations of Charles Holden.” [S.l.] : Capital Transport Lisa Baker(2015). “Contemporary underground stations of the world.” [Salenstein] : Braun, [2015] Alessia Ferrarini(2005). “Railway stations : from the Gare de l’Est to Penn Station.” Milan : Electa Architecture ; London : Distributed by Phaidon Press Richard Bébout. Original photos. by John Taylor (1972). “The Open gate : Toronto Union Station. ” [Toronto] : P. Martin Associates, 1972.

36