School Area & Site Design Guideline by Victor Cheung

Section Title

SCHOOL AREA & SITE DESIGN GUIDELINE

School Area & Site Design Guideline PROMOTING SAFER ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION FOR SCHOOL TRAVEL

Prepared to fulfil the requirements of PLG620 at Ryerson University

made for 1

Acknowledgements

Street Design Guidelines Team

Prepared for

Amy Campbell Nicholas Chan Victor Cheung Brianne Della Savia Alex Gaio Kaitlyn Hundt-Lippett Mitchell Leighton Michael Morozov Jan Puzon Kenneth Scullion

City of Toronto Transportation Planning City Coordinator: Dewan Karim

Advisor RYERSON UNIVERSITY

All images from unsplash.com unless otherwise noted

Raktim Mitra, PhD

Diagrams

Layout Inspired by Street Design Manual, New York City Department of Transportation (2015) Images

Inspired by Traffic Calming Guide for Toronto, City of Toronto (2016)

SCHOOL AREA & SITE DESIGN GUIDELINE

Table of Contents

Foreword IV

School Zone Advance Warning

Introduction 1

Radar Speed Sign

Background 3

2.3 Pedestrian Realm

Rationale 4

Lighting 51

Site Visits & Checklist

Sightlines 52

Checklist Methodology

Furniture and Landscaping

Site Visits

Shared Facilities

Checklist Summary

Street Block Design

Islington Junior Middle School Evaluation

Cycling & Transit Infrastructure

Traffic Signage Evaluation

Crosswalks & Crossings Evaluation

Guideline Implementation

Implementation 22

3.1 Cycling 58 Bicycle Lanes

Bicycle Parking

Bicycle Signage

Active Traffic Calming

1.1 Street Design

26 Proximity 63

Speed Limits

Level of Service

Reduced Lanes

Mode Segregation

Gateways 29 Chicanes 30

3.2 Transit 62

Site Access & Parking

Speed Reducers

4.1 Site Access Points

Roadway Material

Number of Access Points

Intersections 33 Crosswalks 34 Street Parking

Passive Traffic Calming

4.2 Parking 70 Stacked Staff Parking

Reduced/Shared Staff Parking

Drop Off

2.1 Sidewalks 38 4.3 Bus Bays

Full Sidewalks

Bus Bay Location & Pedestrian Interface

Material

Coloured Wayfinding

Programming

Curb Extensions

References

Pedestrian Medians

Textured & Coloured Concrete

2.2 Signage 46 School Zone

III

Foreword

The rapid decline of active transportation modes, greater usage of vehicles around school zones and the rise of pedestrian and cyclists fatalities, has now become a global epidemic. Torontoâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s recent Road Safety Plan identified school travel, particularly among children, as a priority issue to improve existing school safety conditions (Road Safety Plan, 2017). The vision for this project is to develop a collection of knowledge in school content as a means of facilitating the creation and maintenance of a healthy, safe, and active school environments that empower students in choosing sustainable and active transportation. This report has two main components that stakeholders will be able to use the creation of School Area and Site Design Guideline, site evaluation criteria and a portfolio of best practice research, we aim to shape the development of school sites and surrounding school zones and establish active transportation for children as their primary mode of travel. There are two key components to this report: a checklist to evaluate school sites, and a design guideline to effectively enable safety measures by urban design. Through these tools, this report aims to shape the development of school sites and surrounding school zones, while promoting active transportation as childrenâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s primary mode of travel to and from school.

Amy Campbell

Nicholas Chan

Victor Cheung

Brianne Della Savia

Alex Gaio

Kaitlyn Hundt-Lippett

Mitchell Leighton

Michael Morozov

Jan Puzon

Kenneth Scullion

Introduction

Background 3 Rationale 4 Methodology 6

Introduction

Background

SCHOOL AREA & SITE DESIGN GUIDELINE

Our initial research began with a comprehensive review of the literature surrounding active transportation for students, road safety, and school site design. The literature review findings helped to establish a checklist for evaluating the overall safety and design of schools and their surrounding area. The clarity and usefulness of the checklist was tested by summarizing several elementary schools in the City of Toronto. This field test identified issues and concerns in the initial checklist and lead to a modified version of the checklist being created. The refined checklist is more balanced and ensures a more polished operation regarding childrenâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s active transportation. The checklist process aided in the creating the final product of School Area and Site Design Guideline. The objective of the School Area and Site Design Guideline is to inform school staff, municipalities, decision makers, families and students about the future of universal design in Torontoâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s school environments. Elements of design have the ability to improve safety for students. This manual is intended to be accessible to all, yet detailed enough to make substantial awareness, inspiration and impact on achieving greater safety for those traveling to and from Torontoâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s schools. Inclusion of measures in the School Area and Site Design Guideline should not be considered as justification for their inclusion at any specific location. Their application, as with any traffic operation measures, is dependent upon site-specific conditions. As the population grows and more schools are built, it has become increasingly evident that the way we design our streets determines how people interact in our City. When we build spaces that make people of all ability and ages feel comfortable and encourage people not only to move through, but to generate inclusion and increase active transportation, we create a more vibrant public realm. This perpetuates and ensures safety, health and economic benefits for all. Like our City, the manual is continuously evolving to serve the needs of our many communities in smarter, stronger and more effective ways.

Rationale

A number of factors may contribute to low rates of children walking and biking to school. Variables that contribute to this include: lack of sidewalks, quality of sidewalks, high volumes and speeds of vehicular traffic, difficulty of road crossings, concerns about children travelling on their own, long distances between home and school, and high rates of auto ownership. This report recognizes the fact that children are those at most risk in road traffic crashes. According to WHO (2017) approximately 21% of road traffic fatalities are children resulting in an average of 720 child deaths related to road traffic crashes daily. Traffic injuries are the second leading cause of death worldwide for young children, and the leading cause of child disability worldwide.

LEFT: Calmed streets create a safer environment for casual biking. RIGHT: Streetscape near a private school in Toronto. Photo by project team.

Explanations as to why children are at particular risk include their underdeveloped cognitive abilities, perceptions, and greater variability in their actions. Although children begin mobile independence at a young age,

Approximately 21% of road traffic fatalities involve children.

they are not yet cognitively capable of navigating traffic conditions in a way fully developed adults can respond. In addition to this risk, their small size makes them less visible to drivers, and more vulnerable to death when collisions occur. The walk to and from school is a point of considerable exposure and risk for children. Risk factors in the built environment interact with each other, and can potentially increase the probability of pedestrian fatalities and injuries that occur. These children are obligated to attend school by law, and often are unable to provide input in their mode choice of commuting to and from school. It is because of

this, children deserve planners to perform risk assessments of the overall built environment during planning, implementation and evaluations of these school sites. Additionally, supporting more students to walk or bike for the school journey is a simple way to address traffic issues around schools while improving student health through increased physical activity. Studies confirmed a positive

correlation between physical modes of transportation to and from school and improvement of physical and mental health (SRTS, 2015). Finally, with children being the most vulnerable road users, it can be assumed that if streetscapes are deemed safe for children, they are safe for the majority of the population. With these reasons presented, that this project is of importance. This guideline

for school zones, school sites, and their catchment areas was created for the welfare of children regardless of the mode of transportation to and from school. It is encouraged that all schools, public or private, use these guidelines to maximize safety for their students. This is a step forward for greater safety not only for Torontoâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s school children, but Toronto as a whole.

SCHOOL AREA & SITE DESIGN GUIDELINE

i 6

Site Visits & Checklist

SCHOOL AREA & SITE DESIGN GUIDELINE

Site Visits & Checklist

Checklist Methodology

Site Visits

Checklist Summary

Islington Junior Middle School Evaluation

Traffic Signage Evaluation

Crosswalks & Crossings Evaluation

Checklist Methodology

LEFT: A student finishes their last mile journey. Photo by project team. RIGHT: Bike parking facilities at a school in Toronto. Photo by project team.

The purpose of the checklist was to create a set of criteria from which stakeholders could use to identify schools in Toronto based on elements such as urban design, accessibility, and transportation. The checklist served as an instrument that helped assess which schools in Toronto were safe and promoted active transportation, and what factors made them successful. It also helped determined which schools needed improvements in elements such as accessibility or, and the issues and barriers to child safety and active transportation those schools faced. The checklist ultimately had two goals: assist the municipality, school boards, and other stakeholders in identifying common child safety issues during school travel and to take the next step and guide our team towards the development of an active transportation with informing the production of School Area and Site Design Guideline. The checklist analysed schools based on a layered approach. It looked at three different levels of analysis; •

School Site: is defined as the school’s property lines and

•

adjacent sidewalks. This layer is defined in the site planning process and the design is determined by the applicant and is subject to local policies and regulations. School Zone: is defined as the 100m radius surrounding the school property with emphasis on the local and arterial streets and crosswalks. School zones do not have a clear definition from the City of Toronto, thus the 100m radius should be used as a starting point for each school’s unique context. School zones are under the jurisdiction of Transportation Services. Catchment Area: is defined as a designated population area for

The checklist evaluates schools based on a categorical ratio, rather than a numerical score.

each school, assigned by the school boards. Catchment areas are also under the jurisdiction of Transportation Services. The layered approach provides an opportunity to enable various stakeholders, such as the applicant and Transportation Services, to collaborate in producing a design that extends beyond the school site. Each level of analysis contained a series of criteria that is relevant and applicable to their respective level. The criteria were also categorized into themes for each level of analysis. The checklist evaluates schools based on a categorical ratio, rather than a numerical score. The checklist is not weighted, and each criteria is viewed equally significant and is intended to the user of the checklists to identify where a school should improve upon to facilitate safety. Generally, each checklist criteria may be evaluated within the range of: poor, below average, average, above average, and excellent. For some criteria this scale may not be appropriate, and their evaluation may be based on poor,

average, excellent, or simply yes or no. Each criteria on the checklist also contains room for comments, as each school is context specific there will be a need to record qualitative inferences. It is important to note that not all criteria on the checklist is applicable to each school. Every school is located in a different location and environment, and utilized by a different population, therefore their context will vary. To ensure equity and that every school is evaluated appropriately, if a checklist criteria is not applicable to a school then it is omitted from the assessment for that school. The following schools were evaluated using the initial checklist in order to test its clarity and effectiveness: Our Lady of Perpetual Help, Branksome Hall, Davisville Junior Public School, Islington Junior Middle School, Armour Heights Public School, Ionview Public School, Lord Robert Junior Public School, and North Toronto Collegiate School. These sites were chosen based on the percentage of students, who live and walk within 1.6 kilometres of the school. The results of the identification

Not all criteria on the checklist are applicable to each school. during these visits helped modify and refine the finalized version of the checklist. The application and usage of the refined checklist and informed School Area and Site Design Guideline is applicable to all school levels and school boards in Toronto. The Summary Report Tool is a compiled finalized version of the school evaluation checklist. This summary report tool can be used by school board staff members or officials to evaluate the school site, zone and catchment area of any elementary school in the Toronto district. When using this tool it is important to remember that the evaluation criteria are not weighted and to consider if each criteria is applicable to the context of the layers of the school.

SCHOOL AREA & SITE DESIGN GUIDELINE

Site Visits

Site Visits & Checklist

Site Visits

The design guidelines act as a reference for five important themes of School Site and Street design. These four themes include: • • • •

Active traffic calming Passive traffic calming Cycling and transit Site access and parking

It draws information and inspiration from a wide variety of resources at the local, national and global level. The Design Guidelines act as a supplement to existing engineering, design, and policy standards that exist within the City of Toronto. It is recognized that each school and its surrounding area is unique. No one design solution is ideal for every circumstance. The designs must be considered within the context of the school itself. The guidelines provide a variety of options within each section, providing decision makers and the local community opportunity to decide upon the correct design solution that is appropriate for the school and local area. The purpose of the design guidelines is to provide tangible design options to address the areas of improvement that have previously been identified through the school area evaluation tool. The guideline has been drafted so that any stakeholder; city staff, school staff, or the local community can easily understand and apply design solutions to their neighbourhood. It is a reference manual for design solutions that are currently implemented within the city, but also includes designs that have yet to be applied. In this way the guidelines are adaptable to both the present state of school site and street design, but also push forward towards a more renegade future.

The guidelines are organized into five distinct sections; Active Traffic Calming, Passive Traffic Calming, Cycling and Transit, Site Access and Parking, and Programming. Active Traffic calming discusses the physical design solutions that encourage automobiles to become more aware of their surroundings and to reduce their speed, whether consciously or subconsciously. The Passive Traffic Calming section outlines visual or other cues that encourage drivers to operate at lower speeds. The Cycling and Transit Infrastructure section details the significance of cycling and transit as alternative methods transportation options that encourage children to make safe trips to school. The Site Access and Parking Section summarizes the significance and location of parking, drop off locations, and bus bays in relation to pedestrian safety. The final section of Programming, outlines how programming can work in tandem with the physical environment, and the pivotal role it plays in future of promoting safe routes to school. Each design guideline offers five key pieces of information: the description, the benefits, the considerations and the application to the school site, zone, or catchment area. The description gives a brief introduction to the design guideline. The benefits section lists the positive attributes that the application of the design guideline has to children pedestrians. The considerations section lists factors associated with the implementation of the design guideline; it can list possible context variable, policy implications, or possible barriers that need to be altered in order to be applied. The application section builds upon the layered approach found with the checklist and in which layer the design guidelines can be applied; the school site (school property lines), the school zone (100m radius surrounding the school site), and the catchment area itself.

SCHOOL AREA & SITE DESIGN GUIDELINE Site Visits

Section Title SCHOOL AREA & SITE DESIGN GUIDELINE

Site Visits & Checklist

Map of School Sites

The following schools were visited to inform and refine the Checklists.

Ionview Public School

Lord Roberts Junior Public School North Toronto Collegiate Institute

Davisville Junior Public School

Our Lady of Perpetual Help Seperate School

Branksome Hall Islington Jr. Middle School

1¼

2½

11km

SCHOOL AREA & SITE DESIGN GUIDELINE

Site Visit & Checklist

Site Visits

Checklist Summary

The table below is a summary of the checklist that is used in site visits. It is designed to maximise legibility and provide a glanceable summary of the checklist findings.

SCHOOL SITE PEDESTRIAN REALM Sightlines and visibility Lighting

SCHOOL ZONE

CATCHMENT

PEDESTRIAN REALM

Street block

Sightlines and visibility

Pedestrian realm enhancements

Lighting

Sightlines and visibility

Maintenance and cleanliness

Lighting

VEHICLE SAFETY MEASURES

Maintenance and cleanliness

Speed limit

VEHICLE SAFETY MEASURES

Signage school zone designation

Speed limit

Protected play areas (if applicable)

Signage maitenance

Signage school zone designation

Active traffic calming measures

Signage maitenance

Street parking

Active traffic calming measures

PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION

Street parking

VEHICLE SAFETY MEASURES Amount of staff parking Site vehicle circulation Mode segregation

TRAVEL MODES, MOBILITY INFRASTRUCTURE & FACILITIES Bike storage Bike storage location School Site Access Points Number of access points to site

Access to public transit route

Speed transition

SIDEWALKS

Universal accessibility

Continuous, uninterrupted

Maintenance

AVAILABLE PEDESTRIAN ROUTES

CROSSWALKS/CROSSINGS

Continuity, direct routes Alternative No-vehicles Routes

Crossings Wait times

CROSSWALKS/CROSSINGS

Length of crossing

Crossings

Signalization of crossings

Wait times

CYCLING INFRASTRUCTURE

Length of crossing

Routes

Signalization of crossings

Signage

CYCLING INFRASTRUCTURE

WALKING/BIKING ROUTES: MAPPING ANALYSIS

Routes Signage

ROAD CONNECTIVITY

Bus bay

Number of surrounding roads Presence of adjacent arterial roads

Length of routes from the furthest catchment border # of crossings to school from the furthest catchment border # of dangerous intersections in the catchment area

Site Visits

SCHOOL AREA & SITE DESIGN GUIDELINE

Site Visits

Islington Junior Middle School Evaluation

The site visits were conducted to better inform the robustness of the final checklist. In this section, the visit to Islington Junior Middle School is highlighted.

Islington Jr. Middle School

Above: School location within catchment area Left: Islington Junior Middle School. Photo by project team. 0

0.25

0.5

Â´

1 Kilometers

Esri, HERE, DeLorme, MapmyIndia, ÂŠ OpenStreetMap contributors, and the GIS user community

Islington Jr. Middle School is located at 44 Cordova Ave, Toronto. This TDSB school site has a walk score of 80, a transit score of 96 and 63% of the school population is within 1.6km of the school. The site is is well serviced by low and high order public transit, has multi-modal site accesses and a well marked crossings and school zone signage. Multiple site visits to the site were conducted to evaluate the design of school site, zone and catchment. Overall, the site ranked above average on the majority of the categories of the checklist. Areas of improvement include school pavement material maintenance and cycling route infrastructure as they most notably ranked below average or poor on the checklist.

SCHOOL AREA & SITE DESIGN GUIDELINE

Site Visits

Traffic Signage Evaluation

Traffic Signage Within the school zone, the presentence and maintenance of school zone signage is excellent. Multiple brightly coloured and well maintained signs are present in both traffic directions. The speed limit is above average at 40 km/hr and the level of public transit is excellent due to access to frequent low and high order transit. On the school site, adequate traffic signage and traffic calming measures are present, but elements such as speed humps are poorly maintained.

Site Visits

SCHOOL AREA & SITE DESIGN GUIDELINE

Site Visits

Crosswalks & Crossings Evaluation

Crosswalks and Crossings The school zone is designed to prioritize pedestrians and mitigate pedestrian-vehicle conflicts. Signalized cross walks, signed crossings and active traffic calming measures present help encourage students to walk to school and facilitate safe routes to school.

SCHOOL AREA & SITE DESIGN GUIDELINE

Site Visit

Pedestrian Entrances and Routes Pedestrian entrances leading from the back of the school site to adjacent apartment complexes and a local park. These paths are well used, however beyond the school site they are unmaintained dirt trails which are inaccessible by those in need of mobility aids.

Site Visits

SCHOOL AREA & SITE DESIGN GUIDELINE

Site Visit

Cycling parking and Infrastructure On the school site, bicycle parking facilities are present and adequate capacity is provided, however, their location is along the side of the school, in a low traffic area and not visible by an administratorâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s window, and their design is outdated. Infrastructure through out the school zone or catchment is no present in the neighbourhood.

SCHOOL AREA & SITE DESIGN GUIDELINE

Checklist

Checklist School Site

School Site

PEDESTRIAN REALM Sightlines and visibility (2.2.11)

Lighting (2.1.10)

Maintenance and cleanliness (2.1)

Poor

Below Average

Sightlines are obstructed, no view of sidewalks or intersections for all modes of travel.

Sightlines are obstructed, slight view of sidewalks or intersections for all modes of travel.

Streets, sidewalks, and crossings are poorly lit for pedestrian, cyclist and driver visibility. unmaintained

Average

Sightlines partially obstructed, some distortion in the view of sidewalks or intersections for all modes of travel. Streets, sidewalks, and Streets, sidewalks, and crossings are slightly lit for crossings are adequately lit for pedestrian, cyclist and pedestrian, cyclist and driver visibility. driver visibility. poorly maintained slightly maintained

Site Vehicle Circulation (4.3) No traffic calming measures are in place.

Mode segregation (3.2.3)

No sidewalks or bike lanes are available on roadways. All modes access the site from one access point.

On-site parking has adequate capcity may interfere with student space. Empty spots for most of the time.

On-site parking has adequate capcity. Few spots are empty most of the time.

Site traffic cirulation is calmed only by signage.

Site traffic cirulation has at least one of the following: neckdowns, speed humps, woonerf design, planters, signalling, reduced speed. Sidewalks are available on Sidewalks are available on both sides of the street and one side of the street and bike lanes are not available. bike lanes are not available.

Travel Modes, Mobility Infrastructure & Facilities Bike storage (3.1.1) Not provided on school site. Provided near school site within 100m.

(Stoker, 2015) (Halton Technical StakeholdersSub-committee, 2011)

Streets, sidewalks, and crossings are appropriately lit for pedestrian, cyclist and driver visibility. maintained

Streets, sidewalks, and crossings are well lit for pedestrian, cyclist and driver visibility. well-maintained

(Stoker, 2015)

Protected.

(Halton Technical Stakeholders SubCommittee, 2011) (Cutts, Darby, Boone, & Brewis, 2009).

On-site parking has adequate capacity. Parking has small footprint and does not dominate school site. No spots are empty.

On-site parking is adequate capacity, has a small footprint or is buried. Parking and secure storage facilities for bikes are also available. No spots are empty.

School Area Transporttion Safety Guidelines http://conf.tac-atc. ca/english/annualconference/tac2015/s3/t ebinka.pdf

Site traffic cirulation has at least two of the following: neckdowns, speed humps, woonerf design, planters, signalling, reduced speed. Sidewalks are available on both sides of the street and bike lanes are available.

Site traffic cirulation has at least four of the following: neckdowns, speed humps, woonerf design, planters, signalling, reduced speed. Sidewalks on both side of street, bike lanes present. Separated access for each of walking, biking, automobile.

(Jacobsen, 2003) (Halton Technical Stakeholders Sub-Committee, 2011)

On-site and adequate capacity.

(Halton Technical Stakeholders SubCommittee, 2011)

Visible in plain sight from school administrator's window in high-traffic area.

(Halton Technical Stakeholders SubCommittee, 2011)

Above expectations in regards to efficiency, safety and security, multi-modal access points present.

(Halton Technical StakeholdersSubcommittee, 2011)

Multiple separated access points for each of the following: pedestrian, bicycle, automobile. Bus bay is directly adjacent to the school site and does not require crossing a street

(Halton Technical StakeholdersSubcommittee, 2011) (Cutts, Darby, Boone, & Brewis, 2009)

Provided adjacent to school On-site and inadequate site with bike rings or city- capacity. installed storage facility.

Bike storage location (3.1.2) Hidden out of plain site and In plain site far from school Visible in plain sight near to Visible in plain sight and building. school building. adjacent to school building not visible from school in clear line of sight from window. classroom/office window. Access dispered at various Access dispersed at Access concentrated at 1 School Site Access Points Access concentrated at 1 various entrances, designed entrances, no safety, entrance for all modes of (4.1.1) entrance for all modes of security concerns present. to maximize efficiency, travel. Some safety, travel. No safety, security safety and security for all security measures measures implimented. modes of transportation. implimented. One separated access point One separated access point Number of access points to One access point One mixed-traffic access for each of the following: for two of the following: site (4.1.1) automobiles only. point for two of the pedestrian, bicycle, pedestrian, bicycle, following: pedestrian, automobile. automobile. bicycle, automobile. Bus bay is present but is Bus bay (4.3) No bus bay present Bus bay is present, requires Bus bay is present but is <100m away from the >100m away from the crossing the street to school entrance school entrance access

School Zone

Poor Below Average AVAILABLE PEDESTRIAN ROUTES Continuity, direct routes Little thought put in Poorly planned/organized (2.1.14) planning/organizing routes routes Alternative No-vehicles Routes (2.1.14) SIDEWALKS Universal Accessibility (2.1.12)

Continuous, uninterrupted (2.1.1, 2.1.2)

Length of Crossing (1.1.7, 1.1.8)

Signalization of crossings (1.17, 1.1.8) PEDESTRIAN REALM Street Block (2.1.14)

Various alternative safe and convenient routes available

(Whitelegg, 2008)

Sidewalks are avalible and meet AODA minimum design standards width and have accessible curb cuts where necessary.

Sidewalks are avalible on both sides of the street and meet or exceed the minimum AODA design standards width and have accessible curb cuts where necessary.

(City of Toronto, 2004) (Halton Technical StakeholdersSub-committee, 2011)

Sidewalks very sporadic and discourages walking.

Sidewalks are mostly uninterrupted, may or may not be on both sides of the street and encourages walking. Slightly maintained

Sideswalks are uninterrupted, present on both sides of the street and promotes walking.

(Safe Routes of School, n.a) (Town of Whitby, n.a) (Halton Technical StakeholdersSub-committee, 2011)

Maintained

Well-maintained

(Safe Routes of School, n.a) (Town of Whitby, n.a)

Crossings are signed and marked and make use of a signalling device.

Crossings are signed and marked and make use of a pedestrian-controlled signalling device. Crossing may be raised. Short wait times, under 30 seconds, crossing signal functions

(Safe Routes of School, n.a) (Town of Whitby, n.a) (Halton Technical Stakeholders Sub-committee, 2011)

Intersection crossing provides more than enough time for someone to clear the intersection. Children at 0.6 metre/second and adults 1.2 metre/second.

(American Planning Association, 2006) (City of Torotno, 2016)

Signalized

(Halton Technical StakeholdersSub-committee, 2011)

Crossings are signed and marked.

Average wait times (between 30 seconds to under a minute), crossing signal works Intersection crossing provides enough time for someone to clear the intersection. Children at 0.6 metre/second and adults 1.2 metre/second

Long wait times (greater than 60 seconds), crossing unresponsive, or no crossings at all (NA) Intersection crossing does not provide enough time for someone to clear the intersection. Children at 0.6 metre/second and adults 1.2 metre/second. Not signalized

Streets, sidewalks, and crossings are poorly lit for pedestrian, cyclist and driver visibility. Unmaintained

Poorly maintained

ROAD CONNECTIVITY Number of roads surrounding the school site

Block structure is segmented and creates for an inaccessible walking area. Block design incorporates dead-ends and cul-de-sacs.

Poor Cycling routes and infastructure is not present.

Wayfinding and other indications of cycling infrastructure are poorly, or not, presented as to aid in the promotion and use of avalible infrastructure.

Block structure is segmented and creates for an inaccessible walkshed. Block design incorporates dead-ends and cul-de-sacs with mixed-use easements and/or pathways.

Block structure is warped and makes pedestrian and bicycle connections unnecessarily long. Mixeduse easements and/or pathways are present.

Below Average

Wayfinding and other indications of cycling infrastructure are scarcely presented as to aid in the promotion and use of avalible infrastructure.

One road

Signage School Zone Designation (2.1.6)

No designated school zone signage present.

Signage Maitenance (2.1.6)

All/ majority of signage very Most, but not all signage poorly maintained, ex. Very insufficiently maintained. faded, broken, chipped, (Ex. Some fading, broken, graffiti/ vandilism ect.. paint chiped, graffitti/ vandilism)

Block structure is gridiron, but blocks may be long and intended primarily for navigation by automobile. Mixed-use easements and/or pathways are present.

Slightly maintained

Maintained

Average Cycling routes running to and through the school zone/ catchment area areÂ somwhat connectedÂ to the larger cycling network Wayfinding and other indications of cycling infrastructure are presented as to aid in the promotion and use of avalible infrastructure.

Above Average

(Sandalack, Alaniz Uribe,Eshghzadeh Zanjani, Shiell, McCormack, & Doyle-Baker, 2013)

(Stoker, Garfinkel-Castro, Khayesi, Odero, Mwangi, Peden, & Ewing, 2015) (Safe Routes of School, n.a)

(Stoker, Garfinkel-Castro, Khayesi, Odero, Mwangi, Peden, & Ewing, 2015) (Safe Routes of School, n.a) (Halton Technical StakeholdersSub-committee, 2011)

Wayfinding and other indications of cycling infrastructure are properly presented as to aid in the promotion and use of avalible infrastructure.

Two roads

Three roads

Comments

Excellent Cycling routes running to and through the school zone/ catchment area are well connected to the larger cycling network Wayfinding and other indications of cycling infrastructure are well presented as to aid in the promotion and use of avalible infrastructure.

Source (Safe Routes of School, n.a)

(Safe Routes of School, n.a)

Four roads

(Koerth, 2011) (Halton Technical StakeholdersSubcommittee, 2011) (Safe Routes of School, n.a)

One arterial road

No arterial roads

(Koerth, 2011) (Halton Technical StakeholdersSubcommittee, 2011), (Safe Routes of School, n.a)

40 km/hr

Under or at 30 km/hr

(Halton Technical StakeholdersSub-committee, 2011) (School Safety Engineering Project, 2004)

School zone signage present informs drivers of school zone. All signage more than All signage sufficiently Most signage sufficiently maintained, No maintenace sufficiently maintained, No maintained. Some maitenance required in required on immidiate maitenance may be longterm future) (No fading, required in short/ longterm future (Ex.fading, broken, broken, paint chiped, paint chiped, graffitti/ future (ex. No fading, graffitti/ vandilism, Newl vandilism broken, paint chiped, graffitti/ vandilism) Sufficient active traffic calming in place

Street Parking (1.1.9)

Sufficient Street Parking avalible.

No street parking is available.

MMM

Public transit available within 800m. Frequency is 16-30 minutes or less.

(Safe Routes of School, n.a) (Town of Whitby, n.a)

Well-maintained

Active Traffic Calming No traffic calming Measures. (1.0, 1.1.1 - 1.1.9) measures in place.

Public transit unavailable.

(Vancouver Engineering Services, 2001) (Virkler, 1998) (City of Torotno, 2016)

School Zone

Presence of arterial roads More than one arterial road immediately adjacent to school site VEHICLE SAFETY MEASURES Speed Limit (1.1) 50 km/hr or over

Public Transpotation Access to Public Transit Route (3.2)

Source

Sidewalks unavalible, unaccessible or hazardous for individuals with mobility devices.

Lighting (2.1.10)

Signage (3.1.3)

(Halton Technical StakeholdersSubcommittee, 2011)

(Kelly, Tight, Hodgson, & Page, 2011)

Sightlines are obstructed, no view of sidewalks or intersections for all modes of travel.

Routes (3.1.1)

(Jacobsen, 2003) (Halton Technical Stakeholders Sub-Committee, 2011)

Comments

Excellent

Sightlines and visibility (2.2.11)

CYCLING INFASTRUCTURE

(Safe Routes of School, n.a) (Town of Whitby, n.a)

Well-planned/organized routes

Block structure is gridiron and makes for easy pedestrian and bicycle connections in addition to automobile connections. Mixed-use easements and/or pathways are present. Sightlines are unobstructed, Sightlines are unobstructed, Sightlines partially Sightlines are obstructed, slight view of sidewalks or obstructed, some distortion few distortion of sidewalks clear view of sidewalks and intersections for all modes intersections for all modes in the view of sidewalks or or intersections for all of travel. intersections for all modes modes of travel. of travel. of travel. Streets, sidewalks, and Streets, sidewalks, and Streets, sidewalks, and Streets, sidewalks, and crossings are slightly lit for crossings are adequately lit crossings are appropriately crossings are well lit for pedestrian, cyclist and for pedestrian, cyclist and lit for pedestrian, cyclist pedestrian, cyclist and driver visibility. and driver visibility. driver visibility. driver visibility.

Maintenance and cleanliness (2.1)

Above Average Planned/organized routes

No alternative safe and Few alternative safe and Alternative safe and Some alternative safe and convenient routes available convenient routes available convenient routes available covenient routes available

Maintenance Unmaintained Poorly maintained CROSSWALKS/CROSSINGS Crossings (1.1.7, 1.1.8) No crossings are available, Crossings are signed, but or are unmarked. are unmarked.

Wait times (1.1.7, 1.1.8)

Average Somehow planned/organized routes

Source

Excellent Sightlines are unobstructed, clear view of sidewalks and intersections for all modes of travel.

Protected play areas (2.1.13 Not protected. - 2.1.14) Vehicle Safety Measures Amount of Parking for staff On-site parking is (4.2.1 - 4.2.2) overdesigned and has excess capacity. Empty spots during peak hours.

Comments

Above Average Sightlines are unobstructed, few distortion of sidewalks or intersections for all modes of travel.

Public transit available within 400m. Frequency is 16-30 minutes or better.

Public transit available within 400m. Frequency is 15 minutes or better.

Public transit available less than 400m away. Frequency is 10 minutes or better. Served by rail or dedicated right-of-way.

(Halton Technical StakeholdersSub-committee, 2011)

(Halton Technical StakeholdersSub-committee, 2011) (Bowman, 2013), (Halton Technical StakeholdersSub-committee, 2011) (MMM Group, 2015) MMM

MMM (Kittelson & Associates, 2003(a) (Kittelson & Associates, 2003(b)

SCHOOL AREA & SITE DESIGN GUIDELINE

Checklist

Checklist School Catchment

Catchment Poor Pedestrian Realm Street Block (2.1.14)

Block structure is segmented and creates for an inaccessible walking area. Block design incorporates dead-ends and cul-de-sacs.

Sightlines and visibility (2.2.11)

Sightlines are obstructed, no view of sidewalks or intersections for all modes of travel.

Lighting (2.2.10)

Streets, sidewalks, and crossings are poorly lit for pedestrian, cyclist and driver visibility. unmaintained

Maintenance and cleanliness (2.1) Sidewalks Universal Accessibility (2.1.12)

Continuous, uninterrupted (2.1.1, 2.1.2)

Maintenance Crosswalks/ Crossings Crossings (1.1.7, 1.1.8)

Below Average

Average

Above Average

(Safe Routes of School, n.a), (Halton Technical StakeholdersSub-committee, 2011) (City of Toronto, 2004)

Sidewalks very sporadic and discourages walking.

Sidewalks are mostly uninterrupted, may or may not be on both sides of the street and encourages walking. slightly maintained

Sideswalks are uninterrupted, present on both sides of the street and promotes walking.

(Saelens, 2003)

maintained

well-maintained

(Williams, 2005)

Crossings are signed and marked and make use of a signalling device.

Crossings are signed and marked and make use of a pedestrian-controlled signalling device. Crossing may be raised. Short wait times, under 30 seconds, crossing signal functions

(Virkler, 1998).

Intersection crossing provides enough enough time for someone to clear the intersection. Children at 0.6 metre/second and adults 1.2 metre/second.

(Akcelik & Associates Pty Ltd, 2001).

unmaintained

poorly maintained

Signalization of crossings Not signalized CYCLING INFASTRUCTURE Routes (3.1.1) Cycling routes and infastructure running to and through the catchment area are disjointed to the larger cycling network

Cycling routes running to and through the catchment area areÂ somwhat connectedÂ to the larger cycling network

Wayfinding and other indications of cycling infrastructure are poorly, or not, presented as to aid in the promotion and use of avalible infrastructure.

Catchment

Wayfinding and other indications of cycling infrastructure are scarcely presented as to aid in the promotion and use of avalible infrastructure.

Wayfinding and other indications of cycling infrastructure are presented as to aid in the promotion and use of avalible infrastructure. 40 km/hr

No designated school zone signage present.

Signage Maitenance (2.1.6) All/ majority of signage very poorly maintained, ex. Very faded, broken, chipped, graffiti/ vandilism ect..

(MMM Group, 2015). (City of Toronto, 2016). (Access Minneapolis, 2009)

Most, but not all signage insufficiently maintained. (Ex. Some fading, broken, paint chiped, graffitti/ vandilism)

Wayfinding and other indications of cycling infrastructure are properly presented as to aid in the promotion and use of avalible infrastructure.

Cycling routes running to and through the catchment area are well connected to the larger cycling network

(Dill, 2009).

Wayfinding and other indications of cycling infrastructure are well presented as to aid in the promotion and use of avalible infrastructure.

(Winters, 2011)

Under or at 30 km/hr

(Halton Technical StakeholdersSubcommittee, 2011) (Crockett, 2001) (Ferguson, 2013)

School zone signage present informs drivers of school zone within minimum 100m radius of school site. All signage more than All signage sufficiently Most signage sufficiently maintained, No maintenace sufficiently maintained, No maintained. Some maitenance required in required on immidiate maitenance may be longterm future) (No fading, required in short/ longterm future (Ex.fading, broken, broken, paint chiped, paint chiped, graffitti/ future (ex. No fading, graffitti/ vandilism, Newl vandilism broken, paint chiped, graffitti/ vandilism)

Active Traffic Calming Measures. (1.1.1 - 1.1.9)

No traffic calming measures in place.

Sufficient active traffic calming in place

Street Parking (1.1.9)

No street parking is available.

Sufficient Street Parking avalible.

Several

(City of Toronto, 2016)

Signalized

VEHICLE SAFETY MEASURES Speed Limit (1.1) 50 km/hr or over

Presence of dangerous intersections in the catchment area

(Stoker, Garfinkel-Castro, Khayesi, Odero, Mwangi, Peden, & Ewing, 2015) (Safe Routes of School, n.a) (Halton Technical StakeholdersSub-committee, 2011)

Sidewalks are avalible on both sides of the street and meet or exceed the minimum AODA design standards width 1.5m and have accessible curb cuts where necessary.

Average wait times (between 30 seconds to under a minute), crossing signal works Intersection crossing provides enough enough time for someone to clear the intersection. Children at 0.6 metre/second and adults 1.2 metre/second

Signage School Zone Designation (2.1.6)

(Stoker, Garfinkel-Castro, Khayesi, Odero, Mwangi, Peden, & Ewing, 2015) (Safe Routes of School, n.a)

Sidewalks are avalible and meet AODA minimum design standards width 1.5 m and have accessible curb cuts where necessary.

Signage (3.1.3)

Source (Sandalack, 2013)

Sidewalks unavalible, unaccessible or hazardous for individuals with mobility devices.

Crossings are signed and marked.

Length of Crossing ( Road ways)

Comments

Block structure is gridiron, but blocks may be long and intended primarily for navigation by automobile. Mixed-use easements and/or pathways are present.

Block structure is warped and makes pedestrian and bicycle connections unnecessarily long. Mixeduse easements and/or pathways are present.

No crossings are available, Crossings are signed, but or are unmarked. are unmarked.

Wait times (1.1.7, 1.1.8)

Excellent

8-10

One

None

(Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices, 2009).

Department of Transportation, 2015)

Department of Transportation, 2015) (Stoker, 2015) (Halton Technical Stakeholders SubCommittee, 2011) Dangerous intersections are defined as top 100 most dangerous intersections for pedestrians in Toronto relative to the volume of pedestrians at the intersection.

(Transportation Services Division Traffic Data Centre and Safety Bureau, 2007), (Bassil, 2015), (Global Toronto, 2011)

SCHOOL AREA & SITE DESIGN GUIDELINE

ii 20

Guideline Implementation Section Title

Guideline Implementation

SCHOOL AREA & SITE DESIGN GUIDELINE

Implementation 18

The School Design Guideline has the potential to be utilized and integrated in a variety of processes. These include formal governmental and development processes such as master plans, area plans, transport projects, and safety improvements in the Development Application Process, or through more informal processes such as a stakeholder tool.

SCHOOL AREA & SITE DESIGN GUIDELINE

Implementation

Guideline Implementation

The current Development Application process outlines a series of submission requirements as outlined by the City of Toronto’s Planning Division’s Planning Application Checklist. Under Engineering & Technical Services, five studies are required for the development application process to be moved forward. These include: • • • • •

Loading Study (ZBA,SPA only); Parking Study (ZBA,CDM,SPA only); Traffic Operations Assessment (ZBA,SUB,SPA only) & PARKING STUDY; Transportation Impact Study (OPA,ZBA,SUB,SPA only); And Transportation Demand Management Plan.

Development applications for school sites follow the same procedure. As seen from this list, there is no specific requirement that devotes effort to health and safety of schoolchildren in particular. To address this issue, the Street Design Guideline can be used by all parties involved in the development application process including the applicant and those who review the application. For applicants, proposals can similarly use the guideline as a resource for their functional plan. For example under the 2013 Guidelines for the Preparation of Transportation Impact Studies (TIS), the applicant must include functional plans, as appropriate, showing proposed: • • • •

Street and intersection improvements; Transit improvements; Pedestrian improvements; Cycling improvements.

For city staff, the guideline can be used as a tool to review the demonstration of best practices for improving surrounding areas and school sites. Stakeholder of Safe School Zone Beyond formal processes, the Street Design Guideline can be used by various stakeholders as a tool to evaluate their school, school zone, or catchment area. The language and diagrams in the document are produced to ensure it is inclusive and can be used by professional and general stakeholders. The stakeholders and their potential application for the Street Design Guideline are as follows.

SCHOOL AREA & SITE DESIGN GUIDELINE

Guideline Implementation

Local Community

Public Sector

Students

Elected Officials

School staff can inform students on potential safety measures, and how they can impact their everyday travel to and from school.

Elected officials may be consulted by their constituents and as a result require a tool to inform them of best practices and innovative designs. On the contrary, they my advocate for better design of existing or future sites. Collectively, the Guideline has the potential to aid in the decision making process concerning the urban realm.

Parents, Guardians, the Public Parents and guardians can use the Guideline to analyze and identify challenges in their neighbourhoods to better inform decisions on their child’s mode of transportation to and from school. Parents, guardians, and the public may also use the Checklist and an evaluation tool to advocate for better design and programming for school sites, areas, and catchments. Business Improvement Areas

City Staff/Development Application City staff will both advocate and conform to guideline in decision making and development/approval processes. It is suggested that the City makes these guidelines public domain that is easily accessible for increased awareness of these guidelines.

Business Improvement Areas may take interest in the Guideline as they improve upon walking and cycling characteristics generally seen to improve retail and street vitality. When considering new applications or existing sites, the Guideline can be used to explore alternative or best case practices.

Transportation Authority

School Level

The Guideline can aid in Regional planning for school travel; the GTHA School and municipal design and work group; and supplement guidelines proposed in Metrolinx’s Big Move Plan.

Toronto District School Board The Toronto District School Board will use the document to alter current schools, and prescribe the urban conditions for future school development accordingly. There is also the potential for schools to retrofit their sites and incorporate principles highlighted in the Guideline. School Staff School staff will use the guidelines to promote safe modes of travel for the students in the form of in-class, and out of class programming such as the creation of the Safe Routes to School Map for each individual school

Police Police are important actors for these guidelines as they will help in the transitional period pertaining post implementation in school zones and catchment areas. The guidelines could also be used as CPTED measures. Professional Organizations This document may be of interest to other professional bodies including: • • •

The Canadian Institute of Planners The Ontario Professional Planners Institute The Institute of Transportation Engineers

Transportation authorities play a critical role in ensuring all drivers are knowledgeable on the alterations made by these guidelines. They will use the guidelines as an educational tool. Active and Sustainable School Transportation (Metrolinx)

Toronto Public Health These guidelines will aid Toronto Public Health in the overall safety of the City’s citizens. Furthermore, this document aligns with the Healthy Futures Report, which seeks to advance the current health and health behaviours of young people. This report identifies that the health of Toronto’s youth has been limited; however, The Safe Street Guidelines seeks to bridge this gap.

SCHOOL AREA & SITE DESIGN GUIDELINE

1.0 24

Active Traffic Section Calming Title

SCHOOL AREA & SITE DESIGN GUIDELINE

1.0 Active Traffic Calming

Active Traffic Calming

1.1 Street Design

Speed Limits

Reduced Lanes

Gateways 29 Chicanes 30 Active traffic calming is a range of techniques that involve physical measures or changes to the street that reduce vehicle speeds and volumes. They can be applied horizontally or vertically and serve to make the streets safer for pedestrians (School Safety Engineering Project, 2004). As such, active traffic calming reduces the risk to school aged children fatalities and accidents as drivers are provided with more time to react due to increased awareness of the presence of children; and reduced speeds which lead increased stopping distances and reaction times.

Speed Reducers

Roadway Material

Intersections 33 Crosswalks 34 Street Parking

SCHOOLDESIGN STREET AREA & GUIDELINE SITE DESIGN GUIDELINE

1.1 Street Section Design Title

1.1 Street Design Through the careful design and enhancement of streets in school sites and school zones the safety of students will greatly improve, as active traffic calming measures reduce vehicle speeds, prevent collisions, and overall make the area easier for children to navigate (School Safety Engineering Project, 2004).

SCHOOL AREA & SITE DESIGN GUIDELINE

1.1.1 Speed Limits

Street Design

Speed Limits

Speed limits are in place to notify drivers of right driving speeds under favourable circumstances, and are almost always authorized with a key objective of promoting safety while keeping reasonable speed without jeopardizing traffic flow.

Above & Left: School zone speed limits signage in Toronto. Photos by project team.

Benefits The speed of a vehicle correlates with the likelihood of collision and the severity of injuries to cyclist and pedestrians when struck by vehicle. Driving at lower speeds reduces stopping distances. As such, providing more time to avoid potential collisions. Pedestrian risk of fatality at 50 km/hr is twice as high as the risk at 40 km/ hr, and more than five times higher at 30 km/hr. Improved safety for cyclists, pedestrians, and school children Increased street use by cyclists, pedestrians and school children May encourage more active transportation thereby resulting in an increase in physical activity (i.e., walking and biking)

An individual can apply for a speed limit policy on a street or several streets around school zones as long as it satisfies the warrants listed under the Guide to Safer Streets Near Schools When applying for a speed limit policy, the 30 km/h Speed Limit Policy applies to local and collector road, while the 40 km/h Speed Limit Policy applies to local, collector, and minor arterial roadways Furthermore, the 30 and 40 km/h speed limit policies demand different warrants Application  School Site  School Zone  School Catchment

Considerations The Highway Traffic Act of Ontario allows municipalities to reduce default speed limits from 50 to 40 km/hr.

SCHOOL AREA & SITE DESIGN GUIDELINE

1.1.2 Reduced Lanes

Street Design

Reduced Lanes

Reduced lanes are defined as taking away traffic lanes from a street to slow down traffic. It provides additional room for traffic calming and safety measures, and active transportation.

Above: Reduced lanes with curb extensions in Toronto. Photo by project team. Left: Reduced lanes with built-in bike lane. Photo by US Department of Transportation.

Benefits There are fewer lanes for pedestrians to cross and an opportunity to install pedestrian refuge islands There is an opportunity to install bicycle lanes with the reallocated lanes In addition, traffic calming and reduced speed differential, which can decrease the number of crashes and reduce the severity of crashes if they occur can be improved It also gives the opportunity to reallocate street width for traffic calming and safety measures, such as on-street parking or transit stops It encourages a more communityfocused, “Complete Streets” environment, where streets are designed to be safe for all users and accommodates different types of uses and activity

reducing lanes is not the be all and end all. There might be more appropriate alternatives for the street(s) being assessed. Some of the things to consider when implementing reduced lanes include driveway density, transit routes, the number and design of intersections along the corridor, and well as operational characteristics Other considerations include street function and access control, turning volumes, pedestrian and bicycle activity, and cost Also, availability of transit, proximity to schools or hospitals, support of the community, and if the road diet features will better integrate with adjacent street segments need to be considered Application

Considerations

 School Site

Although reduced lanes has many benefits, it may not be feasible in all areas. If the goal is to slow down traffic,

 School Zone

 School Catchment

SCHOOL AREA & SITE DESIGN GUIDELINE

1.1.3 Gateways

Street Design

Gateways

Gateways are used to warn incoming vehicles that they are entering a lower speed residential or commercial streets and discourage continuous traffic with the use of mixture of traffic calming and visual measures.

Above: Example of gateway. Photo adapted from National Association of City Transportation Officials. Benefits One of the benefits of installing gateways is that it reduces vehicle speeds and dissuades continuous traffic without jeopardizing vehicle entry They help define transitions to lowspeed, shared street or pedestrianfriendly zones

Application  School Site  School Zone  School Catchment

Furthermore, they prioritize pedestrian movement across the treated part of the intersection They also provide means for displaying and highlighting neighbourhood identity which also promotes greater overall vitality. Considerations Gateways are particularly useful in the transition between residential neighbourhoods and school zone/ catchment.

SCHOOL AREA & SITE DESIGN GUIDELINE

1.1.4 Chicanes

Street Design

Chicanes

Chicanes are used to slow down traffic along streets by creating extra turns through a sequence of interchanging mid-block curb extensions.

Above: Chicane integrated with cycling infrastructure. Photo by US Department of Transportation Federal Highway Administration. Left: Plan view diagram of Chicane.

Benefits It helps reduce vehicle speeds It also offers the opportunity to add more green space to a street Considerations Chicanes may reduce on-street parking When installing chicanes, good visibility must be maintained by planting only low shrubs or trees with high canopies. Moreover, it must be ensured that the safety and mobility of the bicyclist are not diminished Chicanes are not recommended on bike routes They are also ineffective on low volume streets and there are safety concerns when installing them on high volume streets. Therefore, it is suggested that they should be installed in mid-range traffic volumes

Application  School Site  School Zone  School Catchment

SCHOOL AREA & SITE DESIGN GUIDELINE

1.1.5 Speed Reducers

Street Design

Speed Reducers

Speed reducers (also known as speed bumps) are a form of traffic calming that utilizes an area of raised surface that deflects the wheels and frames of vehicles. They include speed humps (short 4 metres) and speed tables (long 6.7 metres)

Above: Speed hump with signage indicating bump ahead. Photo by Vitaly Barsov. Left: Plan view of raised speed hump.

Benefits

Application

Effective way to reduce vehicle speeds  School Site on the street. Encourages drivers to lower their speed and travel within the  School Zone Speed humps are raised sections of the roadway designed to discourage motor vehicle drivers from speed limit in areas with reducers. travelling at excessive speeds. School Catchment Considerations

SPEED HUMPS

Speed reducers are already widely used across the city of Toronto and are easily applicable to local streets. They are not appropriate for multi-lane streets, and arterial streets (any street Speed Reduction with a posted speed greater than 30km/h)

EFFECTIVENESS

Road Volume Reduction Safety

COST PER MEASURE $1,000—$5,000 (Physical speed hump, signage, pavement markings, polling)

ADVANTAGES • • • •

Speed reduction Minimal impact on cyclists Minimal impact on snow clearing Self enforcing

DISADVANTAGES

• Negative impact on Emergency Ser Ambulance, Fire, and Police), by slo response time and impacting the c patients being transported

SCHOOL AREA & SITE DESIGN GUIDELINE

1.1.6 Roadway Materials

Street Design

Roadway Material

Roadways can be paved with a variety of different materials, One of these materials is cobblestone or blocks. The roadway materials can be coated in colour to serve distinguishing functions (ie separate the vehicle lanes from bike lanes, encourage drivers to lower their speed etc.)

Above: Example of cobblestone roadway material. Benefits Using alternative roadway materials can act as physical design features by signalling to drivers the changes in the physical environment The use of blocks, or coloured asphalt can serve to distinguish functions (ie. Separate the vehicle lanes from bike lanes, encourage drivers to lower their speeds etc...) The consistent use of alternative pavement materials/colours across the city can become a standard for the city of Toronto, increasing the awareness and proximity of the school area Considerations Alternative materials must be considered for the speed limits and traffic conditions in which they are placed

Application  School Site  School Zone  School Catchment

SCHOOL AREA & SITE DESIGN GUIDELINE

1.1.7 Intersections

Street Design

Intersections

Raised intersections are elevated to the same height as the adjacent sidewalks. The entire intersection is raised, including the crosswalks and roadways. Protected intersections are another approach to providing safe facilities for pedestrians and cyclists by extending protected features into the intersection.

Above: Plan view of raised intersection diagram. Left: Plan view of protected intersection diagram.

EFFECTIVENESS Speed Reduction

Benefits

Road Volume Reduction

Application 30 KM/H

The intersection becomes better defined, as it is easier for drivers to identify it. It forces drivers to slow down when approaching and crossing the intersection.

Safety

 School Site  School Zone  School Catchment

COST PER MEASURE $50,000—$100,000 (Cost varies due to size of intersection, pavement material, relocation of catch basins)

Provides better clarity for navigating intersection and improved sight lines/ reduced conflict

EFFECTIVENESS

Considerations

Raised intersections are most appropriate areas where the traffic SpeedinReduction flow is not moving faster than 40km/h.

Road Volume As this is a more costly Reduction option than raised crosswalks, raised intersections Safety are more ideal for intersection directly adjacent to school sites that experience significant issues

COST PER MEASURE $50,000—$100,000 (Cost varies due to size of intersection, pavement material, relocation of catch basins) 33

RKING

SCHOOL AREA & SITE DESIGN GUIDELINE

1.1.8 Crosswalks

Street Design

Crosswalks

Raised crosswalks are elevated to the same height as the sidewalk. Illuminated crosswalks have lights that indicate when pedestrians are crossing. Visual and auditory timers should be placed at crosswalks. The timing of crosswalks are crucial, as the average crossing speed of an adult is 1.2 metres per second, whereas children are 0.6 metres per second. Crosswalks directly adjacent to school sites must consider the reduced crossing times for children and be adjusted accordingly.

Above: Pedestrian controlled signalized crosswalk near school site in Toronto. Left: Plan view of crosswalk diagram.

Benefits

Considerations

Raised crosswalks reduce vehicle speeds. Illuminated pedestrian crosswalks improve visibility with flashing overhead lights.

Raised Crosswalks are ideal for traffic heavy intersections, where crossing distances are longer than normal, when raised intersections cannot be used, either due to cost or traffic conditions.

Mid-block sidewalks shorten crossing distances and can protect pedestrians in long intersections.

Application  School Site  School Zone  School Catchment

ON-STREET PARKING (ALTERNATING SIDES/CHICANE E Mid block crosswalks can be used in areas where jaywalking often occurs.

Increasing the amount ofis crossing time Crosswalks directly adjacent to school On-street parking the reduction of the roadway width available for vehicle movemen at crosswalks will improve child safety sites must consider the reduced motor toexternal parkfactors adjacent andtimes parallel toand the as this vehicles will account for crossing for children be curb. such as slower child speed, crossing guard interference, children dropping items. When children reach the halfway point of the crosswalk the do not cross sign will serve as a warning.

adjusted accordingly.

EFFECTIVENESS

ADVANTAG

Speed Reduction

• Speed reduction • Possible reductio through traffic

Road Volume Reduction Safety 34

DISADVANT

SCHOOL AREA & SITE DESIGN GUIDELINE

1.1.9 Street Parking

Street Design

Street Parking

Space for vehicles outside of the school site. The vicinity of on-street parking is considered an area of focus for pedestrian safety. During peak pick-up/dropoff street parking can be a source of conflict for pedestrians and cyclists. Street parking can be used to offset demand for on-site parking.

Benefits

Primary costs to include on-street parking consist of signage and street markings

Street parking can add parking capacity for schools and can be helpful for adjacent uses that are occupied simultaneously (e.g. parks, libraries) In some cases, street parking can be used to buffer sidewalks and bike lanes Considerations Street parking can be used for AM and PM pick-up and drop-off and may cause problems on the active street network, school-related activity should be brought on-site and off of the street network

Above: Plan view of street parking diagram.

Street parking could add excess parking capacity and lead to an increase in automobile use Visibility can be improved by removing street parking Additional programming such as walka-block can ease demand for parking in the school zone. Application  School Site

• Sp • Pre • Op

Speed Reduction School Zone

Requirements to restrict parking close to intersections and crosswalks should be in place

 School Catchment

Road Volume Reduction

It is easier to avoid initially including street parking than it is to remove street parking afterwards

Safety

COST PER MEASURE

DIS

SCHOOL AREA & SITE DESIGN GUIDELINE

2.0 36

Passive Traffic Section Calming Title

SCHOOL AREA & SITE DESIGN GUIDELINE

2.0 Passive Traffic Calming

Passive Traffic Calming Passive traffic calming provides visual or other cues that can encourage drivers to travel at slower speeds. Sidewalks and the Pedestrian Realm provide dual benefits for school aged children. Children benefit from the additional infrastructure and amenities which make walking on streets more pleasant and attractive while the additional presence of pedestrians emphasize the need for drivers to accommodate a ranger in street users.

2.1 Sidewalks 38 Full Sidewalks

Material

Coloured Wayfinding

Curb Extensions

Pedestrian Medians

Textured & Coloured Concrete

2.2 Signage 46 School Zone

School Zone Advance Warning

Radar Speed Sign

2.3 Pedestrian Realm

Lighting 51 Sightlines 52 Furniture and Landscaping

Shared Facilities

Street Block Design

SCHOOL AREA & SITE DESIGN GUIDELINE

2.1 Section Sidewalks Title

2.1 Sidewalks Sidewalks are a portion of the public street realm, between curb lines or roadways, and the neighbouring property line. They act as the primary link between educational places and a pedestrianâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s location. Sidewalks should be continuous, found on both sides of the street and follow the desired pedestrian lines of travel. The standard City of Toronto standard width for new sidewalks is 1.8m. The continual maintenance is imperative to the success and safety of sidewalks.

SCHOOL AREA & SITE DESIGN GUIDELINE

2.1.1 Full Sidewalks

Sidewalks

Full Sidewalks

Full sidewalks exceed the City of Toronto standard of 1.8m and can be found on both sides of the street. Full sidewalks are to be used in areas of high pedestrian traffic. This would be ideal in areas directly adjacent to the school site because these sidewalks experience the largest concentration of school children. Buffers or ribbon sidewalks can be used to greater delineate the space between the sidewalk and the roadway through the use of different paving materials/and or greenspace. A ribbon sidewalk is ideal in areas of high speeds.

Above: Photo of delineated sidewalk with buffer. Left: Plan view of full sidewalks diagram.

Benefits In addition to greater safety for pedestrians, full sidewalks allow for greater space for the inclusion of pedestrian realm features, see section 2.3

Application  School Site  School Zone  School Catchment

Considerations Full sidewalks are ideal in areas with a high volume school aged pedestrians, with high curbside activity. Areas that front directly onto school sites, or that experience overcrowding are excellent candidates.

SCHOOL AREA & SITE DESIGN GUIDELINE

2.1.2 Material

Sidewalks

Material

At the minimum, sidewalks poured concrete should be used to provide a smooth and uninterrupted walking service. Coloured concrete or pavement stones are considered ideal.

Above: Example of sidewalk material. Benefits A durable and stable walking surface provides an enjoyable and safe walking experience. Considerations Paved sidewalk stones are not always feasible in areas where storm water runoff or weathering is considered an issue.

Application  School Site  School Zone  School Catchment

SCHOOL AREA & SITE DESIGN GUIDELINE

2.1.3 Coloured Wayfinding

Sidewalks

Coloured Wayfinding

The use of coloured concrete or paving stones can be used as an advancement for the pedestrian realm.

Above: Example of coloured wayfinding. Photo adapted from Igor I. Solar. Benefits Alternatives outside of poured concrete can act as a form of wayfinding, increasing the attractiveness of the pedestrian realm. In addition, alternatives to concrete can provide increased friction to prevent slipping.

Application  School Site  School Zone  School Catchment

The widespread use of a consistent sidewalk paving material across the City of Toronto can act as a placemaker, subconsciously indicating to pedestrians and drivers that they are located within a school area. Considerations The use of coloured wayfinding materials must be exhibited within the context of school aged children; thus the use of lettering or numbers may not always be appropriate. The use of school bus yellow is easily understandable, and already associated with school areas.

SCHOOL AREA & SITE DESIGN GUIDELINE

2.1.4 Curb Extension

Sidewalks

Curb Extensions

Curb extensions are the widening of the curb into the adjacent street, typically at the corner of the block. These are also known as neckdowns.

Above: Example of curb extension. Photo by Streetsblog SF. Left: Plan view of curb extension diagram.

Benefits

Application

Curb extensions allow for greater  School Site pedestrian safety by reducing walking distances between the sidewalks.  School Zone If used effectively they can also A curb extension a horizontal intrusion of the curb into the roadway resulting in a narrower section  School Catchment encourage lower automobile is speeds by the roadway. It canradius. be installed mid-block or near an intersection. introducing a smaller turning

CURB EXTENSION S - AT INTERSECTIONS

Considerations Curb extensions may be inappropriate on narrow streets, or streets with vehicle traffic which require greater turningSpeed radii such as freight vehicles. Reduction

EFFECTIVENESS

ADVANTAGES

Road Volume Reduction

• Speed reduction • Reduce crossing distance for p intersections • Increase pedestrian visibility • Prevent parking close to an int

Safety

COST PER MEASURE $50,000—$100,000 (Cost varies due to size and number of curb extensions, type of boulevard material, relocation of catch basins, installation of bollards) 42

2016 TRAFFIC CALMING G

ANDS

ING

SCHOOL AREA & SITE DESIGN GUIDELINE

2.1.5 Pedestrian Medians

Sidewalks

Pedestrian Medians

Pedestrian medians are raised medians found at the centre of street, between crosswalks to reduce exposure time to traffic.

Above: Example of a pedestrian median. Photo by National Association of City Transportation Officials. Left: Plan view of pedestrian medians diagram.

Benefits

Application

Pedestrian medians increase pedestrian safety by providing reducing crossing distances and providing refuge for pedestrians to cross street in stages.

 School Site  School Zone

tactile paving.

 School Catchment

The pedestrian realm can be further improved by adding greenery to the pedestrian median

Speed Reduction

Considerations

Volume Reduction Only viableRoad for large streets with adequate width.

• Speed reduction • Prevents over-taking • Opportunity for landscaping

Safety

Strongest application to arterial roads. Ideal in scenarios with high speed traffic and multiple lanes, where crossings are generally prohibitive and pedestrians feel unsafe crossing the intersection.

COST PER MEASURE $5,000—$15,000

(Costs varies due to modular or in-place construction, type of material, installation of bollards )

DISADVANTAGES

• Maintenance cost • May require the removal of some on-street parking

SCHOOL AREA & SITE DESIGN GUIDELINE

2.1.6 Textured & Coloured Concrete

Sidewalks

Textured & Coloured Concrete

Textured Concrete can be a completely different texture or materials such as raised ground/rumble strips or different colours. Using distinctive paving markings or materials can help considerably to give character to a school thus highlighting its surroundings, and making it unique to a driver.

Above: Example of coloured concrete. Photo by Rocbinda. Left: Example of textured concrete. Photo adapted from Square One Paving.

Benefits Textured and coloured concrete provide visual cues and tactile cues if contrasting textures are used. In addition, this adds a placemaking benefit for all schools and could include community engagement opportunities if a program is created. Considerations This may be met with hesitation because if it was to require a current school to conform to this guideline which will require costs. Textured concrete would also have to consider slow plowing. Textured Concrete should be applied to the School Site and the School Zone layer. For example, it can be applied to intersections near schools, along busy routes that are used by students and could located in front of school sites.

Application  School Site  School Zone  School Catchment

SCHOOL AREA & SITE DESIGN GUIDELINE

2.1.6 Textured & Coloured Concrete

Intentionally blank

SCHOOL AREA & SITE DESIGN GUIDELINE

Section 2.2 Signage Title

2.2 Signage Proposed signage is intended to instruct street users, and inform rules and conditions of street use.. A driver of a vehicle is expected to be able to interpret and act upon the proposed signage. The signage should be clear of debris and trees, and maintained throughout the year. Signage can be located on posts and should be put in clear view of the driver.

SCHOOL AREA & SITE DESIGN GUIDELINE

2.2.1 School Zone

Signage

School Zone

School zone signage can be used to identify the location of a school site and a school zone to a driver. They should be located within 100 metres of school sites.

Above: Example of school zone signage. Photo by project team. Benefits School Zone signage informs drivers of the presence of school aged children who may not be as aware of the dangers of vehicular traffic as adults. Considerations

Application  School Site  School Zone  School Catchment

Standard signage is currently in use across North America so no cultural shift is required. These signs should also be included in conjunction with the legal speed limit in School Zones.. School Zone signs will be located within the streets that are located within the School Zone layer. School Zone signs are used throughout the GTA but are not always placed or used consistently

SCHOOL AREA & SITE DESIGN GUIDELINE

2.1.8 School Zone Advance Warning

Signage

School Zone Advance Warning

School Zone Advance Warning signs indicate to the driver that they will be entering a school zone and should be following the rules of the road in school zones.

Above: Diagram of school zone advance warning sign. Photo by US Department of Transportation Federal Highway Administration. Left: Example of a school zone advance warming sign in Toronto. Photo by project team. Benefits School Zone Advance Warning will benefit the driver ahead of entering a school zone, in the hopes of making sure they have every opportunity to follow the speed limit and/or prevent a collision with pedestrians near schools. Considerations N/A

Application  School Site  School Zone  School Catchment

SCHOOL AREA & SITE DESIGN GUIDELINE

2.1.9 Radar Speed Sign

Signage

Radar Speed Sign

Radar Speed Signs post the current speed limit to the driver, informing them of their current speed.

Above: Example of standard radar speed sign. Photo by Pandora Technologies Limited. Right: Example of radar speed sign with positive reinforcement. Photo by United States Air Force. Benefits This Radar Speed Signs works on the feedback loop theory: being presented with information about our performance, we notice and we then improve. According to Trans Canada Traffic, these signs can slow down drivers by 10% for several kilometres. These signs can also be equipped with solar panels. Considerations

Radar Speed Signs can be applied to all three layers. They can be implemented on street lamp posts, trees or have their own structure if there is none available. Application  School Site  School Zone  School Catchment

Radar Speed Signs are used in Ontario, but a consideration for this is that these Radar Speed Signs are more expensive than other measures such as speed limit signs.

SCHOOL AREA & SITE DESIGN GUIDELINE

2.3 Pedestrian Section Realm Title

2.3 Pedestrian Realm The pedestrian realm is defined by the quality of place and sense of safety, inclusivity and belonging that is provided by the physical elements including landscaping, street furniture and overall visibility of the area. The design of the street and surrounding built environment can increase pedestrian comfort and safety through furnishings, buffers from the vehicular and bicycle traffic and shelter from unfavourable weather conditions. A safe and well designed pedestrian realm ensures that a space that is enjoyable and well used for children and adults.

SCHOOL AREA & SITE DESIGN GUIDELINE

2.3.1 Lighting

Pedestrian Realm

Lighting

Lighting increases visibility, safety and legibility of public streets, sidewalks and public spaces. Maximizing lighting on the school site, paths, and sidewalks is important, especially during times of the year with shorter durations of daylight. Illuminating street, sidewalks, alleys, crosswalks, parking lots and playgrounds improves safety for everyone.

Above: Nørreport Station lighting plan. Photo by Beta Architecture. Left: Example of lighting. Photo by RAGNI. Benefits Lighting increases visibility and therefore benefits pedestrians and encourages walking as a safe and reliable mode of transportation. Improved visibility decreases vehiclepedestrian conflicts and ensures that terrain, built environment elements, and tripping hazard risks are reduced. Highlights entrances, important features, and desired routes; encourages safe travel and allows people to navigate an area with greater ease. Lighting coverage and strategic accent lighting improves pedestrian visibility and awareness of grade changes, curbs/curb cuts, uneven terrain, tripping hazards, presence of street furniture, amenities, and store entrances. Considerations Infrastructure Options: The design and style of lighting infrastructure provides added benefits to the community such as sense of place and wayfinding. This encompasses features

such as pole design, style of light, decorative patterns, colour, and optional add-on banners, planters and signage. Responsive to daylight changes: effective lighting is responsive to daylight. Street lights must be responsive to the natural sun light; during times of the year when there are shorter periods of daylight and the sun sets earlier, street lights must illuminate earlier. Height: The height of light poles and fixtures is indicative of the priority user. Lower lighting places emphasis on pedestrians rather than vehicular traffic. Location and spacing: Street lights should be located on either sides of the street either in an alternating pattern or on opposing sides of the street to ensure total coverage of the street. The glow from the lights should be directed toward the ground and should be configured in a pattern that enhances visibility for both pedestrians and vehicles. Additional Illumination: Residential homes, complexes, and commercial, institutional and retail businesses and neighbouring schools may opt to instal

illuminated signage or fixtures. This should be considered when analysing the lighting coverage and analysis of the school zone and catchment area. The responsibility of the City to install, maintain and repair light fixtures is outlined in the Municipal Code, Chapter 629 - Property Standards. Lighting of parking lots, walkways, stairs, porches, verandas, loading docks, ramps or other similar areas must be maintained to a sufficient level as to not cause undue eyestrain. The City of Toronto’s Streetscape manual describes standard or sitespecific streetlight designs. Styles range from ground accent lighting, to standard poles to decorative and multifunctioning. Application  School Site  School Zone  School Catchment

SCHOOL AREA & SITE DESIGN GUIDELINE

2.3.2 Sightlines

Pedestrian Realm

Sightlines

Sightlines on school sites and along neighbourhood streets should be clear. Priority should be emphasised at access points, entrances, parking lots, play areas, crosswalks and intersections. Placement of vegetation, fences, street furniture and/or signage should not decrease visibility nor create safety concerns. Caution should be taken to reflect design principles for child-pedestrians.

Above: Plan view of impacted obstructed sightline. Benefits Clear sightlines benefit pedestrians, cyclists, and drivers during travel to and from school, regardless of mode of travel. Increases visibility and decreases the likeliness of dangerous unpredicted behaviour. Considerations The location of public amenities and street furnishings must not impede the safety of pedestrians and students traveling to and from school. The location, size and transparency of the following elements should be considered, especially within proximity to school access points, crosswalks and intersections. • • • • • • •

Child-pedestrians have an average height of 98.3cm at 3 years of age, 120cm at 6 years of age, 136.6cm at 9 years of age, 154.6cm 12 years of age and 166.6 at 15 years of age. Application  School Site  School Zone  School Catchment

EFFECTIVENESS

Street trees Vegetation (shrubs, gardens, etc..) Fences Street furnishings Bus shelters On-street parking Snow banks

Speed Reduction Road Volume Reduction Safety

The City enforces sightlines and public right-of-way encroachments through Municipal Code 447 - Fences and Municipal Code 743 - Use of street and sidewalk.

SCHOOL AREA & SITE DESIGN GUIDELINE

2.3.3 Furniture

Pedestrian Realm

Furniture and Landscaping

Street furnishings and landscaping includes but are not limited to transit shelters, litter bins, benches, multi-publications structures/corrals, planters, vegetation, public message boards, way-finding signage and coloured or textured sidewalks. These items frame public spaces, increases urban aesthetics, and provides the necessary safety and convenience functions. The design, placement and concentration of street furniture and landscaping elements should ensure universal accessibility, encourage safety and promote sense of place.

Above: Interactive street furniture in Montreal. Photo by Meghan Ruble. Left: Example of simple street furniture.

Benefits

Considerations

Street furniture benefits the public as each furnishing provides the public with a service, and collectively benefits the area because traffic calming measures encourage walkability and active transportation.

Street furniture in the City of Toronto is distributed and maintained by Astral Media, through 20 year contract with the City of Toronto.

Passive traffic calming: Street furnishings frame the street, conveying the image of active streets that encourage lower vehicular speeds. Activate public spaces and streets: The presence of street furniture represents the city’s commitment to pedestrian realm, and encourages people to get out of their vehicles and walk.

All classifications of streets are applicable and should support engaging and vibrant public realms. Application  School Site  School Zone  School Catchment

Sense of place: Animating public spaces through design, street furniture and landscaping encourages a high quality and safe environment, a local idenitify and a sense of place. The presence of street furniture and landscaping elements creates an enjoyable walking environment encouraging students to walk to school. 53

SCHOOL AREA & SITE DESIGN GUIDELINE

2.3.4 Shared Facilities

Pedestrian Realm

Shared Facilities

Shared facilities and resources offer an opportunity to maximize land use and community resources. This includes establishing cooperative partnerships between school boards and community organizations and/or municipalities to provide shared services such as parking, programming space such as meeting rooms and exhibition space, resources such as libraries and equipment and recreation facilities such as sports fields, gymnasiums, arenas or pools.

Above: Integrated sports and recreational facilities at Toronto School. Photo by International Association for Sports and Leisure Facilities. Benefits Communities can benefit from partnerships between schools and community agencies by centralizing resources for students and residents, reducing overhead costs for facility construction and efficient land use. Introducing shared facilities and resources addresses the spatial and financial challenge faced by dense urban centres and positively benefits local families, students and individuals by increasing the productivity of school and community space during the off hours Considerations The Ministry of Education and TDSB currently support community partnerships to occupy underutilized space. Under the Ministry of Education’s Community Planning and Partnerships Guideline, TDSB has adopted Policy P076, Community Planning and Partnerships, a policy outlining the considerations and procedures emphasising benefits 54

for students and coordination with teaching schedules, learning environments and health and safety. Center for Cities & Schools (2010) discuss that schools who engage in partnerships establish various partnerships ranging from • • •

Basic joint use supporting temporary programming, joint development integrating the needs of either party into the design and arrangement and joint partnerships that encourage coordinated long-term use of the space.

Center for Cities & Schools (2010) recommends formalizing role and responsibilities through agreements, contracts and policies. A shared space vs. dedicated space policies is suggested to clarify the use of shared facilities, rooms and resources.

Application  School Site  School Zone  School Catchment

SCHOOL AREA & SITE DESIGN GUIDELINE

2.3.5 Street Block Design

Pedestrian Realm

Street Block Design

Neighbourhoods must be designed to prioritize pedestrian permeability and legibility within and throughout the larger neighbourhood block. Paths, sidewalks and building design must facilitate complete, direct, and walkable routes that invite children to walk to school.

Above: Illustration of various block structures from lowest connectivity (left) to highest connectivity (right). Benefits Block design and available routes is determinative of the walkability of the school zone and catchment area. Parental perception of safety, the directness of routes, and the distance from a child’s home to their school all impact their mobility.

Application  School Site  School Zone  School Catchment

Considerations The inclusion of small street blocks, pedestrianized alleys and multi-use paths creates routes for pedestrian linkages connections to help provide students with the most safe and direct route to school. The application of small street blocks is best suited to areas undergoing growth or new development.

SCHOOL AREA & SITE DESIGN GUIDELINE

3.0

Cycling & Transit Infrastructure

SCHOOL AREA & SITE DESIGN GUIDELINE

3.0 Cycling & Transit Infrastructure

Cycling & Transit Infrastructure Cycling and transit infrastructure are additional alternative transportation options that supplement walking as a healthy and sustainable practice for making trips to and from school. The integration of cycling as a transportation option for school aged children has long been a barrier due to safety concerns as the proximity between children and vehicles heightens. As such, cycling infrastructure plays a large role in enabling more school aged children to use cycling as a feasible and safe method of transportation.

3.1 Cycling 58 Bicycle Lanes

Bicycle Parking

Bicycle Signage

3.2 Transit 62 Proximity 63 Level of Service

Mode Segregation

SCHOOL AREA & SITE DESIGN GUIDELINE

Section 3.1 Cycling Title

3.1 Cycling Cycling is another form of active transportation along with walking. Cycling allows for greater travel speed than walking but requires dedicated infrastructure such as bike lanes, cycling signage, and bike parking.

SCHOOL AREA & SITE DESIGN GUIDELINE

3.1.1 Bicycle Lanes

Cycling

Bicycle Lanes

A Bike Lane is a portion of the street that has been designated by striping, signage, and pavement markings for the preferential or exclusive use of bicyclists. The dedication of bike lanes allows cyclists to ride without interference at their preferred speed; it also facilitates predictable behaviour between bicyclists and motorists (NACTO, 2014). A bike lane could be physically separated from vehicle traffic or be a part of the shared street with visual marking separation. Bike lanes could be of various types, depending on traffic volume, street environment, and neighbourhood context.

Above: Example of coloured bike lane. Photographer unknown. Left: Protected bike lane. Photo by Modacity.

Benefits

Considerations

Presence of bike lanes in the school amenities provides an option for cycling to and from school.

Sometimes, there is insufficient street width to accommodate a bicycle lane without widening the street or eliminating a travel or parking lane for motor vehicles. Widths of both vehicular and bike lanes should be thoroughly examined to accommodate all modes of transportation.

Students’ biking eliminates the need for using cars for dropping off, which reduces the overall traffic around schools, contributing to safety. Provides designated street space for cyclists Provides an option for sustainable transportation choice for students Promotes cycling behaviour among students Contributes to healthy life of children through physical exercise Provides safe environment for cycling if properly installed

Areas of Toronto for installation of bike lanes are identified in Ten Year Cycling Network Plan approved by the City Council on June 9, 2016. Installation of bike infrastructure should be promoted beyond the scope of the Plan in the areas adjacent to school sites. (Toronto, 2016)

limited operation times – on weekdays during hours when students travel to and from school. Application The area of application is the school zone and catchment area. Cycling to and from school should be available from any point of the catchment area. Cycling routes should have a connection to the larger city-wide network to ensure system integration and continuity.  School Site  School Zone  School Catchment

In low density areas with narrow streets and low potential for cycling demand, consider installing bike lanes with

SCHOOL AREA & SITE DESIGN GUIDELINE

3.1.2 Bicycle Parking

Cycling

Bicycle Parking

Bicycle parking provides storage for bikes using bike racks or bike stands to which bicycles can be securely attached for parking purposes. This is an essential component of cycling infrastructure giving schoolchildren the sense of security of their property during class. There are many different types of bicycle parking: racks, lockers, and bicycle stations. Bicycle racks are defined as fixed objects, usually constructed out of metal, to which bicycles can be securely locked. Bicycle lockers are used to securely store a single bicycle. Bicycle stations are designated buildings or structures designed to provide secure bicycle parking and often incorporate other amenities such as bike maintenance services. (PBIC, 2017)

Above: Bicycle rings. Left: Example of space required to park bicycles as compared to private automobile.

Benefits Provides storage space and security for bicycles

For school grades 2 through 5 allocate 2 parking spaces per classroom (Portland, 2017)

Encourages students to choose bicycle as an active mode of transportation

For school grades 6 through 12 allocate 4 parking spaces per classroom (Portland, 2017)

Occupies relatively small area of school property

Provide covered parking when possible

Requires relatively low cost of installation and maintenance Considerations Bicycle racks need to support the whole bike (not just one wheel) and enable the user to lock the frame and wheels of the bike with a cable or U-shaped lock. (PBIC, 2017) Bike corrals can be used to convert car parking spaces into bicycle parking spaces. 60

Application The area of application is the school site. Parking location should be convenient for students, in close proximity of school entrance. Bicycle parking space is preferred to be located in front of the windows of school principal or administrator to enhance security through supervision.

 School Site  School Zone  School Catchment

SCHOOL AREA & SITE DESIGN GUIDELINE

3.1.3 Bicycle Signage

Cycling

Bicycle Signage

Bicycle Signage and Marking encompasses any treatment or piece of infrastructure whose primary purpose is to indicate the presence of bicycle infrastructure/facility. Proper signage is especially important with younger inexperienced cyclists. All signs and markings should be clear and understandable for younger children. Bicycle signage sub-categories include way-finding and route signage, regulatory signage, and warning signage (NACTO, 2014). Bike lane markings represent any device applied onto the pavement surface and intended to designate a specific right-of-way, direction, potential conflict area, or route option (NACTO, 2014). Colouring of pavement is applied in two ways: as a corridor treatment along the entire length of a bike lane, or as a spot treatment in conflict areas or crossings.

Above: Example of bicycle signage. Left: Example of clear bicycle markings in Copenhagen.

Benefits

Considerations

applied along the entire length of bike lane in the catchment area.

Ensures proper use and safety of bike lanes

Signage for bike lanes in Ontario is standardized by the Ministry of Transportation through Ontario Traffic Manual – Book 18, and should conform to these standards (OTM, 2013).

Regulatory and warning signage should be installed in potential conflict areas to raise motorist and bicyclist awareness to such areas.

Visually indicates to motorists that they are driving along a bicycle route and should use caution. Familiarizes users with the bicycle network. Increases bicyclist comfort though clearly delineated space. Identifies the best routes to destinations. Passively promotes the bicycle network among potential users by providing consistent imagery throughout the catchment area.

Signs should be unobstructed by vegetation and other obstacles throughout the whole extent of the bike infrastructure. Signs should be visible from a viewpoint of younger children. Street markings should be properly maintained to avoid deterioration over time. Application

Way-finding and route signs should be placed at decision points along bicycle routes – at the intersection of bikeways with vehicular traffic and at other key locations leading to and along bicycle routes.  School Site  School Zone  School Catchment

Colour corridor treatment should be applied in the school zone, while the general marking scheme can be 61

SCHOOL AREA & SITE DESIGN GUIDELINE

Section 3.2 Transit Title

3.2 Transit In instances when walking or cycling is not feasible, public transit provides a safe and sustainable option for school aged children. Transit is always supplemented by either walking or cycling for traveling to and from transit stops.

SCHOOL AREA & SITE DESIGN GUIDELINE

3.2.1 Proximity

Transit

Proximity

Proximity to transit plays a significant role in determining mode share. Depending on the level of service, people are more or less likely to walk to the nearest available transit service stop. Transit stops should be no further than 400m away from schools or 800m for rapid transit (TRB, 2013) (services that operate every fifteen minutes or better).

Benefits Provides greater transportation choice and flexibility Close proximity is easier to navigate for school-aged children

Above: Bus stop situated close to amenities. Left: Diagram of school site in relation to transit.

Application  School Site  School Zone  School Catchment

Allows for relaxation of parking requirements on-site and nearby Considerations Rapid transit tends to increase land value and could price students out of their catchment area Transit systems driven by farebox recovery have little motivation to provide better proximity to schools where fare concessions apply to the majority of customers Elementary school students are not necessarily autonomous enough to use transit independently TDSB provides school bus service for students that live >1.6km away from their school

SCHOOL AREA & SITE DESIGN GUIDELINE

3.2.2 Level of Service

Transit

Level of Service

The level of service or frequency of transit influences travel habits. Where there are longer wait times, people will choose other modes of travel. Most people walk 400m to a bus stop and walking distance doubles for those accessing rapid transit. Observed school travel habits closer to frequent transit service with higher frequency trended toward more transit use and walking while schools further away from frequent transit service trended toward less transit use.

Above: Frequent transit contributes to higher transit ridership. Right: Level of service at a school near downtown Toronto. Benefits

Application

Higher transit mode share helps ease congestion and reduce particulate emissions

 School Site

Fewer cars performing routine pick-up/ drop-off leads to less conflict

 School Catchment

Considerations Schools situated near major activity centres should have services that operate every 10mins or better Suburban schools should have services that operate every 30mins or better Ex-urban or rural schools may have services or demand-responsive transit Difficult to sustain all-day service due to school schedules systems operate ‘school special’ schedules

 School Zone

SCHOOL AREA & SITE DESIGN GUIDELINE

3.2.3 Mode Segregation

Transit

Mode Segregation

Splitting up pedestrians, bikes, and cars in their own spaces reduces conflict and makes a safer travel environment for all street users. By making facilities for walking and cycling it attracts more walkers and bikers. It has been noted that as the number of pedestrians and cyclists increases there is improved safety through a ‘power in numbers’ phenomenon’.

Above: Example of complete street.

Benefits Power in numbers phenomenon Clear delineation ensures higher degree of safety Considerations

Application  School Site  School Zone  School Catchment

Difficult to provide multi-modal routes in all seasons Should be supported by a city-wide transportation strategy Winter conditions require clearing with the same priority as traditional streets Tradeoffs need to be made in order to accommodate many transportation roads without infinitely expanding ROW widths

SCHOOL AREA & SITE DESIGN GUIDELINE

4.0

Site Access & Parking

SCHOOL AREA & SITE DESIGN GUIDELINE

4.0 Site Access & Parking

Site Access & Parking Site access and parking are both important aspects of school design. A safe school site should have parking and access that is well designed and placed in accordance to the schoolâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s unique character to ensure safety for both school aged students and staff.

4.1 Site Access Points

Number of Access Points

4.2 Parking 70 Stacked Staff Parking

Reduced/Shared Staff Parking

Drop Off

4.3 Bus Bays

Bus Bay Location & Pedestrian Interface

SCHOOL AREA & SITE DESIGN GUIDELINE

4.1 Site Access Section Points Title

4.1 Site Access Points Site access can be understood as a design principle that allows people to enter, approach, or pass from one place to another on the schoolâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s property. The safety of the access and convenience of use is dictated by how and where the site access is placed.

SCHOOL AREA & SITE DESIGN GUIDELINE

4.1.1 Number of Access Points

Site Access Points

Number of Access Points

School entrances are areas which permit access to the school’s property. Access points may vary from pedestrian orientated, vehicular, or multi-modal.

Above: A school site with access points highlighted. Benefits

Application

Increases efficiency and safety for entering and exiting school sites when implemented rationally.

The usage of logically placed access points in fences, hedges, or pathways are typical ways of implementing formalized access points to schools.

Encourages systemic entering/exiting to avoid maintenance costs. Considerations Selecting appropriate entrances depends on the nature of the school site and adjacent characteristics. For example, in general, access points streets should be located close to bus bays, drop off/pick up areas and entrances/exits of school buildings.

The cost of implementing school access points is 0 to negligible.  School Site  School Zone  School Catchment

Should be placed in spots that avoid long detours for pedestrians to gain access to school sites. The usage of signage/markings indicating school zones should be implemented adjacent to access points.

SCHOOL AREA & SITE DESIGN GUIDELINE

Section 4.2 Parking Title

4.2 Parking Parking on school sites are often necessary for staff and many students at secondary schools. Any place where vehicular movement is common is considered a safety concerning - particularly on school sites. Parking lots must ensure safety orientated design and placement that ensures the safety of the schoolâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s students.

SCHOOL AREA & SITE DESIGN GUIDELINE

4.2.1 Stacked Staff Parking

Parking

Stacked Staff Parking

Stacked parking is a method of adding additional parking spaces while reducing the overall land area taken up by vehicles. The use of stacked parking technology, such as those offered by Klaus Multiparking, may have several applications for new school sites, or those looking to retrofit their design.

Above: KLAUS Multiparking™ example Left: KLAUS Multiparking™ diagram

Benefits Stacked parking provides local schools the opportunity to double the amount of parking in a given area Previous parking can be converted for pedestrian enhancements to better encourage the use of the space for other activities such as green space or play areas.

greater pedestrian permeability and movement throughout the school site The application of new parking design may need to move through minor variance processes as current zoning by-laws dictate parking allocation minimums. Application

Non-permeable paved surfaces can be decreased to reduce surface runoff.

 School Site

Stacked parking can be retrofitted into existing sites and placed into future designs

 School Catchment

 School Zone

Considerations The use of stacked parking measures is largely dependant on existing and projected parking demands by local schools Stacked parking should be implemented in a manner to allow for

SCHOOL AREA & SITE DESIGN GUIDELINE

4.2.2 Reduced/Shared Staff Parking

Parking

Reduced/Shared Staff Parking

An over allocation of parking may be addressed through changes in existing parking allocation framework outlined by the City of Toronto Official Plan and Bylaws, and aided with the use of parking lot sharing with adjacent properties where possible.

Above: Innovative adjacent use and placemaking potential. Photo by Modacity. Left: Innovative uses for reducing parking in Seattle. Photo by djc.com.

Benefits Vehicle parking is a major use of school site lands. Any reduction in parking infrastructure can translate into more usable land for pedestrian and play enhancements. Parking lots pose a barrier to safe pedestrian and cycling circulation and access onto schools. Considerations Reducing parking capacity on site is dependant on existing and projecting parking demands to provide a strong rationale for reducing legislated capacity. Parking lots provide an opportunity for programmable space that can be used by the school board or for community events.

Parking management can include non-traditional strategies. For example, school site parking has the potential to be replaced or supplemented with on street parking. School sites adjacent to community centres and parks may benefit from sharing parking facilities. A reduction in school site parking may be supplemented with transit pass programs for full time staff. Application  School Site  School Zone  School Catchment

SCHOOL AREA & SITE DESIGN GUIDELINE

4.2.3 Drop Off

Parking

Drop Off

School sites are major generators of vehicle traffic. Some estimates place school traffic, trips made exclusively to a school to drop children off, as between 10%14% traffic. Although principally this guideline is written to suggest greater pedestrian access to schools, it is still important to address the issue of students who are dropped off or picked up from school sites. Without a system of managing drop offs and pickups, students may experience dangerous conditions when navigating school sites and school zones on foot or bicycle.

Above: Segregation of uses as related to drop off zones. Diagram by New Zealand Ministry of Education. Left: Example of on-site drop-off area. Photo by the Annandale Blog.

Benefits The implementation of allocated drop off areas reduce illegal and unsafe behaviour such as stopping too close to pedestrian crossings and double parking. Such behaviour poses a hazard to vehicle to pedestrian sightlines. This is an especially important component for school aged children as they are less visible due to their stature. Drop off areas mitigate potential congestion caused by stopping vehicles to the site rather than to the school zone. Considerations Drop off areas can be implemented with one-way drop off zones located on school sites. This ensures students are dropped off and picked up adjacent to the curb to avoid unnecessary crossings.

It is possible to have drop off areas on the street to reduce school site vehicle infrastructure, but this is dependent on street conditions and vehicle regulations adjacent to the school site. Further consultation with local bylaws may need to be consideration for this to be implemented To mitigate potential congestion, programing such as staggered start and finish times for different year cohorts may be applicable.

“Kiss and ride“ zones adjacent to schools, in a safe location that minimizes pedestrian- vehicle conflicts can be considered as a designated guardian drop off zone. Application  School Site  School Zone  School Catchment

Drop off zones can be segregated from pedestrian routes to reduce vehicle pedestrian conflicts. This may be unnecessary with correct vehicle calming measures, but is one consideration depending on the site and local context. Beyond design, for compliance it is important that both signage and education is provided to students and drivers.

SCHOOL AREA & SITE DESIGN GUIDELINE

4.3 Section Bus Bays Title

4.3 Bus Bays Bus bays act as an important amenity on school sites, as many students are dependent on bus transportation. These students are using this area twice daily, five days a week, and often do not have alternative means of transportation. School bus bays vary in their placement; this may be on a curb side, parking lots, or in designated school site areas. No matter the context, these areas act as a potential danger, and school site designs must take into consideration of the large blind spots on buses, how children will access these bays, how children will access the school, and potential vehicular dangers from traffic on adjacent streets. Design and placement of bus bays are critical to the overall safety of school sites.

4.3.1 Bus Bay Location & Pedestrian Interface

SCHOOL AREA & SITE DESIGN GUIDELINE

Parking

Bus Bay Location & Pedestrian Interface

Bus bays are areas that are designated for the loading and unloading persons in the school site area.

3 metres

Most dangerous

3 metres

3 metres Danger zones

Danger from passing cars

Walking Area

3 metres

Most dangerous

Above: Bus bay example. Photo by Melissa Jenkins. Right: School bus danger zones.

Benefits Bus bays can result in increased speed on adjacent streets as congestion may be relieved. Increases the efficiency for loading and unloading as students well as travel time to and from school. Increases the likelihood of students refraining from using dangerous routes to and from school. Optimized safety for those using the school buses through safety orientated design. Considerations Bus bay areas should be located in one-way in a counter-clockwise direction. This encourages students to be loaded and unloaded directly to the curb/sidewalk, effectively ensuring minimal pedestrian/vehicle conflicts. Maximize fronting curb space at bus

bays by locating the loading/unloading area at the far end of the zone. Adequate driveway length should be provided for queuing cars on site. This length should be calculated for the sites expected number of vehicles. Bus bays should not allow vehicles to drive backwards. Bus bays should not encourage the crossing of vehicular ways to get access to schools.

By-law amendments may be necessary to prohibit parking on bus bays or allow the construction of bus bays on school sites. Application  School Site  School Zone  School Catchment

On-site pavement markings and raised concrete channelizing islands can encourage use of designated walking areas to keep children out of blind spots. Markings can also be used to raise awareness of the designated school bus spaces. Often, bus bays are relatively inexpensive when sufficient street space if available. Designated areas of streets with signage and alterations to pavements are sufficient.

SCHOOL AREA & SITE DESIGN GUIDELINE

Programming

School boards have the capacity to reduce risk to school aged children through programming strategies. Programming is beneficial as there are low barrier to implementation. Some options available for programming includes: Walk a Block: an initiative to encourage parents to park a block before school and walk their children to school. This encourages walking, while also reducing vehicular traffic directly adjacent to the school site. Walking School Bus: Children walk together in groups with the supervision of an adult. As the groups sizes grows, so does safety, encouraging even more students to choose walking as their primary method of transport.

LEFT: Photo of family â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;walking a blockâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;. Photo by Eve Lewis. RIGHT: Example of walking school bus program. Photo by SNAP Walking School Bus.

Safe Routes to School Mapping: A safe route to school map highlights design features and routes that are most safe to travel. This can be distributed by school staff to families so they are made more aware of route options near their school.

Section Title

This is not an exhaustive list. For more detailed information visit saferoutestoschool.ca While programming is generally successful, it is emphasized that the predominance of motorized travel and the design standards to accommodate and prioritize travel by cars outweighs the benefits derived from safe travel programs to and from school. Until design standards are changed, these programs are unlikely to address the heart of the problem.

SCHOOL AREA & SITE DESIGN GUIDELINE

Programming

Intentionally blank

SCHOOL AREA & SITE DESIGN GUIDELINE

ref 78

Section References Title

References

References Access Minneapolis. (2009). Pedstrian Facility Design. Design Guidelines for Streets & Sidewalks. Adelaide City Council. (2015). Adelaide Design Manual: Lighting. Retrieved from: http://www.adelaidedesignmanual. com.au/design-toolkit/lighting Akcelik & Associates Pty Ltd. 2001. An Investigation of Pedestrian Movement Characteristics at Mid-Block Signalised Crossings. Technical Report. December. Alta Planning + Design. (2015). Lessons learned: Evolution of the protected intersection. American Planning Association. (2006). Planning and Urban Design Standards, Student Edition. Wiley. Bassil, K; Heather Rilkoff, Marco Belmont, Anna Banaszewska, Monica Campbell (2015) Pedestrian and Cycling Safety in Toronto Retrieved from: http://www.toronto.ca/legdocs/ mmis/2015/hl/bgrd/backgroundfile-81601.pdf Bentley, I., Alclock, A., Murrain, P., McGlynn, S., and Smith, G (1985). Responsive Environments. MPG Books Ltd. Bodmin, Cornwall. Bowman, S. (2013, September). Road Diets: Fitter, Healthier Public Ways. Retrieved from National Collaborating Centre for Healthy Public Policy: https://www.inspq.qc.ca/pdf/publications/1842_Road_Diet.pdf Center for Cities & Schools (2010). Partnerships for Joint Use: expanding the Use of Public School Infrastructure to Benefit Students and Communities. A Research Report. University of California, Berkeley. Retrieved from: http:// citiesandschools.berkeley.edu/reports/Partnerships_JU_ Aug2010.pdf)

SCHOOL AREA & SITE DESIGN GUIDELINE

City of Ottawa. (2010). Pedestrian Intersection Safety Countermeasure Handbook. Retrieved from: http://app06. ottawa.ca/calendar/ottawa/citycouncil/trc/2010/04-07/ ACS2010-COS-PWS-0001_Doc7_Countermeasure_EN.pdf City of Portland (2017) Parking And Loading. Retrieved from: https://www.portlandoregon.gov/bps/article/53320 City of Toronto (2016). Traffic signals - operation - timing. Retrieved March 22, 2017, from http://www.toronto. ca/311/knowledgebase/36/101000039636.html City of Toronto (2008) The Guidelines for the Design and Management of Bicycle Parking Facilities. Retrieved from: http://www1.toronto.ca/city_of_toronto/city_planning/transportation_planning/files/pdf/bicycle_parking_guidelines_final_may08.pdf City of Toronto (2015). Chapter 629 Property Standards, Toronto Municipal Code. Retrieved from: http://www.toronto. ca/legdocs/municode/1184_629.pdf City of Toronto (2015). Toronto Municipal Code Chapter 447, Fences. Retrieved from: http://www1.toronto.ca/wps/ portal/contentonly?vgnextoid=f8b7affbf0651410VgnVCM10000071d60f89RCRD&vgnextchannel=b44732e2e7741410VgnVCM10000071d60f89RCRD City of Toronto (2016) Toronto Ten Year Cycling Network Plan. Retrieved from: http://www.toronto.ca/legdocs/ mmis/2016/pw/bgrd/backgroundfile-92811.pdf “City of Toronto (2016). Toronto Municipal Code Chapter 447, Use of Streets and Side walks. Retrived from http:// www.toronto.ca/legdocs/municode/1184_743.pdf” City of Toronto (2017). Street furniture: Co-ordinated Street Furniture Program. Retrieved from: http://www1.toronto. ca/wps/portal/contentonly?vgnextoid=cb5a8d0195ce1410VgnVCM10000071d60f89RCRD

Chan, K., Quigley, B., & Wittmann, K. (2016, September). Guide to Safer Streets Near School. Retrieved from City of Toronto: http://www.toronto.ca/legdocs/mmis/2016/hl/ bgrd/backgroundfile-96414.pdf

“City of Toronto (2017). Streetscape manual design details. Urban Design, Civic Improvements. Retrieved from: http:// wx.toronto.ca/inter/plan/streetscape.nsf/lighting?OpenView”

Chillón, P., Evenson, K. R., Vaughn, A., & Ward, D. S. (2011). A systematic review of interventions for promoting active transportation to school. International journal of behavioral nutrition and physical activity, 8(1), 10.

City of Toronto and StreetsTO (2016). Street Furniture update: 2016 Rollout and publication boxes. City of Toronto. Retieved from http://www.toronto-bia.com/images/stories/ Interdepartmental_Presentations/2016/02_16_2016_ StreetFurnitureRollOutUpdate.pdf

City & County of San Francisco. (2015). Chicanes. Retrieved from City & County of San Franscisco: http://www.sfbetterstreets.org/find-project-types/pedestrian-safety-and-traffic-calming/traffic-calming-overview/chicanes/

City of Toronto, City Planning, Clean & Beautiful City Secretariat and Transportation Services (2012). Vibrant Streets: Toronto’s coordinated Street Furniture program. Toronto. Retrieved from: https://www1.toronto.ca/city_of_toronto/ city_planning/urban_design/files/pdf/vibrant_streets.pdf

SCHOOL AREA & SITE DESIGN GUIDELINE

References

City of Toronto. (2016). Traffic signals - operation - timing. Retrieved from http://www.toronto.ca/311/knowledgebase/36/101000039636.html

Halton Technical Stakeholders Sub-Committee. (2011, May). Design Guidelines for School Site and Adjacent Lands Planning. Retrieved March 22, 2017.

Crockett, P. M. (2001, November 26). Policy for Setting Speed Limits on City of Hamilton Roadways (TOE01189) - (Affects Ward 15 and also has City Wide Implications). Retrieved from City of Hamilton: http://www2.hamilton.ca/ Hamilton.Portal/Inc/PortalPDFs/ClerkPDFs/committee-ofthe-whole/2001/Dec05/TOE01189.pd

Jacobsen, P. L. (2003). Safety in numbers: More walkers and bicyclists, safer walking and bicycling. Injury Prevention, 9(3), 205-209. doi:10.1136/ip.9.3.205

Cutts, B. B., Darby, K. J., Boone, C. G., & Brewis, A. (2009). City structure, obesity, and environmental justice: An integrated analysis of physical and social barriers to walkable streets and park access. Social Science & Medicine, 69(9), 1314– 1322. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socscimed.2009.08.020 Department of Transportation. (2015). Street Design Manual. Retrieved from New York City: http://www.nyc.gov/html/ dot/downloads/pdf/nycdot-streetdesignmanual-interior-lores.pdf Dill, J. (2009). Bicycling for transportation and health: the role of infrastructure. Journal of public health policy, 30(1), S95-S110. Dwyer, J. F., McPherson, E. G., Schroeder, H. W., & Rowntree, R. A. (1992). Assessing the benefits and costs of the urban forest. Journal of Arboriculture, 18, 227-227. Federal Highway Administration. (2014, November). Road Diet Informational Guide. Retrieved from U.S. Department of Transportation: https://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/road_diets/ info_guide/rdig.pdf Ferguson, D. (2013, January 24). Comment: Why lowering speed limits is a good idea. Retrieved from Times Colonist: http://www.timescolonist.com/opinion/op-ed/commentwhy-lowering-speed-limits-is-a-good-idea-1.55002 Forbes, G. (2012, March 30). Global Approaches to Setting Speed Limits. Retrieved from Transportation Association of Canada: http://conf.tac-atc.ca/english/annualconference/ tac2012/docs/session17/forbes.pdf Giffin Koerth. 2011. School Area:Planning and Designing for Safety. Retrieved from: https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/0B2yVfn3B3gSUbHJwU3B3b2JneDA Global Toronto. (2011). Interactive maps: Toronto’s worst intersections for pedestrians. Retrieved from: http:// globalnews.ca/news/118032/interactive-maps-torontos-worst-intersections-for-pedestrians/.

Kelly, C. E., Tight, M. R., Hodgson, F. C., & Page, M. W. (2011). A comparison of three methods for assessing the walkability of the pedestrian environment. Journal of Transport Geography, 19(6), 1500–1508. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. jtrangeo.2010.08.001 Kittelson & Associates. 2003. (a) Transit Cooperative Research Program, & Transit Development Corporation. Federal Transit Administration. United States. Kittelson & Associates. 2003. (b) Transit capacity and quality of service manual Transportation Research Board. Transit Cooperative Research Program, & Transit Development Corporation. Federal Transit Administration. United States. “Manitoba Infrastructure and Transportation (2015). School Area Traffic Safety Guidelines for Manitoba. Retrieved from: https://www.gov.mb.ca/mit/traffic/pdf/school_area_guidelines.pdf.” Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices. (2009). Part 7: Traffic Control for School Areas. Retrieved from: https:// mutcd.fhwa.dot.gov/pdfs/2009/part7.pdf Ministry of Transportation Ontario (2013) Ontario Traffic Manual – Book 18. Retrieved from: http://www. raqsb.mto.gov.on.ca/techpubs/eps.nsf/0/825810eb3ddd203385257d4a0063d934/$FILE/Ontario%20Traffic%20Manual%20-%20Book%2018.pdf MMM Group Limited (2015). School Area Transportation Safety Guidelines. Retrieved from: http://conf.tac-atc.ca/ english/annualconference/tac2015/s3/tebinka.pdf MMM Group. 2015. School Area Transportation Safety Guidelines. Transportation Service of Canada. Charlottetown. PEI. National Association of City Transportation Officials (2014) Urban Bikeway Design Guide. Retrieved from: http://nacto. org/publication/urban-bikeway-design-guide/bike-lanes/ National Center for Safe Routes to School (2010). School on Site Design. Retrieved from: http://library.ite.org/pub/ e2660aa0-2354-d714-510d-6a9aed049d40 New York City Department of Transportation (2004) School Safety Engineering Project. Retrieved from: http://www.nyc. gov/html/dot/downloads/pdf/schoolsafetymitigation.pdf

References

SCHOOL AREA & SITE DESIGN GUIDELINE

“New York City Department of Transportation (2015) Street Design Manual. Retrieved from: http://www.nyc.gov/html/ dot/downloads/pdf/nycdot-streetdesignmanual-interior-lores.pdf”

State of Florida Department of Transportation (2011). Traditional Neighborhood Development Handbook. Office of Roadway design. Tallahassee, FL. Retrieved from: http:// www.fdot.gov/roadway/floridagreenbook/tnd-handbook.pdf

Ontario School Bus Association. (2017). School Bus Safety. Retrieved from: http://www.osba.on.ca/about-osba

Stoker, P., Garfinkel-Castro, A., Khayesi, M., Odero, W., Mwangi, M. N., Peden, M., & Ewing, R. (2015). Pedestrian safety and the built environment: a review of the risk factors. CPL bibliography, 30(4), 377-392.

Pedestrian and Bicycle Information Center (2017) Bicycle Parking. Retrieved from: http://www.pedbikeinfo.org/planning/facilities_bike_bikeparking.cfm Pedestrian and Bicycle Information Centre. (n.d.). Chicanes. Retrieved from U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Highway Administration: http://www.pedbikeinfo.org/planning/facilities_calming_chicanes.cfm

Sustrans. (2014). Sustrans Design Manual Chapter 3: Placemaking. Retrieved from: http://www.sustrans.org.uk/ our-services/what-we-do/route-design-and-construction/ route-design-resources/placemaking-design

Project for Public Spaces (2009). Lighting Use & Design. Retrieved from: https://www.pps.org/reference/streetlights/

Sustrans. (2015). Sustrans Design Manual Chapter 4: Streets and roads. Retrieved from: http://www.sustrans.org. uk/sites/default/files/images/files/Route-Design-Resources/4_Streets_and_roads_05_03_15.pdf

Province of Manitoba. (2015). School Area Traffic Safety Guidelines For Manitoba. Retrieved from: https://www.gov. mb.ca/mit/traffic/pdf/school_area_guidelines.pdf

Tebinka, R. (2015). School Area Transporttion Safety Guidelines. Retrieved from: http://conf.tac-atc.ca/english/annualconference/tac2015/s3/tebinka.pdf

Rosen, E. and Sander, U. (2009). Pedestrian fatality risk as a function of car impact speed. Accident Analysis and Prevention 41(3):536–542

Thierry Serrea, Loïc Lalysb, Christophe Bartolic, Amandine Christia-Lotterc, Georges Leonettic, Christian Bruneta (2010). Child pedestrian anthropometry: evaluation of potential impact points during a crash.Université de la Méditerranée. Retrieved from: https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/ hal-00542368/document

Saelens, B. E., Sallis, J. F., & Frank, L. D. (2003). Environmental correlates of walking and cycling: findings from the transportation, urban design, and planning literatures. Annals of behavioral medicine, 25(2), 80-91. Safe Routes of School. (n.a). Walk-About Checklist. Retrieved from http://www.saferoutestoschool.ca/oldsite/partnership/downloads/Safety-School-Site-Walkabout-Checklist.pdf Sandalack, B. A., Alaniz Uribe, F. G., Eshghzadeh Zanjani, A., Shiell, A., McCormack, G. R., & Doyle-Baker, P. (2013). Neighbourhood type and walkshed size. Journal of Urbanism: International Research on Placemaking and Urban Sustainability, 6(3), 236-255. doi:10.1080/17549175.2013.771694 School Safety Engineering Project. (2004). Retrieved http:// www.nyc.gov/html/dot/downloads/pdf/schoolsafetymitigation.pdf Schulze , L. (n.d.). Evaluation of cross-walk timing and the application of a standard crossing light timing formula . Retrieved from http://www.iea.cc/ECEE/pdfs/art0217.pdf SF Better Streets (n.d.) Street Lighting. Retrieved from: http://www.sfbetterstreets.org/find-project-types/streetscape-elements/street-lighting/

Toronto and East York Community Council. (2015, June 22). Reducing the Speed Limit on Local Roads from 40 to 30 km/h in the Toronto and East York Community Council Area. Retrieved from City of Toronto: http://www.toronto.ca/legdocs/mmis/2015/te/bgrd/backgroundfile-81792.pdf Toronto Centre for Active Transportation. (2012). Complete Streets by Design: Toronto streets redesigned for all ages and abilities. Retrieved from Toronto Centre for Active Transportation: http://www.tcat.ca/wp-content/ uploads/2014/10/Complete-Streets-by-Design-TorontoStreets-Redesigned-for-All-Ages-and-Abilities-Side-by-sidespread.pdf Toronto District School Board (2014). Community: Community Planning and Partnerships. Retrieved from: http://www. tdsb.on.ca/Community/CommunityPlanningandPartnerships. aspx Toronto District School Board (2017) Student Transportation Frequently Asked Questions. Retrieved from: http://www. tdsb.on.ca/EarlyYears/Kindergarten/Transportation/FAQs. aspx

SCHOOL AREA & SITE DESIGN GUIDELINE

References

“Toronto District School Board Executive Council (2016). Community Planning and Partnerships. Operational Procedure PR713. Retrieved from: http://www2.tdsb.on.ca/ppf/ uploads/files/live/92/1981.pd”

World Health Organization (2017) Children and Road Traffic Injury. Retrieved from: http://www.who.int/violence_injury_prevention/child/injury/world_report/Road_traffic_injuries_english.pdf

“Toronto Municipal Code (2014) Chapter 886, Footpaths, Pedestrian Ways, Bicycle Paths, Bicycle Lanes and Cycle Tracks. Retrieved from:

Wridt, P. (2010). A qualitative GIS approach to mapping urban neighborhoods with children to promote physical activity and child-friendly community planning. Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design, 37(1), 129-147.

http://www.toronto.ca/legdocs/municode/1184_886.pdf” Toronto Public Health (2012). The Walkable City: Neighbourhood Design and Preferences, travel choices and health. City of Toronto. Retrieved from: www1.toronto.ca/city_of_toronto/toronto_public_health/healthy_public_policy/hphe/files/ pdf/walkable_city.pdf Town of Whitby. (n.a). Walkability Audit. Retrieved from http://www.whitby.ca/en/resources/PW-AppendixB.pdf Transportation Research Board. (2013). Transit capacity and quality of service manual (3rd ed.). Washington, DC: Transportation Research Board. Transportation Services Division Traffic Data Centre and Safety Bureau (2007 ) City of Toronto Pedestrian Collision Study http://www1.toronto.ca/City%20Of%20Toronto/ Transportation%20Services/Walking/Files/pdf/ped_collision_study-full_report.pdf Transportation Services Division. (2016). Traffic Calming Guide for Toronto. Retrieved from City of Toronto: http:// www.toronto.ca/legdocs/mmis/2016/pw/bgrd/backgroundfile-94207.pdf Vancouver Engineering Services (Pat Ryan). (2001). Reduced Waiting Times for Pedestrians at Traffic Signals. City of Vancouver. Retrieved from http://council.vancouver. ca/010605/tt3.htm Virkler, M. (1998). Scramble and crosswalk signal timing. Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, (1636), 83-87. Whitelegg, J. (2008). Wold Transportation Policy & Practice. The Journey to School. 14(1). Williams, J. E., Evans, M., Kirtland, K. A., Cavnar, M. M., Sharpe, P. A., Neet, M. J., & Cook, A. (2005). Development and use of a tool for assessing sidewalk maintenance as an environmental support of physical activity. Health promotion practice, 6(1), 81-88. Winters, M., Davidson, G., Kao, D., & Teschke, K. (2011). Motivators and deterrents of bicycling: comparing influences on decisions to ride. Transportation, 38(1), 153-168.