Planning for the First Mile & Last Mile in the Greater Toronto and Hamilton Area
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
This paper brings together topics surrounding transportation planning issues and opportunities in the Greater Toronto and Hamilton Area. Using the concept of transit urban design around major transit station areas, I examine how to retrofit the existing urban form across multiple typologies to solve first-mile/last-mile transportation mobility challenges in suburban communities across the region. By undertaking a holistic and interdisciplinary approach towards retrofitting suburban communities, simple changes can make all the difference across a multitude of basic typologies. \nThe paper begins with review of the scholarly literature surrounding the themes connected to this topic. Beginning with a historical dive back two centuries, I examine the factors that led to the desire to create the first suburban environments away from cities. From here we explore the history of the automobile and suburban sprawl in Europe and America. Focusing on Toronto in the mid 20th century, I look at when planning changed course and abandoned the American model of city building in favour a new Toronto style, one which would save most of the downtown core. Following this, I unpack barriers to the built environment, the first-mile/lastmile dilemma in transportation planning, and what it means to retrofit suburbia and what that entails. Finally, we examine current land use issues around regional transit stations in the GTHA and identify the conditions requiring retrofits. \nI then turn to policy and break down the expectations from the Province of Ontario's Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe, identifying Urban Growth Centres and major transit station areas within various typologies, as per the plan. Continuing the dive into policy, I uncover what the Provincial Policy Statement, Planning Act, and Greenbelt Plan all have to provide with regards to transportation planning and transportation infrastructure development. I then examine local policy in the City of Toronto's Official Plan and the Toronto Complete Street Design Guidelines. Following this I look at how cities and people take policy into action, examining the role and form of public consultation and its impacts. Then looking at the two Regional Transportation Plans, I examine what has been done, what is in progress and what is proposed in the region to help close transit gaps and create a well-connected network for the GTHA. \nUsing the Growth Plan's urban growth centres as key nodes, the retrofit of suburban environments across the region is broken down into three typologies: (1) greenfields, (2) autocentric superblocks, and (3) developed communities. The typologies are distinct as they interact with the urban environment in different ways, and require unique retrofit strategies in order to implement better transit urban design strategies. First, we look at "creating the blocks," then "changing the blocks" and finally "laying the blocks" of the urban environment. \nVarious themes related to transportation planning, urban design and mobility are connected to numerous challenges and benefits identified within the retrofit process for each typology. I examine issues around land ownership, costs, equity in decision making, safety, politics and public opinion. I also present opportunities in the form of transit-oriented development, redeveloping blocks, and alternative modes available through transportation demand management, in order to mitigate first-mile/last-mile issues and increase local to regional mobility across the region and between its nodes. I conclude that a holistic, interdisciplinary approach, considering numerous angles at once is required regardless of the context in question.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,009 | 0,005 |
| Communication savante | 0,004 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,007 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».