Upload
others
View
6
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
© 2014 Neluka Leanage
Implementing Walking and Cycling Policy in Ontario
Neluka Leanage
Planner/Designer + PhD Student
Study Results and Directions
© 2014 Neluka Leanage
Outline
• Overview of Research Project
• Key Findings
• Implications
© 2014 Neluka Leanage
Project Overview
• Dr. Pierre Filion: leading expert, professor • Canadian cities
• urban form
• land use-transportation patterns
• Ontario Smart Growth Panel (pre-Places to Grow; nodes and corridors)
• Neluka Leanage: consultant, PhD student • policy, plans, designs, behaviour shift strategies
• active transportation, trails, parks, recreation
• engagement, user experience
• TCAT Steering Committee, 2008-2012
• 2 Other Grad Students
© 2014 Neluka Leanage
Project Overview
New Urbanism Smart Growth 1990s-
1970s-‘80s-
Late 1990s- Traditional Neighbourhood Design
Transit-Oriented Development
Active Transportation
Complete Streets
2005-
Planning Policies + Movements (Alternatives to Automobile-Dependency)
2010-
Active Environments (Public Health-Planning)
Pedestrian/Walking
Cycling
U.S.A.
© 2014 Neluka Leanage
Project Overview
Ontario Places to Grow and growth planning
Walking and cycling or active transportation (AT)
Institutional Policies
Planning Practices
Case studies Ontario, GGH Regions, municipalities 75+ in-depth interviews Planners, Decision-makers
Obstacles Failures
Successes Catalysts
Conditions
Do Things Better
Policies not translating into implementation • automobile-dependent planning and design = dominant
• alternatives = slow, inconsistent or lacking
Our Study:
© 2014 Neluka Leanage
Project Overview 7 Upper Tier Municipalities 18 Lower Tier Municipalities
5 GTHA Regions 3 Outer GTHA Regions/Counties
Source: Places to Grow, Ontario Government
Today: Toronto & GTA Municipalities
© 2014 Neluka Leanage
Key Findings: City of Toronto
Places to Grow/Provincial Growth Plan & AT? X Provincial policy not a factor or impetus • Not a necessary or sufficient condition in Toronto case • Provincial policy not doing enough; AT = afterthought
• Specific challenges with MTO
• Federal government absent
• Developers participating case-by-case
People, advocacy groups, private sector “ahead” of governments and policies
© 2014 Neluka Leanage
Key Findings: City of Toronto
Most needed to advance AT? • infrastructure • transit integration • political will • make it feel safe • education • supportive staff environment • supportive land use & street design (not ranked)
Approach/Status Quo/Lack of
Consideration
29%
Lack of Awareness/Training
18% Physical
Environment
11%
Funding 7%
Electoral Politics 7%
Transit funding & AT integration
7%
Other 21%
(multiple, single answers)
Obstacles to AT Implementation
© 2014 Neluka Leanage
Key Findings: Toronto Successes
Approach St. George Street approach and road diet
Priority Yonge-Dundas scramble (with caveats)
Transit Integration Finch bike station (vs. Downsview)
Neighbourhood New Urbanist design, Cornell, Markham
Street Dundas Street East road diet & bike lanes
Parcels Developer: pedestrian link instead of density incentive
Connection Waterfront pedestrian access at Jarvis-Sugar Beach
Safe Experience Waterfront Trail/Martin Goodman Trail
© 2014 Neluka Leanage
Key Findings: Toronto Conditions for Success
• Pre-war urban form = enabling environment
• Integrate AT at outset & with transit
• Pilot projects to get something going (but may be temporary)
• Leadership at political & senior bureaucratic levels
• Designating pedestrian & cycling priority areas
• Implement with supportive councillors & wards (follow the “yes”)
• “Right” staff & supportive staff environment
• Collaboration & flexibility (citizens, private, public, non-profit)
• Building new easier than retrofitting
© 2014 Neluka Leanage
Key Findings: GTA Municipalities
Places to Grow/Provincial Growth Plan & AT?
Provincial policy was a factor or impetus
• Provincial policy insufficient condition Federal Government absent Regional Government: significant tensions Developers respond if clear Local municipalities trying, policy helps, few supportive mechanisms to implement, challenged on all fronts
© 2014 Neluka Leanage
Key Findings: GTA Municipalities
Obstacles
• Regional municipality transportation planning
• Inter-regional economy & jobs
• Lack of transit connecting local to regional/network
• Physical environment & land use
• Piecemeal approach – reacting to funding, lobby
• Public acceptance/resistance
• Standards impeding professional & bureaucratic change
• Poor local level mechanisms & tools
© 2014 Neluka Leanage
Key Findings: GTA Successes
Awareness & Options • Smart Commute & Clean Air Commute • Downtown parking charges • Pilot seasonal shuttle services between
business park & restaurants
Transit Viva
Transit Integration Bike racks on buses
Neighbourhood New Urbanist design, Cornell, Markham
Safe Experience • Tom Taylor Trail & highway underpass • Other trails
© 2014 Neluka Leanage
Key Findings: GTA Successes
Conditions Places to Grow/Growth Plan directions
Being an Urban Growth Centre e.g., Brampton Queen St. Corridor
Provincial funding (e.g., Smart Commute, bus bike racks)
Regional transit development (with caveats)
Local strategies, official plans, master plans aligned with provincial policy
Local capacity to influence Regional Municipality
Benefits derived from alternative development e.g., Cornell value – example, infrastructure, taxes
Political champion e.g., Ajax mayor
© 2014 Neluka Leanage
Implications
Toronto • Early adopter of smart growth principles
• AT implementation & advancements prior to Places to Grow
• Outdated thinking still an obstacle at all levels, professions
• Needs levers & tools at different scales
GTA Municipalities & Suburban Areas • Smart growth principles (& Places to Grow) most relevant & helpful
• AT will be altered with land use change, transit & economy
• Tensions between local & regional municipalities need attention
• Local municipalities need more supports, mechanisms & tools
© 2014 Neluka Leanage
Implications
Policy Needs
• “lens” for systematic consideration with horizontal-to-vertical integration
• Departmental & bureaucratic standard in absence of relevant/despite existing road, fire, public works standards
• Scale- & context-appropriate transportation-planning direction
• Guidance at parcel-to-street-to-neighbourhood-to-network levels
• Incentives to deliver contextual, complete solutions (land use-transit/transportation)
• Carrots and sticks may be needed by province
• collaboration incentives
• Provincial teeth? (for lack of progress & accountability)
© 2014 Neluka Leanage
For More Information
• Neluka Leanage
• www.groundshift.ca
• Email: [email protected]
• Pierre Filion
• https://uwaterloo.ca/planning/people-profiles/pierre-filion
• Email: [email protected]
• Places to Grow
• www.placestogrow.ca