Integrated Regional Transportation Master Plan Task Force

Integrated Regional Transportation Master Plan Task Force Agenda

January 21, 2021, 9:00 a.m. - 12:00 p.m.

Virtual Meeting via Zoom

Public Viewing via YouTube

1. Opening

1.1 Quorum

Action: Confirmation Lead: Chair Katchur

1.2 Call to Order

Action: Declaration Lead: Chair Katchur

1.3 Chair’s Opening Remarks

Action: Information Lead: Chair Katchur

2. Approval of Agenda Action: Approval Lead: Chair Katchur Recommended Motion: That the Integrated Regional Transportation Master Plan Task Force approve the January 21, 2021 meeting agenda.

IRTMP Task Force Presentation - January 21, 2021

3. Approval of Minutes Action: Approval Lead: Chair Katchur Recommended Motion: That the Integrated Regional Transportation Master Plan Task Force approve the November 19, 2020 meeting minutes.

IRTMP Task Force Minutes - November 19, 2020 - Draft

4. Progress Update Action: Information Lead: Ms. Charlene Wilcock (Consultant)

5. Technical Stakeholder Engagement Summary Action: Presentation/Discussion Lead: Ms. Debra Irving / Ms. Charlene Wilcock (Consultant)

5.1 Technical Stakeholder Engagement Summary

That the Integrated Regional Transportation Master Plan Task Force receive the IRTMP Technical Stakeholder Engagement Summary for information.

Request for Decision - Stakeholder Engagement Summary

Page 78 - 89

Page 1 of 90

https://youtu.be/DBOAtNOLqXA

6. Plan Structure and Policy Framework

Action: Presentation/Discussion Lead: Ms. Melanie Hare (Consultant)

6.1 Plan Structure and Policy Framework

That the Integrated Regional Transportation Master Plan Task Force endorse the IRTMP Plan Structure and Policy Framework.

Request for Decision - Plan Structure and Policy Framework

Page 90

7. Policy Direction Action: Discussion Lead: Ms. Melanie Hare (Consultant)

8. Next Steps Action: Information Lead: Ms. Charlene Wilcock (Consultant)

9. Next Meeting Action: Information Lead: Chair Katchur IRTMP Task Force February 26, 2021 1:00 p.m. - 4:00 p.m.

10. Adjournment Action: Declaration Lead: Chair Katchur

Page 2 of 90

Task Force Meeting #8

January 21, 2021

EMRB Integrated Regional Transportation Master Plan

SC1

Page 3 of 90

01 Opening

02

Progress Update

03

Technical Stakeholder Engagement Summary

04

Plan Structure + Policy Framework

0506

A g e n d a

3

Approval of Agenda

Approval of Minutes

0708 Next Steps

Policy Direction

09 Next Meeting

Page 4 of 90

1. Opening4

Page 5 of 90

1.1 Quorum

1.2 Call to Order

1.3 Chair's Opening Remarks

5

Page 6 of 90

2. Approval of Agenda6

Page 7 of 90

2. Approval of Agenda

Recommended motion: That the Integrated Regional Transportation MasterPlan Task Force approve the January 21, 2021 meeting agenda.

7

Page 8 of 90

3. Approval of Minutes8

Page 9 of 90

3. Approval of Minutes

Recommended motion: That the Integrated Regional Transportation MasterPlan Task Force approve the November 19, 2020 meeting minutes.

9

Page 10 of 90

4. Progress Update10

Page 11 of 90

Schedule

Work Plan & Scope

We are here11

Meetings

Page 12 of 90

Regional Transportation Scenarios

Work Plan & Scope

Tasks • Review population and employment Inputs• Generate base existing and future business-as-usual scenarios• Develop project and system performance metrics• Identify and screen projects long list• Develop and evaluate system scenarios

StakeholderActivities

• Working Group and Task Force:• Scenario Development Workshop• Introduction to Policy Workshop

Deliverables • Regional Transportation Scenarios Report – direct to IRTMP; subregionalnetworks technical memo to be distributed; scenario memo previouslydistributed

12

Page 13 of 90

Policy Framework

Work Plan & Scope

Tasks • Document and refine policy guidance• Identify additional supporting policy

StakeholderActivities

• Working Group: Policy Framework Review• Task Force: Policy Framework Refinement Workshop• Board: Presentation

Deliverables • Policy Framework

13

Page 14 of 90

5. Technical Stakeholder Engagement14

Page 15 of 90

Technical Stakeholder Engagement• Key task in IRTMP Project Charter

• Stakeholders identified by Project Team, Working Group and Task Force

• These are external organizations and associations directly impacted by andinvested in the betterment of the regional transportation network

• Stakeholders can be grouped into four categories:• Industry – includes land development community, chambers of commerce, industrial

associations• Operational – directly involved in transportation (i.e., railroads, airports, trucking association)• Institutional – post-secondary institutions and Armed Forces• Active Modes – transit and bicycling group

• Summary provided in this presentation, more comprehensive summary inseparate report

15

Page 16 of 90

Technical Stakeholders Contacted

• Alberta Health Services• Alberta Industrial Heartland Association• Alberta Motor Transport Association• Canadian Armed Forces• Canadian Pacific Railway• Canadian National Railway• Canadian Urban Transit Association• Commercial Real Estate Development

Association (NAIOP Edmonton)• Edmonton Global• Edmonton International Airport• Greater Edmonton Region Chambers of

Commerce

• Government of Canada – Office of WesternDiversification

• Leduc Chamber• Nisku Business Park• Northern Alberta Institute of Technology• Pathways for People• Regional Transit Services Commission• River Valley Alliance• Strathcona Industrial Association• Treaty 6 (Enoch Nation)• University of Alberta• Urban Development Institute – Edmonton

Reached out to 22 organizations, heard back from 20:

16

91%response rate

Page 17 of 90

Technical Stakeholders Interviewed

• Alberta Health Services• Alberta Industrial Heartland Association• Alberta Motor Transport Association• Canadian Armed Forces• Canadian Pacific Railway• Canadian National Railway• Canadian Urban Transit Association• Commercial Real Estate Development

Association (NAIOP Edmonton)• Edmonton Global• Edmonton International Airport• Greater Edmonton Region Chambers of

Commerce

• Government of Canada – Office of WesternDiversification

• Leduc Chamber• Nisku Business Park• Northern Alberta Institute of Technology• Pathways for People• Regional Transit Services Commission• River Valley Alliance• Strathcona Industrial Association• Treaty 6 (Enoch Nation)• University of Alberta• Urban Development Institute – Edmonton

Total of 19 30-minute video conference interviews carried out with:

17

86%response rate

Page 18 of 90

What We Heard - IndustryInterests:

• Transportation logistics underlies all sectors

• Transportation integral to attracting new business andinvestment to the Region

• Transportation (access, efficiency, and cost) key site selectioncriteria

• Regional but also external connectivity important –connectivity between Region and rest of Province, otherProvinces, and international markets

• Importance of high-load corridor in proximity to industrialareas

• Mode choice important for residential and commercial realestate development

Stakeholders:• Alberta Industrial Heartland

Association• Commercial Real Estate

Development Association(NAIOP Edmonton)

• Edmonton Global• Greater Edmonton Region

Chambers of Commerce• Government of Canada –

Office of WesternDiversification

• Leduc Chamber• Nisku Business Park• Strathcona Industrial

Association• Urban Development Institute –

Edmonton

Page 19 of 90

What We Heard - Industry

Challenges and Opportunities:

• Certainty and timing of infrastructure investment (e.g.LRT and TOD in St. Albert)

• Manufacturing and government continue to be leadingeconomic sectors and strengths of the region

• Capital flowing into employment nodes with good transportation access(e.g. SE Edmonton to Nisku, AIHA, Acheson)

• Multi-modal access important (e.g. Amazon located in Leduc areabecause of proximity to road and air network but also commitment ofmunicipalities to RTSC)

• Transportation-related emissions cited as majorchallenge for monitoring of PM 2.5









Edmonton

Page 20 of 90

What We Heard - Industry

Looking Ahead:

• Economic recovery expected in 2024

• Economic diversification like to increase over time• Specialized products may require more road transportation over

heavy rail

• Residential development continue to invest in suburbs;however, form of new communities changing (i.e. moredense)

• Climate change and sustainability increasingly a criticalfactor









Edmonton

Page 21 of 90

What We Heard - Operators

Interests:

• Supporting existing business/clients but also growth

• Air and rail not in competition when it comes to goodsmovement

• Rail close to capacity so fluidity of transportation networkimportant for operations

• Rail connections of interest: Port of Prince Rupert(CN), connections into intercontinental US (CP)

• Intermodal functions

Stakeholders:• Alberta Motor Transport

Association• Canadian Pacific Railway• Canadian National Railway• Edmonton International

Airport

Factoid:On a direct flight

approximately 50-60%of cargo is goods

Page 22 of 90

What We Heard - OperatorsChallenges and Opportunities:

• Lack of direct flights impacting ability to move goods by air

• Acceleration in e-commerce – impacts on distribution

• Shortage of drivers and pilots

• Lack of facilities to support drivers (i.e. along Hwy 16 and2)

• Increasing emphasis in connecting to Port of Prince Rupert

• Road-rail interface a concern• Examples: 46 St at 50 Ave in Leduc; Highway 15 at 830; Highway

60 in Acheson; RR 231 over Yellowhead/Hwy 16; 149 Street aswell as 170 Street in Edmonton

• Streamlining intermodal connectivity



Airport

Factoids:Port of Prince Rupertcurrently moves 1.1M

units, by 2030 thatnumber is anticipated toincrease to 7.5M units.

CN line to Rupert is at85% capacity

Page 23 of 90

What We Heard - Operators

Looking Ahead:

• Rethinking distribution in the Region• Example: drone delivery, neighbourhood distribution hubs

• Smart vehicles / smart cities

• Fibre and sensors will be required to support vehicleconnectivity (i.e., vehicle-to-infrastructure)

• Innovation in alternative fuels• Example: hydrogen• Potential to decrease transportation related emissions• Supporting infrastructure



Airport

Page 24 of 90

What We Heard - InstitutionsInterests:

• Post-secondary: commuter campuses, supportingaccess to campus for current/future students

• Armed Forces: travel between bases for trainingpurposes, and travel to/from armories for more civilianpurposes/programs


• Post-secondaries:• Growth in enrolment and consolidation of campuses• Encouraging mode shift• Campuses as major nodes and complete communities

• Armed Forces: maintaining ease of travel betweenbases, increasing multi-modal access to/from armories

Stakeholders:• Armed Forces• NAIT• University of Alberta

Factoid:Only 15% of UofA'sstudent population

live on campus. 85% liveoff campus.

Page 25 of 90

What We Heard – Active Modes

Interests:

• Supporting the mobility of labour in the Region

• Increasing transportation equity and mode choice


• Development of a regional transit and bicycling network

• Opportunity to offer specialized transit services for seniorsand people in need

• River Valley a key regional connection• Gap in SW Edmonton/Leduc

Stakeholders:• Pathways for People• RTSC• River Valley Alliance

Page 26 of 90

What We Heard – Active Modes

Looking Ahead:

• Electrification of micro-mobility (e-bikes, e-scooters)

• Increasing access to shared mobility

• On-demand and micro-transit for transit access in low-demand areas

Stakeholders:• Pathways for People• RTSC• River Valley Alliance

Page 27 of 90

Advice for the Board

Interviews ended with the question: What is one piece of advice you have for theBoard?

• Supporting future industrial activities in the region means considering keyexport points

• Continue to have conversations with end users. Allows a better understandingof regional transportation needs

• Work closely with Province and Federal government to leverage sources offunding

• Continue regional collaboration

Page 28 of 90

Summary

• High response rate indicates an interest in regional information sharing andmaintaining/enhancing the regional transportation system

• An efficient, cost-effective, and multi-modal system key to supporting economicgrowth and development

• Industrial activity will continue to drive Region’s economy, and both internal andexternal connectivity are priorities for stakeholders

• Active modes (transit and bicycling) requires regional integration and high levelof service to be successful

• New technologies (such as new fuel technology, connectedvehicles/automation, and supply-chain processes) bring new opportunities forimproving the system

Page 29 of 90

Technical Stakeholder Engagement Summary

Recommended motion: That the Integrated Regional Transportation MasterPlan Task Force receive the IRTMP Technical Stakeholder EngagementSummary for information.

Page 30 of 90

6. Plan Structure and PolicyFramework

30

Page 31 of 90

31

POLICY DEVELOPMENT: TOWARDS THE IRTMP

December 15:DRAFT PlanStructure

DEC JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN

January 12:Core PolicyDirections

February 4Draft Policies

March 2:85% DRAFTIRTMP

April 13:DRAFT IRTMP

May 5:FINAL IRTMP

January 21:DRAFT PlanStructure &PolicyFramework

WorkingGroup

TaskForce

IRTMPBoardMeeting

February 26:Draft Policies

March 18:85%DRAFTIRTMP

April 29:DRAFTIRTMP

May 20 :FINALIRTMP

March 11Draft Policies

April 885% DRAFT

IRTMP

June 10FINAL IRTMP

Where weare today

Page 32 of 90

32

PLAN STRUCTURE AND POLICY FRAMEWORKTASKFORCE MEETING, JANUARY, 2021

Objectives:

• Review a draft Plan Structure of the IRTMP document• Review the proposed Policy Framework, and how we arrived at it’s key features

• Plan Outcomes• System Based Strategies

• Sneak peak at Initial Draft Policy Directions• Discuss and provide feedback/direction on above

Direction Requested:

Provide feedback on, and on this basis, endorse the proposed Plan Structureand Policy Framework (Plan Outcomes, System Based Strategies)

Page 33 of 90

OUR DEPARTURE POINT

Page 34 of 90

34

WHAT WE HAVE(HOW THE SYSTEM PERFORMS AND THETOOLS TO IMPROVE RESULTS)

SYSTEMSTRATEGIES(HOW WE GET THERE)

Transportation SystemChallenges and Opportunities

Optimizing the use ofexisting corridors andinfrastructure

Connecting goods tomarkets

Getting people to jobsand services

Connecting modes andsupporting modal shift

• Policies• Schedules

Responsiveness to Core,Metropolitan and RuralAreas

OUTCOMES(HOW THE TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM CANCONTRIBUTE TO THE GROWTH PLAN)







PLAN STRUCTURE Growth Plan

Serving TheDiverse Needs ofthe Region

Sustainable andResilientCommunities

Health and theEnvironment

EconomicCompetitivenessand Prosperity

OUT

COM

ES

ImplementationMOVING FORWARD(WHAT ARE THE NEXT STEPS ANDPROCESSES REQUIRED)

Page 35 of 90

PLAN STRUCTUREThe Vision

Recommendation:• Pull the Vision for the IRTMP directly from the Growth

Plan• Consistent with ongoing study approach, it will be

framed as an implementing tool of the Growth Planaimed at supporting the GP Vision, Principles andtransportation policies.

• The policy audit ensures alignment between the twodocuments and identify gaps

• The IRTMP will build on the Growth Plan policies withgreater detail and more specific direction

Page 36 of 90

PLAN STRUCTURETransportation System Challenges andOpportunities

Recommendation:• An upfront chapter will describe the network

challenges and gaps that exist based on theBAU growth and transportation scenario

• The section will include an overview of some ofthe tools / strategies to address the challenges,drawing for the input we received during thespring

Page 37 of 90

PLAN STRUCTUREOutcomes

To Discuss and Confirm:• A series of desired outcomes will describe how

the IRTMP will support the Vision of the GrowthPlan

• Can be tied back to the regional policy areas• Provide the ability to accommodate additional

directions (Example: Equity, Resiliency)

Page 38 of 90

PLAN STRUCTURESystem Based Strategies

To Discuss/Confirm:• 4 system-based strategies that will be

described and supported by policies andschedules

• Can include region-wide and policy-tier specificstrategies

• Will support, integrate or expand upon policiesof the EMRB as per the Policy Audit

Page 39 of 90

PLAN STRUCTURE

• Simple organization, witha clear progressiontowards policy

• Recognition that astrategy and relatedpolicies could work insupport of multiple goals

Best Practice:Vancouver Metro Region – Transport 2040

Page 40 of 90

• Identifies policies andspecific action itemsunder each policy

• Takes into account thecontextual differencesbetween areas (Central,Inner, Outer, and BeyondLondon) at the vision andthe policy scale

Best Practice:London – Mayor’s Transport Strategy

POLICY FRAMEWORK

Page 41 of 90

PLAN STRUCTUREImplementation

• Will describe the next steps andactions/processes required to move forward• Recommendations for coordination and

updates to the growth plan• Ongoing data and metric collection• Criteria for prioritization

Page 42 of 90

PLAN STRUCTURE

• Simple organization

• Included a list of priorityactions, as well as moregeneral policy objectives

• Comprehensive: connectsgoals to specific actionitems, all working towardsan identified network

Best Practice: Metrolinx RTP

Page 43 of 90

43

WHAT WE HAVE(HOW THE SYSTEM PERFORMS AND THETOOLS TO IMPROVE RESULTS)

SYSTEMSTRATEGIES(HOW WE GET THERE)

Transportation SystemChallenges and Opportunities



Getting people to jobsand services




OUTCOMES(HOW THE TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM CANCONTRIBUTE TO THE GROWTH PLAN)







PLAN STRUCTURE Growth Plan





OUT

COM

ES

ImplementationMOVING FORWARD(WHAT ARE THE NEXT STEPS ANDPROCESSES REQUIRED)

Page 44 of 90

Question:

1. Does the Plan Structure effectively complement and address all key components of theIRTMP mandate?

2. Is there any Plan component or part of the Plan Structure you would modify or feel ismissing?

44

PLAN STRUCTURE

Page 45 of 90

Outcomes the plan can help to support

45

POLICY FRAMEWORK

The DiverseNeeds of the

Region

HealthAnd The

EnvironmentEconomic

Competitivenessand Prosperity

Sustainableand ResilientCommunities

Page 46 of 90

Outcomes the plan can help to support

46

POLICY FRAMEWORK

Economic Competitiveness & Prosperity• Positioning the region for success• Movement of goods• Access to markets• Supporting jobs & Job Access

Health & Environment• Promotion of more sustainable modes/means of travel• Support for more active mobility

Serving The Diverse Needs of the Region• The three policy tiers• Ages / Abilities• Economic status• Equitable access

Sustainable and Resilient Communities• Resiliency to change• Support for more sustainable growth• Connecting people to services

Page 47 of 90

Outcomes

Question:

1. Recognizing the Outcomes are broad buckets that can capture a number of ideas, do you feel that we haveidentified the right outcomes to communicate the objectives of the plan?

2. Are there any you would modify or feel are missing?

47

POLICY FRAMEWORK





Page 48 of 90

System Based Strategies

• 4 system-based strategies that will bedescribed and supported by policies andschedules

• Can include region-wide and policy-tier specificstrategies

• Will support, integrate or expand upon policiesof the EMRB as per the Policy Audit

POLICY FRAMEWORK

Page 49 of 90

49

Optimizing the use of existingcorridors and infrastructure Connecting goods to markets Getting people to jobs and

servicesConnecting modes andsupporting modal shift

Scenario modelling showed us that:


POLICY FRAMEWORK

• Some areas of the networkcontinue to performadequately without majorinvestments or withdelayed investments

• Some areas did notfunction well withoutinvestment

• TDM required for thesuccess of any networksolution

• Modelling showed us thatthere may be considerablevalue in managed lanesalong corridors with hightruck volumes

• People generally live closeto where they work

• The demand is less aboutcross-regional movementsand more sub-regionalmovements

• Integration of modes ismore important thanfocusing on a single mode

• Right-sizing transit todemand

• First and last mileimportant components

• Success of modeshift requires a TDMapproach

Page 50 of 90

50



Supporting a shift to transit, higher-occupancy vehicles and active modesand improving connections betweenmodes for more seamless travel.

Making it easier for people toaccess jobs and services across arange of modes.

Supporting the efficient flow ofgoods and connecting goods toregional, national and internationalmarkets.

Finding ways to get the most out ofexisting streets and transportationcorridors to move more people andgoods in similar amounts of space.

POLICY FRAMEWORKSystem Based Strategies

Page 51 of 90

51




Example Plan / Policy Intents

Metropolitan Core• Supporting a shift to more active

modes and transit with greaterlevels of pedestrian and cyclingactivity

Metropolitan Area• Supporting more seamless,

comfortable, and convenient lastmile connections to and fromrapid transit

Rural Area• Increasing choice



Metropolitan Core• Enhancing access into the core

and supporting a continued shiftto active and sustainable modes

Metropolitan Area• Enhancing access to major

destinations

Rural Area• Improving connectivity

to/from/between rural centresand enhancing access to majordestinations



Metropolitan Core• Managing local deliveries

Metropolitan Area• Enhancing access between

manufacturing, energy, andindustrial centres, the EIA and agoods movement network

Rural Area• Development of a rural goods

movement network



Metropolitan Core• Supporting higher levels of

walking, cycling and transit

Metropolitan Area• Enhancing transit

competitiveness and movingmore people through the majorarterial and highway network

Rural Area• Balancing the movement of

goods and passenger travel

POLICY FRAMEWORK

Page 52 of 90

52


[DRAFT] Policy DirectionsPlan for a series of multi-modalmobility hubsSupport FALM active transportationconnectionsDevelop a regional active AAA (allages and abilities) networkImprove safety and comfort of theactive transportation networkAddress inter-municipal limitationsto network connectivityIncentivize other modes throughpricing and managementImprove the coordination betweentransit services


[DRAFT] Policy DirectionsConnect Centres and MajorEmployment Areas with transitExplore transit connectivity withinand between CentresEncourage an active transportationand transit-first approach to thedevelopment of CompleteCommunities within CentresSupport the clustering of jobs,services and residential land uses,towards the creation of 15-MinuteCommunities which support publictransit and active transportation


[DRAFT] Policy DirectionsImplement a planned goodsmovement networkEnable efficient multi-modal goodsmovementSupport the goods movementindustryReduce conflicts in the goodsmovement networkSupport the Edmonton MetroairportsMinimize impacts agriculturalproduction


[DRAFT] Policy DirectionsReduce demand for work-basedtravelImplement a managed lane networkRight size corridor capacityIncrease network redundancyAlign infrastructure investmentPlan for and leverage newtechnology

POLICY FRAMEWORKOptimizing the use of existingcorridors and infrastructure Connecting goods to markets Getting people to jobs and


Page 53 of 90


Question:

1. Do you feel the we have captured the correct system-based strategies as a means to structure the policies ofthe plans?

2. How might the Policy intents vary for each strategy to better reflect the three policy tiers?

53



POLICY FRAMEWORK

Page 54 of 90

Plan Structure and Policy Framework

Recommended motion: That the Integrated Regional Transportation MasterPlan Task Force endorse the IRTMP Plan Structure and Policy Framework.

Page 55 of 90

7. Policy Direction (sneak peek)

Page 56 of 90

56

DEVELOPING POLICY DIRECTIONSDifference between a Policy Direction and policies

Encourage a Modeshift away fromprivate automobiles

Policy Direction

We begin withthe core idea

Later, we willexpand intomore detail anddraft policylanguage

Page 57 of 90

57

DRAFTING POLICY DIRECTIONSOur Process:

• Building on the work completed to date and feedback received in earlier WorkingGroup and Task Force sessions we prepared [DRAFT] policy directions,

• We captured new subjects/topics (equity, sustainability, resilience) where they best fitwithin the proposed plan structure, rather than create additional Systems Strategies,

• Where appropriate, we identified the policies that would benefit from additionalschedules

• We captured potential policies related to implementation at the end of the document

• Based on the [DRAFT] Policy Directions, we began to compile a glossary of termsthat will require definitions

Page 58 of 90

58

IDENTIFYING PRIORITY POLICY DIRECTIONSWorking Group Priorities

• Support the clustering of jobs, services, and residential opportunities to createcomplete communities, well served by public transit and active transportationinfrastructure.

• Coordinate transportation investment with investment in other infrastructure(IT, communication, utilities): future foreword, minimize disruptions.

• Ensure multi-modal connectivity and coordination across the goodsmovement.

• Support regional coordination between transit service providers.

• Ensure multi-modal connectivity between key destinations: economic,educational, recreational and cultural.

• Consider innovative governance and cost-sharing models.

• Implement transportation demand management.

• Minimize disruption to the agricultural sector

Page 59 of 90

59



Getting people to jobs andservices


Supporting a shift to transit,higher-occupancy vehicles andactive modes and improvingconnections between modesfor more seamless travel.

Making it easier for people toaccess jobs and servicesacross a range of modes.

Supporting the efficient flowof goods and connectinggoods to regional, nationaland international markets.

Finding ways to get the mostout of existing streets andtransportation corridors tomove more people andgoods in similar amounts ofspace.

DRAFTING POLICY DIRECTIONS

Page 60 of 90

60


Finding ways to get the mostout of existing streets andtransportation corridors tomove more people andgoods in similar amounts ofspace.

Reduce demand for work-based travel

Implement a managed lane network (as outlined on schedule xx) to movemore people and goods before investment in additional capacity.

Implement strategies to optimize flow of vehicles on the network.

Right size corridor capacity and leverage underutilized corridors towardsbroader transportation objectives

Plan for resiliency by increasing network redundancy (policy but more networkbased)

Align transportation investment with investment in other forms of infrastructure

Plan for and leverage new technology to optimize the network capacity (policy)


Page 61 of 90

61

Implement the planned goods movement network inside and outside Centres

Enable the efficient multi-modal movement of goods across the network, insideand outside Centres (warehousing/connecting between large and small trucks;rail to truck intermodal facilities)

Support the goods movement industry and its employees

Reduce conflicts in the goods movement network (road and rail; small andlarge trucks; agricultural goods) (policy and networks components)

Support the Edmonton Metro airports through improved access to and from keydestinations and supportive land uses

Locate transportation infrastructure to minimize impacts on prime agriculturallands and operations


Supporting the efficient flowof goods and connectinggoods to regional, nationaland international markets.


Page 62 of 90

62

Connect and serve Centres and Major Employment Areas with transit

Explore transit connectivity within and between Centres (Network)

Encourage an active transportation and transit-first approach to thedevelopment of Complete Communities within Centres

Support the development of 15-Minute Communities• Support the clustering of jobs and services (land use)• Support the co-location of employment and residential land-uses and

the development of complete communities in areas well-served bypublic transit and active transportation infrastructure

• Promote increased access to daily needs and services through transit,active transportation or shared transportation solutions

Getting people to jobs andservices

Making it easier for people toaccess jobs and servicesacross a range of modes.


Page 63 of 90

63

Plan for a series of mobility hubs that bring together and connect modes

Encourage active transportation improvements that support first and last mileconnections

Develop a regional active AAA (all ages and abilities) network

Improve safety and comfort of the active transportation network

Identify and address inter-municipal limitations to network connectivity

Incentivize other modes through pricing and management

Improve the coordination between transit services (schedules, signage,wayfinding) throughout the region to support a seamless regional network


Supporting a shift to transit,higher-occupancy vehicles andactive modes and improvingconnections between modesfor more seamless travel.


Page 64 of 90

64


DiscussionDo you have any initial thoughts, comments or directions on theworking Draft Policy Directions?

Page 65 of 90

65

POLICY DEVELOPMENT: TOWARDS THE IRTMP

December 15:DRAFT PlanStructure

DEC JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN

January 12:Core PolicyDirections

February 4Draft Policies

March 2:85% DRAFTIRTMP

April 13:DRAFT IRTMP

May 5:FINAL IRTMP

January 21:DRAFT PlanStructure &PolicyFramework

WorkingGroup

TaskForce

IRTMPBoardMeeting

February 26:Draft Policies

March 18:85%DRAFTIRTMP

April 29:DRAFTIRTMP

May 20 :FINALIRTMP

March 11Draft Policies

April 885% DRAFT

IRTMP

June 10FINAL IRTMP

Where weare today

Page 66 of 90

66

NEXT STEPS: DRAFTING POLICIES

• Refine Plan Structure, Policy Framework based on Task Forcediscussion

• Expand on the policy directions and craft specific policies• Prepare for Working Group meeting on February 4 (DRAFT

Policies)• Prepare for IRTMP Board Workshop on March 11

Page 67 of 90

8. Next Steps67

Page 68 of 90

Next Steps• Continue to work through Working Group, next meeting on February 4

• Project long list• Prioritization process• Crafting of specific policies• Plan outline

• Preparing for Board Workshop

68

Meetings

Page 69 of 90

9. Next Meeting69

Page 70 of 90

Next Meeting• Next IRTMP Task Force Meeting

• February 26, 2021• 1:00 – 4:00 pm• Location: virtual

70

Meetings

Page 71 of 90

10. Adjournment71

Page 72 of 90

© HDR, all rights reserved.© HDR, all rights reserved.© HDR, all rights reserved.

Page 73 of 90

Integrated Regional Transportation Master Plan Task ForceMeeting Minutes: Thursday, November 19, 2020 Page 1 of 4

Integrated Regional Transportation Master Plan (IRTMP) Task Force

Thursday, November 19, 20209:00 a.m. – 11:00 a.m.

Virtual Meeting via ZoomPublic Access via YouTube

Task Force Members: Gale Katchur, City of Fort Saskatchewan (Chair)John Stewart, City of Beaumont (Vice Chair)Tim Cartmell, City of EdmontonNicole Boutestein, Town of MorinvilleJustin Laurie, Town of Stony PlainBill Tonita, Strathcona CountyAlanna Hnatiw, Sturgeon CountyMichael Botros, Alberta Transportation

Working Group Members:Kevin Cole, Strathcona CountyDavid Hales, City of EdmontonShawn Olson, City of Leduc

Guests:William Choy, EMRB Chair, Town of Stony PlainStephen Dafoe, Town of MorinvilleRobert Parks, Strathcona County

EMRB Staff:Karen Wichuk, Chief Executive Officer Sharon Shuya, Director of Regional Growth

PlanningCindie LeBlanc, Director of Corporate and

Stakeholder RelationsDebra Irving, Senior Project ManagerRon Cook, Manager of GIS and Business

IntelligenceDan Rose, Senior Communications AdvisorCarol Moreno, Project Coordinator

Consultants:Stephen Power, HDRCharlene Wilcock, HDRKaren Gilchrist, Karen Gilchrist & AssociatesMelanie Hare, Urban Strategies Inc.Craig Lametti, Urban Strategies Inc.Giuseppe Tolfo, Urban Strategies Inc.

Page 74 of 90


1. Opening

1.1 Quorum

Quorum achieved; 7 of 7 voting members present.

1.2 Call to Order

Chair Katchur called the meeting to order at 9:01 a.m.

1.3 Opening Remarks

Chair Katchur welcomed members of the Task Force, participating Working Group members, and members of the public joining the meeting via YouTube. Opening remarks included a land acknowledgement, recognition of the upcoming municipal election as a driver for timely project completion, initiation of technical stakeholder engagement efforts and that the model will be owned and maintained by the Region once the IRTMP project is concluded.

2. Approval of Agenda

IRTMP20-11 Motion: That the Integrated Regional Transportation Master Plan Task Force approve the November 19, 2020 meeting agenda.Moved by: Mayor StewartAccepted by: ChairDecision: Carried unanimously

3. Approval of Minutes

IRTMP20-12 Motion: That the Integrated Regional Transportation Master Plan Task Force approve the September 17, 2020 meeting minutes.Moved by: Councillor LaurieAccepted by: ChairDecision: Carried unanimously

4. Progress Update

Mr. Power indicated an additional Task Force meeting may be required in February 2021 in order to ensure critical approvals are in place and meet the target completion date. He noted that the scenario work is nearly complete as the project moves on to policy work.

5. Thematic Scenario Review

Mr. Power reviewed the intent of each scenario: business as usual, delayed investment, transit focused, transportation demand management, and goods movement. He emphasized that scenarios test “what if” questions and do not constitute actual plans, but they will inform development of a regional plan. He illustrated the differences in vehicle kilometres travelled

Page 75 of 90


between scenarios as an indicator of trip lengths and greenhouse gas emissions. The model suggests an increase of 30% in hours lost due to congestion in the delayed investment scenario. The transit focused scenario modelling suggests greatest impact along corridors. The transit demand management scenario, including both incentives and disincentives, demonstrates the greatest effectiveness over a number of metrics. This emphasized that a multipronged approach is necessary. Mr. Power summarized that with all scenarios, just building infrastructure is insufficient on its own but can be strengthened with complementary policies and integrated strategies.

Comments from the Task Force included enquiring about differences between in and outside Anthony Henday Drive, understanding the implications of and alignment with the Regional Transit Services Commission’s work, suggesting the use of special vehicle lanes for buses on major roadways, exploring an outer ring road or addressing specific areas, considering active transportation components, incorporating the first and last mile connections, and reflecting the evolving effects of the pandemic on travel patterns.

6. Approach to Policy Development

Ms. Hare explained that the Edmonton Metropolitan Region Growth Plan constitutes the foundation for the IRTMP’s development and directs implementation to support key outcomes. She provided a high-level summary of the policy audit conducted by the Project Team, which will be discussed in greater depth by the Working Group in their meeting tomorrow.

Ms. Hare shared some examples of current Growth Plan policies that may require greater specificity and perhaps clarify which implementation tools will be used to achieve the desired outcomes. She noted some terms that may need further refinement and identified concepts of resilience and equity as potential gaps that could be incorporated in the IRTMP.

Responding to the Task Force, the Project Team indicated that the policies will be drafted simultaneously along with the final network plan and project lists as part of the upcoming project activities. Members of the Task Force also commented on capturing the Villeneuve airport along with the Edmonton International Airport as a key feature, understanding the iterative process of developing metrics, and looking forward to how elements of each scenario will be weaved together for optimal benefit to the Region.

7. Technical Stakeholder Engagement

Ms. Irving shared that the Project Team is reaching out to targeted technical stakeholders with invitations for one-on-one interviews. Stakeholder groups were identified in the project charter but also supplemented by contributions from the Working Group and Project Team as the project has advanced. These groups will be invited to provide input on priorities, trends and opportunities for an integrated approach. Ms. Irving noted that the River Valley Alliance has been added as a stakeholder at the request of the Task Force.

Page 76 of 90


CEO Wichuk commented that EMRB Administration is encouraged by the quick responses and high level of interest from stakeholders. This speaks to the profile and relevance of the IRTMP on the regional stage.

The Task Force also proposed Enoch Cree Nation, Strathcona Industrial Association, and Edmonton Transit System Advisory Board as possible stakeholders.

8. Next Steps and Wrap Up

Mr. Power reviewed the work plan leading to the preferred network and commented that the time invested in ensuring an accurate model has pushed the schedule behind but was well worth the effort. Since the last Task Force meeting, the project has caught up by two weeks, but the concern remains around lining up major decisions with the Board meeting schedule. The outputs of work to date is now being incorporated into the draft IRTMP and the Project Team reaffirmed its commitment to the June 2021 deadline.

Members of the Task Force noted concerns about the lack of decision points to date and the implications of keeping to the deadline.

9. Next Meeting

CEO Wichuk noted that the upcoming meeting will allow sufficient time to hear the valuable questions and contributions of the Task Force.

Chair Katchur thanked all participants for their level of engagement and indicated the Project Team will be in touch about scheduling an additional meeting in the new year.

IRTMP Task ForceJanuary 21, 20219:00 a.m. – 12:00 p.m.

10. Adjournment

Chair Katchur declared the meeting adjourned at 11:02 a.m.

Task Force Chair, Gale Katchur

Page 77 of 90

Item 5.1

Request for Decision

Meeting: Integrated Regional Transportation Master Plan Task Force - January 21, 2021 To: Integrated Regional Transportation Master Plan Task Force From: Administration Subject: Technical Stakeholder Engagement Summary

Recommended Motion: That the Integrated Regional Transportation Master Plan Task Force receive the IRTMP Technical Stakeholder Engagement Summary for information. Background:

• The Integrated Regional Transportation Master Plan (IRTMP) Project Charter was approved by the Board on June 13, 2019, which included a preliminary list of stakeholders with interest in the plan. As an update to the existing IRTMP, the engagement approach is focused on key stakeholders in transportation agencies, development industry representatives, and major employers.

• The list of industry stakeholders was augmented based upon feedback from the Project Team, Working Group, and Task Force. In addition, active transportation stakeholders and major institutions were included in the engagement interviews.

• Interviews were held throughout December 2020 and into January 2021, consisting of one-on-one video interviews with each stakeholder.

• The attached Technical Stakeholder Engagement Report highlights the challenges identified in the transportation network, opportunities stakeholders foresee to improve the network, as well as insight into the trends and long-term plans for their organizations.

• A consultation with Treaty 6 has been delayed due to the appointment of a new Grand Chief, and once that is complete the report will be updated.

Next Steps:

• Information gleaned from the interviews has already helped informed policy work by the Project Team and will feed in to further policy refinement by the Working Group.

• CN and CP Rail are following up the engagement with details regarding their top infrastructure priorities, which will help inform further review of the transportation network as the project moves into the transportation priorities process.

• Introductions to Treaty 6 First Nations and engagement on the IRTMP and other EMRB initiatives will continue separate from this engagement process.

Attachments: rpt - Technical Stakeholder Engagement Summary - January 21, 2021

Page 1 of 12

Page 78 of 90

Page 2 of 12

Page 79 of 90

IRTMP Technical Stakeholder Engagement Summary Integrated Regional Transportation MasterPlan (IRTMP)

Edmonton Metropolitan Region Board

January 14, 2021

Prepared by:

Page 3 of 12

Page 80 of 90

Edmonton Metropolitan Region Board | Integrated Regional Transportation Master PlanBackground

1

1 BackgroundThe Integrated Regional Transportation Master Plan (IRTMP) project has been underwaysince the fall of 2019. The IRTMP takes direction from the 2017 Edmonton MetropolitanRegion Growth Plan (Growth Plan). The purpose of the IRTMP is to build on the policydirection of the Growth Plan and identify key elements of and policy directions for thetransportation system over the next 25 years to 2045.

Stakeholder engagement was identified in the IRTMP Project Charter as a keycomponent of the IRTMP. Stakeholders provide a unique boots-on-the-groundperspective on the challenges and opportunities facing transportation in the Region.Connecting with these stakeholders allows the project team to better understand thecurrent and future transportation needs in the Region.

A list of stakeholders was initial developed by EMRB Administration and was added to bymembers of the Project Team and IRTMP Working Group. These stakeholders includedorganizations whose interests include passenger transportation and/or goods transportfunctions, whether by road, rail, air, or active modes (transit, walking and bicycling).

The following 22 stakeholder organizations were contacted by the EMRB and theconsultant team in mid-November:

· Alberta Health Services

· Alberta Industrial HeartlandAssociation

· Alberta Motor TransportAssociation

· Canadian Armed Forces

· Canadian Pacific Railway

· Canadian National Railway

· Canadian Urban TransitAssociation

· Commercial Real EstateDevelopment Association(NAIOP Edmonton)

· Edmonton Global

· Edmonton InternationalAirport

· Greater Edmonton RegionChambers of Commerce

· Government of Canada –Office of WesternDiversification

· Leduc Chamber

· Nisku Business Park

· Northern Alberta Institute ofTechnology

· Pathways for People

· Regional Transit ServicesCommission (RTSC)

· River Valley Alliance

· Strathcona IndustrialAssociation

· Treaty 6 (Enoch Nation)

· University of Alberta

· Urban Development Institute –Edmonton

Page 4 of 12

Page 81 of 90

Page 5 of 12

Page 82 of 90

Edmonton Metropolitan Region Board | Integrated Regional Transportation Master PlanWhat We Heard

1

Of the 22 stakeholders contacted, 20 replies were received (a response rate of 91%) anda 19 video conference interviews were carried out in December and early January for acompletion rate of 86%.

Stakeholders were provided with questions in advance of each interview. In almost everyinterview, each stakeholder was asked the following set of questions:

· What are your interests (including potential issues and/or concerns) that we shouldbe aware of?

· What challenges are you facing from a transportation perspective in the Region?What are opportunities to improve the transportation system in the Region?

· What changes are coming (or are you planning for) in the next 10-20 years thatwould change how we think about transportation?

· What is one piece of advice you would give to the Board to improve the efficiency ofthe transportation system in the Region?

2 What We HeardThe following summarizes some of the key findings consolidated in four mainstakeholder groupings: industry, operators, institutions, and active modes.

2.1 IndustryIndustry stakeholders includes industrial associations, chambers of commerce, economicdevelopment entities, and the commercial/residential real estate organizations.

Industry’s InterestsCommon to all industries was the need to attract capital (new business or investment) tothe Region.

· Transportation access, efficiency, and cost plays a key role site selection

o For commercial or industrial operations, proximity to the high-load corridor isimportant

· For many businesses it is about regional (internal) connectivity, but also externalconnectivity between the Region and the rest of Alberta, other provinces, andinternational markets.

o Examples:

§ CANAMEX corridor (via Highway 2)

§ Transcontinental rail connections, such as connections to the Port of PrinceRupert

§ Air connections to/from provincial hubs and international markets

· Mode choice is important to many in the industry, particularly when it comes toresidential or commercial real estate development.

Page 6 of 12

Page 83 of 90

Transportation Challenges and Opportunities facing IndustryCertainty and timing of infrastructure investment, supporting forecasted growth in theindustrial sector, keeping transportation costs low, and connections to markets outside ofthe Region were cited as challenges as well as opportunities for industry.

· For commercial or residential development, particularly Transit OrientedDevelopment (TOD), the lack of certainty around these projects makes it difficult fordevelopers.

o Example: Uncertainty tied to plans for LRT in St. Albert has impacted investmentin today’s developments in the area.

· The industrial (particularly manufacturing) and government continue to be keyeconomic sectors in the Region, many stakeholders cited these areas as part of theRegion’s economic strengths.

· Growth in the Region is largely driven by demand for products in Asia. Modes thatserve this connection include rail connections to seaports like the Port of PrinceRupert and air connections out of EIA.

o Several stakeholders mentioned the growth in moving goods to/from the Port ofPrince Rupert. The Port currently moves 1.1 million units, but 2030 that numberis anticipated to increase to 7.5 million units.

· There was a desire to work on the Region’s strengths by continuing to focus ondevelopment related to government administration and industrial sectors. Theindustrial focus means that vehicle, rail and air access continue to play an importantsite selection factor. Access to transit for employee access can also be a key factorin site selection.

o Examples:

§ There was a suggestion to focus on employment nodes like the SE industrialarea (SE Edmonton to Nisku) because of proximity to airport and rail.

§ The Amazon Distribution Centre was highlighted as locating near the airportbut also because Leduc Country was part of RTSC at the time.

§ It was noted that capital is flowing into areas like Acheson because of goodtransportation access.

· Transportation emissions cited as a major challenge for many industrial sites. Airmonitoring stations at many industrial operations pick up particulate (PM 2.5) fromoutside/external/offsite sources such as motorized vehicles.

o Example: alternatives fuels such as hydrogen may reduce transportation-relatedemissions.

Industry Look-AheadWhile the current economic situation may seem grim, representatives had positiveoutlooks for the longer-term. All respondents agree that the longer-term impacts ofCOVID are yet to be seen.

· It was noted that economic recovery may not happen until 2024.

Page 7 of 12

Page 84 of 90


3

· Economic diversification may increase over time, creating more unique productswhich may require trucking instead of rail.

· The development industry is not divesting in suburbs; however suburban form ischanging and becoming more dense. Different housing markets and housing typeswill continue to serve different life stages.

· Climate change and environmental sustainability is increasingly a critical factor forindustry.

2.2 OperatorsOperation-focused stakeholders includes airport authorities, motor transportassociations, and major railroads.

Operators InterestsSimilar to industry, operators are focused on supporting existing business and attractingnew capital. Some operators have both a passenger and goods movement focus, whileother operators are more singular.

· The EIA is concerned with the movement of passengers and goods. EIA serves bothpassenger and goods while Villeneuve serves as more of a connection to NorthernAlberta and as a training facility.

· Railroads are concerned with the movement of goods. Rail is constrained andcapacity limited, so ensuring the fluidity along the network as well as first and lastmile connections are of key importance.

· For trucks, the highway network is critical.

Transportation Challenges and Opportunities Facing Operators

· Participants mentioned that a lack of tourism due to COVID-19 is hurting theRegion’s ability to maintain air sector. This impact produces issues with economicdevelopment and risk of permanently diminishing capacity to connect communitiesand move cargo. On average, around 50-60% of the cargo on direct flights is cargo.

o Example: EIA might not return to pre-COVID levels until 2024, which results inreductions in staffing levels by 40%.

· Several stakeholders cited concerns around the road-rail interface. Reducing road-rail interactions seen as critical in ensuring fluidity along the rail network. Delaysimpact investment and competitiveness. Crossing elimination by either closure orgrade separation was identified as an interest that might spur investment.

o Examples:· 46 Street at 50 Avenue in Leduc· Highway 15 and Highway 830 grade separation· Highway 60 requires separation in Acheson· Range Road 231 over Yellowhead/Highway 16· 149 Street and 170 Street in Edmonton

Page 8 of 12

Page 85 of 90

· Shortage of drivers as well as facilities needed for trucking to decrease delays inmovement of goods.

o Examples:§ Along Highway 2 and 16 there are a lack of truck stops (i.e. rest areas with

amenities) that allow heavy truck drivers to stage the “last mile” of their tripinto or out of the Edmonton Region.

§ There is one truck stop in Nisku but no infrastructure to support the effectivemovement of goods with services such as fuel, showers, and food.

· COVID has accelerated the uptake of e-commerce in the Region. Severalstakeholders identified opportunities to rethink distribution in the Region:

o Develop freight and trucking corridors to move product quickly.

o Rethink distribution throughout the Region, looking to places like Korea andChina.

o Drone delivery for commercial and residential purposes likely a reality in the nearfuture.

· Streamlining intermodal connectivity was mentioned as a priority for manystakeholders, whether it was air to truck intermodal functions, or rail to road.

Operators Look-Ahead

· There was a call for more research and innovation to explore diversification of thefuture of commercial transport.

o Examples: Potential future technology to decrease emissions and/or increaseefficiency includes hydrogen and electricity and using it in trucking, autonomousfreight network, air monitoring stations, and drone delivery. When it comes toalternative fuel sources, what supporting infrastructure is needed?

· Enabling the application of future technologies important. Fibre to supportconnectivity of vehicles and infrastructure, as well as an array of sensors to supportconnectivity in a winter environment.

2.3 InstitutionsStakeholders grouped under institutions includes post-secondary schools such as theUniversity of Alberta and NAIT as well as the Armed Forces.

Institutional Interests

· Post-secondary institutions are planning for increases in student population in thelonger term, helping to make up for capital shortfalls due to budget cuts. Institutionslike NAIT cited a consolidation of campuses in the future, centralizing moreprograms/functions to one campus.

· Armed Forces operations are primarily concerned about the travel between bases fortraining purposes and programs (i.e., between Edmonton, Sturgeon County, ColdLake, and Wainwright). Department of National Defense operations planners seegood flows along the corridors connecting bases such as Highways 2, 14 and 28.

Page 9 of 12

Page 86 of 90


5

Transportation Challenges and Opportunities Facing Institutions

· NAIT and University of Alberta are primarily commuter campuses. At the U of A, only15% of the student population lives on campus, while 85% lives off campus. ForNAIT, many of the programs are short-term (i.e. 6 to 8 week programs), so manystudents do not live on campus.

· Suggestions that transit and LRT connections to campuses will need to becomemore efficient, reliable, and increase in frequency as increased enrollment instudents will occur in the future. Airport connections to campuses should beenhanced as well for international students.

o Examples:

§ Inter-regional transit provides increase opportunities for students to accessUofA and NAIT campuses without having to drive.

§ Both NAIT and UofA have plans to increase student enrollment, withoutadding significant on-site student housing.

§ NAIT’s campus expansion plans do not include expansions to on-siteparking.

§ While flows between Armed Forces Bases are good, transportation to/fromarmouries relies on multi-modal access. Transit access to/from armouriesimportant now and in the future.

· Post-secondaries are major nodes in the Region. The form, density, and activity inthese nodes are akin to the activities of small, walkable villages with a variety ofuses. Stakeholders raised the concept of the “15-minute city”, where most basicneeds can be met within a 15-minute walk or bike ride.

2.4 Active ModesStakeholders that fall under this category include transit, trail, and complete streetsgroups, including: the Edmonton Metro Transit Services Commission (EMTSC), Paths forPeople and the River Valley Alliance. These stakeholders emphasize a seamlessexperience for transit or bicycles across the Region as well as supporting greater equity,mobility of labour, and mode choice.

Active Mode InterestsThese stakeholders generally emphasized the interconnections of modes, thedevelopment of regional transit and bicycle networks, and supporting greater equitywhen it comes to mode choice and supporting the mobility of labour through affordablemodes.

Transportation Challenges and Opportunities Facing Active Modes

· Opportunities to develop a regional transit network, focusing on links in/throughEdmonton and lifeline services into the greater Region.

· Opportunities to integrate transit systems under a common fee and operationsstructure – better service with less cost.

Page 10 of 12

Page 87 of 90

· There were multiple suggestions that employees in spaces outside of the City Centreneed more transit support and connections to access their workplace. Park andrides, regional fixed route and on-demand transit, were suggested as possiblesolutions.

o Examples:

§ The UofA emphasized connections to the EIA for visiting students, guests,and staff.

§ The EIA and industrial organizations cited that many prospective businessesand major events consider alternative modes of transport to/from the airportin their site selection process.

· Supporting the mobility of senior population and persons with disabilities outsideEdmonton was cited by several stakeholders as a regional need. References madeto the 2015 Transportation Needs Assessment, noting that the Regional population isaging and that the percentage of individuals with a disability is increasing.

· Regional bicycle connections cited as priorities.

o Examples:

§ Comments that separated bicycle infrastructure (such as separated bicyclelanes in Downtown Edmonton and multi-use trails in and around the Region)should continue to be created and maintained.

§ Southwest Edmonton is the major gap in the River Valley trail system. Itcontains recently annexed land that is a high priority from an activetransportation infrastructure perspective.

· COVID created an opportunity to show how reconfiguring certain roads toaccommodate wider sidewalks and bicycle lanes can be an affordable option thatcan promote change in behaviours.

Active Mode Look-Ahead

· Trends in e-bikes and e-scooters and shared systems were stated as something tocontinue to consider. Electrification of micromobility and the rise of shared systemsproving that ownership, hills, distances, and physical exertion may be less of abarrier.

· Trends in on-demand and micro-transit are opportunities for providing services inlower demand areas.

2.5 Advice for the BoardThe project team ended most interviews with the question, “What is one piece of adviceyou have for the Board?”. Not all stakeholders were ready to answer this question, butfor those that did, this is what we heard:

· Support the connectivity to export markets. Several stakeholders cited thatindustrial growth in the Region requires consideration of efficient linkages toexport points such as the Port of Prince Rupert.

Page 11 of 12

Page 88 of 90

Edmonton Metropolitan Region Board | Integrated Regional Transportation Master PlanSummary

7

· Continue the conversations with end users. This allows the EMRB to have abetter understanding of regional transportation needs.

· Work closely with the Province and Federal governments. This will allow theEMRB to leverage sources of funding.

· Continue regional collaboration. Several stakeholders emphasized that theysee value in regional dialogues, information sharing, and partnerships.

· Emphasis on sustainability, resiliency and equity. These are becominggreater concerns for industry, operators, institutions, and active modes.References made to climate change, smart cities/new technologies, the mobilityof labour, aging in place, and reducing emissions.

3 SummaryA high response rate from stakeholders indicates an interest in regional informationsharing and a strong interest in maintaining and enhancing the regional transportationsystem. Stakeholders emphasized that transportation is critical in supporting economicdevelopment and enhancing the quality of life in the Region.

Several key themes emerged from stakeholder feedback:

· Efficient, cost-effective, and multi-modal transportation is key insupporting the future growth and quality of life in the Region. Stakeholdersemphasized intermodal aspects of both passenger and goods movement.

· Industrial activity, particularly manufacturing, will likely continue to drivethe Region’s economy. Connections within the Region but also outside of theRegion (to other destinations in the Province and to international markets) arepriorities for industrial stakeholders.

· The success of modes like transit and bicycling requires regionalintegration and a high level of service, whether in frequency and quality ofthe infrastructure. Transit connections support residents but also plays a part inattracting investment to the Region.

· Future proofing requires the consideration of new technologies. Thisincludes understanding the potential for alternative fuels such as hydrogen;electric vehicles; drone delivery; to vehicle autonomy/connectivity in the Region.

4 Next StepsThis Technical Engagement Summary will be shared with the IRTMP Working Group,Task Force and Board for information. The project team will review the stakeholderfeedback against the draft long list of transportation projects and draft policy directions.Projects identified in the interviews may be considered for addition to the project list, andissues/opportunity areas, as well as any future forward thinking, may be addressedthrough a combination of policy and projects.

Page 12 of 12

Page 89 of 90

Item 6.1

Request for Decision

Meeting: Integrated Regional Transportation Master Plan Task Force - January 21, 2021 To: Integrated Regional Transportation Master Plan Task Force From: Administration Subject: Plan Structure and Policy Framework

Recommended Motion: That the Integrated Regional Transportation Master Plan Task Force endorse the IRTMP Plan Structure and Policy Framework. Background:

• The Integrated Regional Transportation Master Plan (IRTMP) Project Charter was adopted by the Board on June 13, 2019. The IRTMP initiative implements the bold vision and expanded transportation policy direction in the Edmonton Metropolitan Region Growth Plan (Growth Plan), supported by an evidenced-based approach through scenario modelling on a project-specific platform within the Regional Travel Model.

• Future scenario modelling occurred throughout the second half of 2020, with focus on five scenarios: Business As Usual, Delayed Investment, Transit, Transportation Demand Management, and Goods Movement. Results of the model runs were presented the Project Team highlighting the insights around the network improvements and policies that will make the greatest difference in creating network efficiencies and enable mobility capacity to support population, employment and economic growth identified in the Growth Plan.

• The insights from the scenario results are intended to inform policy development; however, before the Project Team and Working Group further advance the policy work, direction from the Task Force is required to inform the Plan Structure and Policy Framework as these Plan components will create the structure from which the policies will be developed.

• The slide deck attached to this agenda package provides the background on the Plan Structure and Policy Framework, under Item 6, which will be discussed in depth and refined, as needed, based on the feedback from the Task Force.

Next Steps:

• Policy development will continue with the Working Group based upon Task Force feedback and direction, and draft policies will be brought to the Task Force in February. A preliminary view of the policy work underway is shown in Item 7 of the attached slide deck. Time permitting at the January Task Force meeting, the Project Team will introduce these preliminary policy directions.

Page 1 of 1

Page 90 of 90

Documents

Integrated Regional Transportation Master Plan Task Force