TL: TRANSIT IN CANADA A Handbook for Environmentalists SO: Greenpeace Canada (GP) DT: April, 1991 Keywords: greenpeace reports atmosphere transportation cars canad gp urban / A Survey of Transportation Issues in Major Cities Across Canada By Joell Vanderwagen, B.A., M.Sc. Commissioned by John Bennett, Atmosphere and Energy Campaigner Greenpeace Canada TABLE OF CONTENTS Preface Chapter one: Introduction Chapter two: Summary & Recommendations Chapter three: Basic Elements of Public Transportation Systems & Transportation Planning Chapter four: The Urban Form Chapter five: Case Studies of Canadian Cities: Metropolitan Toronto Ottawa/Carlton Vancouver Regional Transit System (VRTS) Regina Saskatoon Notes PREFACE This paper was originally intended as an internal report to Greenpeace Canada about transit systems and transportation issues in major cities across Canada, to provide advice on general policies and specific local efforts which should be supported. As the report was being prepared, it became evident that an understanding of the basic principles of transportation planning was a pre-requisite for effective action, so another section on that topic was added. It also became evident that the report, as it had evolved, would be of use to many community groups and individuals wishing to influence transportation policies. Thus, Greenpeace decided to print it for public distribution in its present form. Of the ten cities studied, only five are presented in this edition of the report. Although five cannot represent all of Canada, they do illustrate a range of different kinds of transit systems and organizational structures and a representative variety of issues. The case studies of specific cities will provide not only information about those particular cities but also a framework that can be used to understand transportation issues in any city. The technical information describing the transit systems and their performance is intended to be as accurate as possible for the time period represented. Note that the information about policies and issues in each city is neither comprehensive nor complete and, gathered in the fall of 1990, will become outdated. It was impossible within the scope of this project to ensure that every topic was covered in depth or that all points of view were included. However, the material will be an introduction to the range of issues that exist. The writer offers special thanks to Richard Levine for bringing clarity at crucial moments through his editorial assistance. INTRODUCTION ASSUMPTIONS The private automobile is a major source of environmental damage, both globally and locally. The only way to reduce the damage is to reduce the use of the car. Better emission standards and alternative fuels, while welcome, are not a panacea. Any gains in this area are offset by the growing number of automobiles on the road, and with them, increasing pollution, energy consumption, congestion and urban sprawl. Thus, there is a need for a major shift on the part of Canadians toward public and non-motorized forms of transportation, which are inherently less polluting and more energy efficient. PURPOSE Because transportation is such a complex issue, with government plans often hidden in bureaucratic language and lengthy approval procedures, it is often difficult for members of the public to know how to bring about change. However, by describing the many inter-related components of the problems and range of possible solutions, it is intended that this report will help individuals and community groups participate effectively in the development and implementation of new urban transportation initiatives. CONTENT CHAPTER TWO presents a brief history of transportation in Canadian cities and describes the problems associated with automobile dependency. It sets out general recommendations for shifting the emphasis in Canadian society away from the automobile and toward public transportation, walking and bicycling. CHAPTER THREE summarizes many of the basic elements of public transit systems and transportation planning. CHAPTER FOUR describes the kind of urban form necessary for successful public transportation as well as the current land-use planning process. CHAPTER FIVE contains case studies of five Canadian cities. It describes the organizational structure of the transit operation, the service area, the transit system, its performance, and provincial and municipal government responsibilities. Background is provided on existing problems and policies, and new plans and proposals are discussed within the context of current issues. STUDY DESIGN There are 74 public transit systems in Canada. The following ten were selected for study (five# included in present report) and are listed according to size: Name Service Area Population (1989) Metro Toronto# 2,133,400 Island of Montreal 1,752,258 Greater Vancouver# 1,240,900 Calgary 669,000 Winnipeg 605,910 Edmonton 583,872 Ottawa# 568,252 Halifax/Dartmouth 230,000 Regina# 179,000 Saskatoon# 177,659 A data profile of the characteristics and performance of each system was created based upon information from the Canadian Urban Transit Association (CUTA). Interviews were conducted with experts in the field of transportation planning. Then, telephone interviews were conducted with transit officials in each city regarding system characteristics and transit, land-use, social and environmental issues. Government reports, professional studies, newspaper and magazine articles and other publications were also drawn upon and are listed in the notes. The resulting material provides a foundation for answering the following important questions: How car dependent are Canadian cities? What are the prospects for a significant shift toward public and non-motorized transportation? What are the necessary elements for such change? Are those elements in place? What are the important issues to consider? How can Greenpeace help create the policies for transit, pedestrian and bicycle oriented communities and then encourage a transformation in public attitudes and behaviour? SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS HISTORY Canadian cities have, historically, followed a somewhat different path than American cities. In the United States, during the '5Os and '60s, the federal government funded massive highway building programs. The highways were constructed not only between cities but into the city cores, displacing homes, businesses and entire neighbourhoods. Important functions deserted the downtowns and moved to the suburbs. This process was associated with a rising level of affluence which brought car owner-ship within the reach of the general public. Thus, Americans deserted their downtowns and public transit systems and embraced the suburban dream on a large scale. Also, not to be ignored were the deliberate efforts of major auto and petroleum interests to dismantle the existing network of electrified streetcar, trolley and interurban rail systems in the U.S. In Canada, major highway building initiatives came much later than in the United States, after there was an opportunity to observe the impacts of similar programs in the United States. As a result, in major cities such as Toronto, Edmonton and Vancouver, plans for construction of highways into the downtown cores were cancelled due to citizen opposition. Although suburbanization and universal car ownership eventually came to Canada, the older parts of the cities remained largely intact, at the centre of expanding suburbs. This same pattern of a compact core built on a grid system, surrounded by suburban sprawl, is found in cities all across Canada. Transit ridership reached its peak around 1946 and from that point began a long decline until 1973. As well, during the 1960s it became evident that transit systems, most of which had been privately owned, could no longer afford to operate from fare box revenue alone. Local and provincial governments assumed responsibility for public transit, taking over ownership and operation of existing systems and establishing new ones. The 1970s were characterized as a 'golden age' or renaissance of interest and investment in public transit. Ridership rose steadily from 1974 until about 1985. CURRENT PROBLEMS Since then, there has been some decline in ridership almost across the board. In some cities transit staff blamed the latest decline on economic recession as well as fare increases and service cuts. In other places they blamed it on prosperity and increased levels of car ownership. In either case, transit operators are faced with rising operating costs and often declining revenues at a time when provincial and municipal governments are unable or unwilling to offer more subsidies. In some places, such as Saskatchewan and Quebec, the provincial governments are eliminating the operating subsidy. The alternatives of either increasing fares or reducing service are both likely to alienate riders, setting in motion a downward spiral of ridership, revenues and service. At the same time, in almost all cases where new land development occurs, it continues to perpetuate the patterns of the '5Os and '60s. Transit staff interviewed in every city complained about urban sprawl as the biggest obstacle to providing good transit service. Yet, in most places, transit planners and operators have little formal power to influence the land-use planning and development process. As car congestion increases, governments commonly react on an incremental basis to provide more capacity for the automobile, expanding parking lots and widening or building new roads. Unfortunately, this invites more automobile use and further discourages transit ridership, perpetuating a vicious cycle of traffic congestion, road expansion and transit decline. ADVERSE IMPACTS OF CAR-DEPENDENCE On an individual basis, the automobile provides the average person with a sense of freedom, convenience and power almost unparalleled in history. However, on a broader basis, the private automobile is proving unsustainable as a primary form of transportation because of its environmental, social and economic costs. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT The private car, and our growing addiction to it, could well be considered the world's biggest environmental problem, yet it has received relatively little attention as an issue in itself, possibly because its impact is so pervasive and complex. Our cars have become so central to our lifestyle and economy that for most North Americans, it is hard to imagine life without a car. It is equally hard for us to comprehend the chain of events set in motion every time we step on a gas peddle. The number of cars worldwide (386 million in 1986) continues to grow and so does the damage to the environment. The car's insatiable demand for fuel perpetuates global exploration, development, shipping, refining and, even, military activities which cause varied and widespread damage to fragile ecosystems. Its use fosters urban sprawl which destroys valuable farmland and natural areas as well as depletion of non-renewable resources. Its emissions, including carbon dioxide, carbon monoxide, nitrogen oxides, particulate matter, volatile organic compounds, lead, benzene, toluene, xylene and ethylene dibromides, contribute to greenhouse gases, acid rain and urban smog. SOCIAL IMPACT The widespread use of automobiles has caused us to alter the very physical design of our environment, creating a sprawling, low-density urban form. In this situation it becomes difficult to provide good transit service, and the pedestrian environment is often poor as well, with long walking distances and sterile streetscapes. In this kind of setting, the automobile becomes a necessity of life instead of a convenient alternative. People who do not drive or own a car may lack access to jobs, services and community life because of poor transit service. A woman at home with children may find it almost impossible to carry out simple errands or take her children to the doctor without a car. Teenagers may find themselves dependent upon parents for taxi service, thus increasing family tensions. Many low-income families will spend an average of $7,000 a year to own and maintain one car and perhaps two, using money which could have gone to housing, food or education. In our automobile-oriented society, traffic jams and long commuting times cause psychological stress for individuals and families. Automobile accidents are a leading cause of deaths and injuries and urban smog causes bronchial diseases and lung damage. ECONOMIC IMPACT Urban sprawl is very expensive for the taxpayer because a low density area requires more miles of roads, transit lines, sewer, water and gas mains and other services per capita than does a compact community. The infrastructure costs for private businesses are increased as well due to the necessity of providing large amounts of parking space for customers. Deaths and injuries from traffic accidents generate enormous medical costs, as do respiratory diseases due to pollution. Traffic accidents also add to the load of the court system and police services. In short, there are many hidden costs of and subsidies to the automobile and The Worldwatch Institute estimates that government subsidies for the automobile in the United States amount to over $300 billion each year. CONCLUSIONS Cars and trucks are here to stay and have a role to play in a comprehensive and integrated transportation system as delivery vehicles, emergency vehicles, and taxis. They are necessary for tradespeople and others who need them for their work, for those who are physically frail, for making special kinds of trips and for those living in rural settings. However, the widespread and unnecessary use of automobiles is causing an urban crisis - a vicious cycle of traffic congestion, road expansion and declining transit service with all the associated environmental, social and economic impacts. Breaking that cycle will require a clear and decisive shift toward public and non-motorized transportation on the part of governments and individuals. It will require a fundamental re-thinking of the role of the private automobile in our lives and our economy and, indeed, of our very expectations of ever-increasing mobility. Over the past decades we have, as individuals tended to expand our network of activities over a wider and wider geographical area, increasing the trips made and distances travelled. We expect to shop across town rather than in our neighbourhood, live in one community and work in another, and fly back and forth to another city to attend a morning business meeting. In order to minimize the consumption of energy and resources and reduce the output of waste and pollution, we will need to reduce the number of trips made and distances travelled. This could involve adapting our lifestyles to live more within our local neighbourhoods and communities and making greater use of the fast-developing technology of telecommunications. In doing this, we may also improve the quality of fife in our local communities by developing more relationships within them. RECOMMENDATIONS The results of research for this project can be summarized in the form of 15 general recommendations. These principles can be applied as guidelines for creating better transportation policies in most communities. 1. Curtail further road expansion. Governments should not spend money on widening roads or building new ones to increase capacity for automobiles. 2. Make better use of existing roads. Take cars off the road through use of alternatives such as car pools, walking, public transit and bicycles and introduction of transit priority measures such as reserved transit lanes and signal light pre- emptions. 3. Invest in public transportation. Provide adequate funding to ensure frequent, reliable, convenient service. 4. Create effective incentives for behavioral change with parking policies, tax regulations, marketing programs and so forth. 5. Provide good cross-town and off-peak service in order to serve a wide range of the population and greater variety of trip purposes, rather than focusing only on peak-hour work trips. 6. In making expensive capital investments in new rapid transit lines, take great care in the choice of technology and routes. Rapid transit routes should usually be aligned with arterial roads and the stations should be integrated into the 'urban fabric', i.e. close to buildings and people. The choice of technology should be made as objectively as possible with information about alternatives available to the politicians and public, guarding against promotion of vested interests or the narrow biases of powerful individuals. 7. Establish guidelines for pedestrian planning, including specific criteria for walking distances, accessibility, safety and amenities. 8. Make bicycles an integral part of the transportation network, providing bike paths, bike routes, bike lanes, parking facilities and access to transit vehicles. 9. Develop inter-regional transit links around areas such as Metropolitan Toronto, rather than investing only in commuter rail service into downtown, in order to promote more balanced regional growth and travel patterns. 10. Provide for better integration of different modes such as inter-city bus, rail and air service with urban transit. Provide better information about and co-ordination of fares, scheduling and ticketing. 11. Mandate better co-ordination between land-use and transportation planning. Amend provincial planning legislation, where appropriate, to require that municipalities plan for public transportation, pedestrians and bicycles. 12. Plan for compact, mixed-use, human-scale communities. Rethink the form of the city and the function of the street, returning to the concept of the city as a cluster of urban villages, where basic services are within walking distance of homes. 13. Preserve farmland and the rural landscape from further incursions of urban sprawl, drawing a firm line around existing urbanized areas. 14. Direct future growth to unused spaces in existing low- density urban areas in order to bring about their gradual evolution into a more efficient urban form. Projects could include the creation of 'mainstreets' on empty arterial roads, innovative development of shopping centre parking lots, infill of office and industrial parks, and permitting rental units in owner-occupied homes. 15. Expand public awareness about the health and environmental impacts of the automobile and the social and economic benefits to be gained from shifting to alternatives. Community and environmental groups have a primary role to play in public education in order to promote lifestyle changes and create the necessary climate for political action. BASIC ELEMENTS OF PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS & TRANSPORTATION PLANNING ROUTE PATTERN GRID Older cities, built before the 1950s, are laid out on a rectilinear grid with evenly spaced east-west and north-south streets. Transit routes based on the grid give equal access to all parts of the city. The routes and transfer points are easily understood by the users. However, on routes with low frequency of service, it is difficult to schedule timed connections on a grid system. RADIAL A radial system is designed like the spokes on a wheel, all routes converging on the city centre. The concentration of employment and other special functions in a common destination area creates the basis for high ridership, at least during peak rush-hour periods. The existence of a strong central business district (CBD) is often associated with a viable transit system. A radial system should also have good cross-town routes, connecting the spokes of the wheel and providing for a variety of destinations and types of trips. If cross-town routes are neglected in service planning, then access to random destinations like shops, community services, recreation, schools, daycare and friends may then be very difficult, if not impossible, to make by transit. In a large urban area, the existence of cross-town routes is important in fostering development of sub-centres. A radial system, lacking cross-town routes, may foster an imbalance in regional growth patterns, with housing moving further out to the periphery and employment growth concentrated in the core, with increasingly long commutes between. FOCAL POINT A focal point system is a third kind of route pattern in which groups of routes are designed to meet at transfer centres. This pattern is commonly used in low density suburban areas where there is no one strong centre, nor a grid street system. In sprawling communities with random, meandering street patterns, it will be difficult for transit riders to have a mental map of routes and confusing to plan transfers. Riders may, in fact, have a limited number of destinations available to them. A random pattern may also occur because of geographical features like rivers. However, a special route can work well in some cases, when it serves a common destination for a large number of users, such as a university, sports stadium or shopping centre. ROUTE SPACING In order that the entire population of a city may be within walking distance of public transit, routes should be spaced from 600 to 800 metres apart (according to traditional transit 'service standards', which may be adopted and implemented at the local level). Thus, the initial layout of the street system and preservation of any off-street right-of-ways create the framework for future development of the transit system. TYPE OF SERVICE LOCAL OR RAPID TRANSIT In service planning, there is a trade-off between the speed of the service and the number of stops. A local service is characterized by closely spaced stops within easy walking distance of users. Rapid transit, on the other hand, covers long distances quickly and has more widely spaced stops. It is often on its own right-of-way, separated from traffic. FEEDER OR EXPRESS A feeder line is a local route that brings people to rapid transit or express routes. An express bus is one that goes primarily to a single destination making few if any stops along the way. These are used in many cities to bring suburban riders downtown and are very popular because of the speed and convenience. THE TRANSIT TRIP THE WALK Except for suburban 'park and ride' situations, every transit rider is first and foremost a pedestrian. Accessibility to public transit is primarily a function of walking distance. Canadian guidelines for transit planners range from 300 to 500 metres. However, the Canadian Transit Handbook suggests that "these standards commonly exceed the distances transit users are willing to walk." 50% of all transit users walk less than 150 metres. It also suggests that subdivision planners may underestimate actual walking distances by failing to consider the street patterns. Perceived distance is just as important as actual distance in influencing the decision whether to take transit. This is of critical importance in street design of subdivisions, where a street that doubles back on itself win be perceived as longer than a direct route. According to the handbook, "access time tends to be weighted two to five times more heavily than in- vehicle time" by the transit user. Accessibility also relates, of course, to the design of stations and vehicles - whether obstacles exist for wheelchairs, shopping carts and baby strollers. Steps and staircases can also be an obstacle for people who are elderly, infirm or the parents of small children. THE WAIT Waiting time is directly related to frequency and reliability of service. The length of time between arrival of vehicles is known as the 'headway'. Certainly, high-frequency service with less than ten minute headways, is most likely to attract riders. On routes with long headways, a reliable schedule becomes very important to users and information about the schedule needs to be easily available. On low frequency routes, a good system for the user is called 'clockface' scheduling (these terms may differ from one city to the next). The bus arrives at a given stop at the same points on the clock each hour, for example, on the hour, 20 minute past and 40 minutes past. The user can remember this without referring to a schedule. A phone number may also be posted at stops for information about the schedule. Transit shelters, good lighting and other features providing a sense of comfort and safety are also important. THE RIDE The important elements of the ride are comfort and speed. Comfort is affected by crowding and availability of seats, and in summer, by the quality of air conditioning. It is also related to the smoothness of the ride. Buses that turn in and out of traffic jostle their riders more than streetcars which stay on a fixed course. The speed of the ride will be affected by traffic congestion and the number of stops. Thus, transit priority measures such as exclusive rights-of-ways and signal light pre-emption are important ways of reducing the conflict between transit vehicles and traffic. TRANSFERS If a transfer is necessary, then a short walking distance between stops and short waiting time are of critical importance to the rider. In a grid system, transfers are easy for the rider to plan, but hard to schedule on routes of low frequency service. Cities with predominantly radial systems may operate 'timed transfer' systems based on 'focal points'. Express buses and local feeder buses will be scheduled to arrive simultaneously at the same terminal so that riders can be assured of an immediate transfer. CAPITAL EXPENSES AND CHOICE OF TECHNOLOGY A transit system requires extensive capital investment, whether the purchase of buses, the laying of rails, the digging of tunnels or the building of stations. Decisions concerning these investments are of critical importance because they are almost irreversible, create the framework on which the entire system is based, and are a major factor in long-term cost-efficiency of service. Because money is always finite, these decisions involve significant trade-offs. Therefore, the decision-making process, the motives of and information available to the public and the decision-makers are important factors. The range of alternatives includes buses, trolley buses, streetcars, LRT, subway and commuter rail. These vary according to many factors such as capacity, flexibility, power source, right-of-way, and expense of purchase, installation and operation. BUSES Buses are the simplest and, initially, the least expensive investment, since they use the existing street system. An average size bus can carry about 60 people. Mini-buses may be used to serve low density neighbourhoods and articulated (long, bendable) buses for heavily travelled routes. With their closely spaced stops and complete flexibility of routing, buses are appropriate for local/feeder services. They are also most appropriate for small and/or low-density communities. Types of Buses The disadvantages of the standard diesel bus are that it is noisy and smelly. New natural gas powered buses being introduced on a trial basis in Hamilton and Toronto will be less polluting. However, it is said that they are very heavy and noisy and that refuelling requires an expensive compression procedure. Trolley buses, powered by overhead electric wires are quiet and cause no local pollution. However, such systems are initially expensive to install and require ongoing maintenance of overhead wires and supporting infrastructure. Transport 2000 has recently completed a comprehensive study of the issues concerning trolley systems. Road Design Features Compared to rail modes, buses offer a poorer quality ride because they weave in and out of traffic to make stops and because they are slowed by congestion. The problem of conflict with traffic can be reduced or eliminated by means of reserved bus lanes and/or busways. Creating a reserve lane usually means taking one lane of a street away from automobiles, either full time or during the peak period. A busway is a road built exclusively and specifically for buses on which there is no conflict with either pedestrians or other vehicles. In Ottawa, a network of busways was constructed, rather than rail lines, in order to allow individual buses originating in the downtown to be directed to varied suburban locations without the need for transfers. Bus bays, on the other hand, decrease the efficiency of transit service. Bus bays are off-street bus stops, where the bus pulls into a space outside the lane of traffic to pick up and unload passengers. Traffic engineers like them because traffic is not held up behind the bus as it stops. Transit officials discourage them because, after each stop, the bus must fight its way back into the lane of traffic, significantly slowing service. STREETCARS Streetcars run on rail lines laid on city streets and are powered by electricity from overhead wires. Their capacity is somewhat higher than that of buses, they cause no local pollution, and provide a smoother ride for passengers. They take precedence over cars, holding their place in traffic, rather than weaving in and out to stop for passengers. Rail modes are generally more attractive to riders. The disadvantage of streetcars is that they are inflexible. If one car on a line breaks down, the entire line is delayed. They also require a higher initial capital investment for the infrastructure. Thus, they are appropriate for well-established, well-travelled routes. LIGHT RAIL TRANSIT (LRT). Light rail transit (LRT) refers to electrically powered rail cars operating singly or in short trains - a form of a high- capacity, high-speed streetcar. It can have a number of cars, or articulated cars, and usually operates on its own right-of-way. In terms of routing, it is more flexible than heavy rail because it can move on the street, tunnel underground or go overhead, wherever necessary. It is a form of 'rapid transit' and is appropriate for heavily travelled routes in intermediate size cities like Calgary. ADVANCED LIGHT-RAIL TRANSIT (ALRT) This is the term sometimes used for the kind of technology employed in Vancouver's 'Sky-Train' and Scarborough's 'RT' line, produced by the Urban Transportation Development Corporation (UTDC Inc.). UTDC was created by the government of Ontario in 1973. In 1986 the province sold it to Lavalin of Quebec (retaining 15% ownership), although the equipment is still manufactured at Ontario plants in Thunder Bay and Kingston. The system is powered by linear induction motors (LIMs) which have no moving parts. Electrically-generated magnetic fields interact with a reaction rail, a continuous wide steel plate set in the middle of the tracks. The trains are designed to be automated and, in Vancouver, are run without drivers. Because of the LIM and being driver-less, they must be fully grade-separated. Because of the limited power of linear induction motors, the cars must be very lightweight, smaller and with less carrying capacity than those of a standard LRT. Thus, the UTDC system costs far more than an LRT line to construct and equip. However, transit officials say that the grade-separation allows UTDC trains to run more frequently than LRT and thus carry more total ridership. UTDC critic, Professor Tony Turrittin of York University describes some problems that have occurred with the technology. The cars, he says, are excessively noisy due to small flat spots that develop on the wheels. 'Turning' the wheels helps but this means taking the cars out of service for maintenance. And there is the problem of track corrugation caused by small wheels, steerable axles and the LIMS. The solution is to grind the rails, but this lowers the track relative to the reaction rail. Since the gap needs to be a constant 10 millimetres, eventually the height of the reaction rail must be adjusted, a very labour-intensive process. The Vancouver system broke down during massive, freak snow-falls of January 1991 due to snow in the motors and ice on the rails. It turns out that when B.C. Transit purchased the system, it decided to forgo some protective features because of their normally mild winters. The Sky-Train is very popular in Vancouver and has high ridership. Transit officials there are pleased with its performance in spite of some challenges associated with introducing a new technology. In Ontario, however, UTDC has been controversial on a number of levels. Because UTDC was originally owned by the government of Ontario, strong pressure was placed on the Toronto Transit Commission to purchase that system regardless of whether it was the most appropriate or economically competitive. This was still the case in 1991 when the TTC placed major orders for subway equipment with UTDC without going through the tendering process in order to support the manufacturing plants located in Ontario. HEAVY RAIL VEHICLES (HRV) Heavy rail vehicles (HRV), called subways, are electrified by means of a power rail, with track completely separated from other vehicles and pedestrians, and usually run underground. They can move more passengers per hour than a major highway and are appropriate for large, dense urban areas like Toronto and Montreal. The pre-eminent form of rapid transit, they are the backbone of the transit system and provide a framework for further development of the city. Subway lines are crucial for the efficient functioning of a major city. Because of the high expense of tunnelling and building stations, the routes must be carefully located - coordinated with bus routes and designated linear and nodal centres. COMMUTER RAIL Powered by diesel engines, these are essentially passenger trains using conventional railway lines in order to bring commuters into the central city to work, on a daily basis. As a limited stop, express service, they cover long distances at high speed. FARES AND FUNDING Transit systems have operating expenses and capital expenses. Operating expenses are usually funded by a combination of fares and government subsidies. The proportion coming from user fares is sometimes called the 'revenue-cost ratio'. Capital expenses are funded by varying combinations of municipal and provincial subsidies. SERVICE PLANNING GOALS AND VALUES Transit operators and politicians must make trade-offs in setting fares and in allocating taxpayers' money for capital investment and operating expenses. In doing so, they are expressing, consciously or unconsciously, certain values and goals for their public transportation system. KINDS OF TRIPS There are two basic kinds of trips - work trips and 'personal' trips. Work trips (including school and university) are usually concentrated in peak periods and focused on certain common destinations. Most transit systems concentrate their efforts on serving this sector of the travelling population. These routes and schedules are easiest to plan and yield the highest economic returns. However, a large portion of the population need to make personal trips apart from the rush hour work trip. Such people include homemakers, retired people, teenagers, and workers performing personal errands like grocery shopping, taking children to daycare, going to the doctor or attending night school. These trips will be at random times of the day and are multi-directional. Many of these people will not be car owners or, at least, not car drivers and are, therefore, transit dependent. The system, however, is rarely geared to their needs. Off-peak, cross-town trips usually have the lowest frequency of service, if the routes exist at all. Car ownership, if not necessary for the work trip, may become a necessity for these other kinds of trips. With the annual cost of operating a car estimated at an average of $7,000 per year (CAA), car ownership represents a significant diversion of household income - income that could be spent on housing, food and education. Car dependency is thus linked to issues such as affordable housing, poverty and equality of opportunity. USER PAY VERSUS COMMUNITY BENEFIT The trade-off, on the most general level, is between two views of the purpose of public transportation - user pay versus community benefit. The utilitarian approach seeks to move the greatest number of people at the least cost to the government. Service levels and fares are set in order to achieve the most cost-efficient operation. The other approach is to use the transit system to maximize social benefits. According to this view there is real value in a clean environment, energy conservation, improved quality of urban life, and a high level of mobility and accessibility for everyone. Therefore any cost-benefit analysis of improvements to the transit system should take these values into account. Ideally, since both objectives are valid, they should not be tradeoffs but rather, pursued simultaneously. EVALUATING TRANSIT SYSTEM PERFORMANCE CUTA collects and publishes data from Canada's 74 transit systems, on a yearly basis (Operating Characteristics of Member Systems). CUTA staff recommended seven items as being most useful in judging the performance of a public transit system (They caution that the data is not entirely reliable for comparative purposes because of different collection and accounting practices from one city to the next): Financial Performance REVENUE TO COST RATIO. This is calculated by dividing the direct operating cost of services into total operating revenue (mainly the fare box, not including subsidies). The resulting figure indicates what percentage of the transit system's costs are paid for by the passengers. Average Fare FARE BOX REVENUE PER PASSENGER. Total revenue from the fare box is divided by the total number of passengers. In this way, senior, student, child, adult fares and monthly passes are averaged together into one figure for the system. Service Utilization RIDES PER CAPITA. The number of residents divided into the total number of trips made on the system in a given time period. PASSENGERS PER VEHICLE HOUR. Total number of passengers divided by the number of revenue vehicle hours indicates the relationship between ridership and service levels - a good indicator as to whether services are meeting passenger needs. Cost Efficiency OPERATING COST PER VEHICLE HOUR. Direct operating costs of regular service are divided by annual revenue vehicle hours. This represents the cost of running the system, with no consideration of revenue. Cost Effectiveness OPERATING COST PER PASSENGER. Direct operating costs of regular service divided by the total annual number of passengers. This represents the cost of the system in relation to the number of passengers, with no consideration of revenue, i.e. what does it cost to provide each passenger trip? Amount of Service VEHICLE HOURS PER CAPITA. Annual revenue vehicle hours divided by the total number of residents. This is an indication of average level of service - the extent of service available from the rider's point of view. NON-MOTORIZED FORMS OF TRANSPORTATION WALKING Walking can be the primary form of transportation in a well-designed city, and indeed, almost every transit rider is a pedestrian at the beginning and the end of his/her trip. Walking is energy-efficient and non-polluting. For the individual it costs nothing, provides exercise and fresh air, and creates over time an intimate acquaintance with the neighbourhood and larger community. Before the era of universal automobile ownership, cities were automatically planned to pedestrian scale. Now, however, these planning principles have been largely forgotten and it would seem that a deliberate effort is required to reintroduce pedestrian guidelines into both the land-use and transportation planning process. These would include standards for sidewalks, walkways, walking distances, accessibility, the spacing and design of street crossings, and safety features. BICYCLES Bicycles are also an energy-efficient and non-polluting form of transportation. In addition to being comparatively inexpensive, they provide the individual with a great deal of range and flexibility in trips, from local errands to work trips to recreation. They also provide exercise, fresh air and an intimate exposure to the neighbourhood and community. Their use is, however, restricted by the individual's physical condition and, to some extent, by weather. Given proper planning, bicycles could become a major mode of transportation, especially in low-density areas poorly served by public transit. The most basic need is for road improvement and maintenance. Potholes, road grates, rail tracks and other obstacles can cause serious accidents. A bike route is simply a series of streets designated on a map and marked with signs, allowing cyclists to avoid busy and dangerous arterials. A bike path is an off-street route especially for the use of bicycles, although sometimes shared with pedestrians. A bike lane is a portion of a city street that has been reserved for bicycles. If bicycles are to be widely used, bicycle parking facilities must be provided everywhere and especially at major destinations like office buildings and rapid transit stations. Bike 'lockers' can be installed which ensure protection from vandalism. The provision of changing facilities in the work place can be an incentive for people to ride their bicycles to work. Equally important is provision for boarding bicycles onto rapid transit vehicles and trains. The bicycle ride can then supply an important component of a longer trip. TRAFFIC REDUCTION STRATEGIES INCREASING SUPPLY "In the 1960s, transportation planners made a startling discovery about urban transportation systems..." says Brian Fawcett in his Globe and Mail column. "It involves", he says, "an application of what economists refer to as Say's Law, named after nineteenth century French economic mystic Jean-Baptiste Say, who was the first person to believe that supply creates its own demand.... The specific instance that convinced planners that transport supply creates its own demand was a 23-lane freeway built near Atlanta during the golden age of government budget and land surpluses. The freeway was deliberately overbuilt and was meant to handle traffic growth for at least 20 years. But just three years after it opened it was running at full capacity." This same trend is repeated all over North America as car ownership and use increases and occupancy decreases. The resulting congestion leads to demand for more road space, a never ending cycle of road expansion and more congestion, a la Los Angeles. REDUCING DEMAND The alternative to this cycle is to create more road space by reducing the number of vehicles on the road. Car Pooling Car pooling is a practical solution in situations where public transit is not available. People living near each other and working at the same location share rides, three people taking one car instead of three cars. Large companies may have formal, computerized matching programs for their employees and in the United States, some municipalities run such programs. While car pooling should be strongly encouraged in situations where it is the best alternative, it has disadvantages compared to public transportation in that people in a given car pool arrangement are locked into a strict schedule and are dependent upon one another's reliability. High Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) Lanes High Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) lanes are lanes on expressways reserved for transit vehicles, taxi cabs, and cars carrying a minimum number of passengers. The existence of HOV lanes encourages ride sharing. Some cities like Houston have had HOV lanes for a number of years. Parking Policies, Gasoline Taxes, Income Tax Regulations Parking policies, gasoline taxes, income tax regulations and many other kinds of government policies at all levels create incentives or disincentives to the use of the automobile. For example, employers can write off the provision of free parking facilities for tax purposes but cannot do the same if they provide employees with free transit passes. INTEGRATION OF MODES Public transportation pertains not only to urban trips but to regional, national and international ones served by plane, train and bus. Because transportation must be viewed as door-to-door, the local transit system is a vital link in the larger system. A person boarding a train in Toronto should be assured that, upon arrival in Ottawa, there will be convenient transport from the train station to the final destination, and around town during the stay. Ideally, then, bus and rail terminals should be integrated with local transit lines in the central city and, in turn, have direct links with the airport outside of town. While this arrangement is considered normal in Europe, it is the exception rather than the rule in Canada. The need for integration extends also to the making of reservation and purchase of tickets. MEASURING TRANSIT/AUTO USAGE MODAL SPLIT There are three common indicators used to measure a city's level of transit usage and car dependency. The first is called the modal split. This is a count of the total number of trips made during a given time period according to the mode used - whether car, public transit, walking or bicycle. Usually it is divided into three groups - auto, transit and other - and stated as one kind of trip as a percentage of the total. In this study, information on modal split was not uniformly available across Canada and therefore is not used for comparison purposes. RIDERSHIP PER CAPITA The second indicator often used is the total number of transit trips per person per year in a given area. This is arrived at by dividing the number of residents into the total number of trips made on the system. This figure is available for all cities with transit systems and is a good means of comparing the level of transit usage from one city to another and over time. However, total ridership figures should be considered as well, because where the population is growing faster than transit use, ridership per capita would appear to be declining even if the total number of riders on the system were increasing. GASOLINE CONSUMPTION PER CAPITA Another useful measure of automobile dependency is the amount of gasoline consumed per capita for transportation purposes. In their study of thirty-two international cities, Kenworthy and Newman looked at relationships between urban form, public transportation, energy efficiency and vehicle emissions. They provide comparative data on gasoline consumption in different kinds of cities around the world. THE URBAN FORM The physical characteristics of a city determine, to a large extent, what kind of transportation system will work best for that city. The transportation infrastructure, in turn, becomes the framework for future urban growth as well as personal lifestyle choices. Thus urban planning and transportation are closely interrelated. The Canadian Transit Handbook, published by CUTA for transit planners and operators, contains in Chapter 27 a summary of professional theory and practice on the subject of "Transit, Land-Use and Community Planning". It refers to, among others, an important technical study called Public Transportation & Land Use Policy" by Pushkarev and Zupan, which examines statistical relationships between the quality of transit service and the demand for travel and between population density and the demand for travel. The CUTA Handbook states that, "In summary, empirical evidence suggests that a number of factors on the regional, community, and neighbourhood scale can contribute to a situation in which people own fewer cars, use them less often, and make greater use of public transit services." "Land use", it continues, "is known to be a determinant both directly and indirectly of the demand for travel because it influences trip generation, trip length, trip distribution and modal choice." After setting out the important elements of transit-oriented land-use planning, however, it cautions that "...the physical planning of urban areas consistent with these relationships will not necessarily result in increases in transit ridership. These relationships can only increase the potential for transit use. The decision to use public transit depends on a wide variety of factors, including income, car ownership, level and quality of transit service, transit fares, perceived and real travel time, traffic congestion, and parking availability. ... These relationships should be used as a guide in planning urban areas and structuring urban growth." POPULATION SIZE According to the Handbook, "The population size of Canadian cities is directly related to transit ridership". "Increasing city size generally is closely related to longer average trip lengths...higher levels of congestion and greater concentration of common destinations. In communities as small as 20,000, regular fixed-route service may not be practical. Instead, service may need to be customized and concentrate on serving people with special needs. POPULATION DENSITY "... The greatest amount of empirical evidence... concerns the density of an urbanized area. Density is a measure of the intensity of land-use activity and is directly related to the degree of public transit usage. ... However, average area-wide density does not reveal much about the propensity to use transit. ...a more important comparison is the relationship between residential density and transit use. ...the number of trips made by transit rises with increases in net residential density." The important questions for transit decision-makers are: What levels of ridership are necessary to provide frequent transit service, on a cost-efficient basis? and, what densities are necessary to potentially generate that number of riders? According to Pushkarev and Zupan, residential densities in the range of 2 to 7 dwellings per acre produced only marginal use of the public transit. Densities of 7 to 30 dwelling units per acre were necessary to sustain significant transit use, i.e. in the range of 5% - 40% of all trips. The above study also showed that in urban areas with large downtowns (keeping income characteristics the same) neighbourhoods with 15 dwellings per acre produce 30% fewer auto trips per person than those with 5 dwellings per acre. Simultaneously, public transit use increases by more than 100%." Another way of describing density is in persons per square kilometre or per hectare. The January 1991 report of the Metropolitan Toronto Planning Department, titled The GTA: Concepts for the Future, recommends a gross urban density of 4000 persons per square kilometre for the Greater Toronto Area. In choosing that figure, planners referred to the study by Kenworthy and Newman. The municipality of East York (in Metro Toronto) is cited by Metro planners as an example of that density, characteristic of compact urban neighbourhoods built before 1950. Such areas have two and three story single and semi-detached houses built on relatively narrow lots (6.6 - 12 metre frontages), as well as some low-rise and high-rise apartment buildings. ARRANGEMENT OF USES The CUTA Handbook states that "...theoretical literature and case studies have identified general land-use arrangements which are supportive of transit use. These arrangements include polycentered municipalities, concentration of high-density residential, commercial and employment development in areas with a high degree of transit accessibility, self-contained neighbour-hoods, the development of multi-functional activity centres, and generally an increase in the mix of land-uses within an urban area." "... studies have determined a number of land-use arrangements that are not beneficial to transit operators ... including dormitory suburbs with no match of jobs and labour force; large areas of uniform zoning, i.e. industrial parks; and, travel generators haphazardly scattered throughout the community with no focal corridors for transit." PEDESTRIAN ACCESS As discussed in the first section, walking is the most basic form of transportation. And, almost all transit riders are pedestrians at the beginning and end of their trips. Before the 1950s, urban communities were automatically designed with the pedestrian in mind. Buildings in such older areas are close together and near the street, with windows and doors facing onto wide sidewalks. Streets are laid out on a grid pattern with short blocks and there may be a great deal of variety in a small area. Thus it is possible to walk to stores, schools, community services and recreation and to bus stops and transit stations. Traffic lights and stop signs are closely spaced, providing numerous protected crossing points. By contrast, areas developed since the 1950s are designed for automobile access and provide a poor pedestrian environment. Buildings are scattered and set far back from the street, often surrounded by enormous parking lots. Backyard fences may line main roads and residential areas have long, winding streets with no sidewalks. Wide and busy arterial roads are often designed solely to facilitate the flow of traffic with protected crossing areas too far apart. Signal lights may be timed for Olympic athletes rather than mothers with baby carriages, seniors, or persons with disabilities and wide roads may lack safety islands in the middle. The CUTA Handbook provides specific guidelines regarding walking distances and subdivision design. The issue then becomes whether transit officials have any power in the development approval process to implement these guidelines. ATMOSPHERE Another crucial factor for pedestrians is that of atmosphere: does the environment feel pleasant and safe? In the old community, the presence of homes and businesses facing onto the street made it an interesting place to walk and ensured that there were, as Jane Jacobs puts it, "eyes on the street". In new suburbs, the large set-backs and, often, reversed frontages (backyard fences facing arterial road) leave the sidewalk feeling barren and unsupervised. In this respect, high- rise apartments do not foster the sense of a safe and friendly neighbourhood because the residents tend to be cut off from the street. Thus, it is crucial that development be planned according to human scale. A NEW PARADIGM In her influential book, titled Death and Life of Great American Cities, Jane Jacobs suggests that it is more appropriate to look at cities as biological organisms, rather than great machines to be constructed and manipulated according to mechanical principles. Michael Replogle expands on this concept in his paper, titled Sustainable Transportation Strategies for World Development. The emerging paradigm, he says, is "based on the principles of biological and ecological systems. ... Ecological systems are healthiest when they display great species diversity and many niches for specialization of function and resource utilization. So too are transportation systems healthiest when they display great modal diversity ... to meet different ... demands for movements of people and goods." "Biological organisms increase in specialization of function as they grow in size, developing more complex circulatory and communication structures. Nature limits single-celled organisms to very small sizes. One finds larger organisms only of a multi- celled variety. Similarly, single-use land areas can be of only limited size in cities before they become dysfunctional." "As cities grow, multiple compact urban clusters accessible to efficient circulatory systems of the larger metropolis offer the most efficient and robust form of organization... Atrophication of the small scale structures of the metropolis - for example, the systems that facilitate walking or use of bicycles - reduce the system efficiency and threaten the health of the metropolis just as loss of capillary circulation poses the threat of gangrene in one's limbs." He quotes a recent policy paper of the League of German cities which states that "Public mass transport and individual transport, either on foot, by bike, or in a car, must be seen as a holistic system." And he goes on to say that "This emerging paradigm explains why the multi-modal transport systems of Northern Europe and Japan are far more sustainable than the automobile-dominated U.S. system." THE PLANNING PROCESS The Federal government does not have a direct role in municipal transportation or land use planning. According to the Canadian Transit Handbook, "Powers conferred by the Federal government on the provinces permit the establishment of legislation to control land use and urban transit systems...in general, provincial legislation permitting the operation of transit systems does not charge the transit operator with any specific responsibility to participate within the community planning process." PROVINCIAL PLANNING LEGISLATION "...all Canadian Provinces have enacted statutes concerning planning. In most provinces ... a separate planning act has been created. In Quebec and British Columbia, on the other hand, planning powers are included with the general powers conferred by the municipal act. In all cases, powers are conferred on municipalities to create official plans and regulatory power to control land use through zoning by-laws, subdivision by-laws, and subdivision agreements." "Despite the relationships between transit and land-use, provincial planning legislation makes specific reference to roads and transportation in general but no specific reference to public transit." In 1983, "the Ontario Planning Act was revised and the Ontario Urban Transit Association (OUTA) recommended strongly that specific reference be made to public transit ... that consideration be given to 'the adequate and economic provision of transit services'. None of the OUTA recommendations were included in the final version of the act." "The most specific provincial act with regard to transit and land use is in Saskatchewan's Planning and Development Act,... First, a development plan may contain policies relating to the development of transportation systems... Second, where a municipal zoning by-law permits payments in lieu of providing parking facilities... the funds collected may be expended on ... the capital cost of a transit system. Third, a municipality may enter into a zoning agreement ... access to transit services could be included as a condition of approval. Fourth, the Minister of Urban Affairs may make subdivision regulations respecting standards for efficient transportation systems including public transit for some municipalities. Those municipalities with full planning authority may establish their own subdivision regulations." "With the exception of Saskatchewan, no provincial legislation requires the consideration of public transit in the land use planning process. Some provinces, most notably British Columbia, have established planning guidelines for the consideration of public transit in the design of subdivisions." MUNICIPAL PUNNING & REGULATION Official Plans Official Plans contain general policy statements expressing goals for the community on such topics as housing, transportation, economic growth and social and environmental policies. They will also designate areas for certain uses with restrictions on height and density. They may indicate transportation routes and growth centres. Zoning By-laws Zoning By-laws provide the legal tools to implement the Official Plan policies. On a detailed basis, they regulate height, density, building set-backs, and type of use. Engineering Codes Municipal Codes regulate street layout and design for the purposes of safety and regulating traffic flow. They may govern street width, on-street parking, curb radii, intersection spacing, etc. Plans of Subdivision In order for large blocks of land to be legally divided into smaller parcels and developed, they must go through a subdivision approval process. This may be handled at the Provincial or Local level, depending on the province. According to the Handbook, "Most provincial ministries responsible for planning are required to distribute plans of subdivision, official plans, etc. to other ministries and agencies for comments." In most provinces, this is an informal process and comments generally are not binding. "The best examples of a formalized process of coordination of land-use policies and transit services are in Toronto and Saskatchewan. ... In Toronto, development proposals submitted for approval are automatically circulated to the Toronto Transit Commission (TTC) for comment ... Despite the above process ... it is not incumbent on the local municipality to follow TTC recommendations." "In Saskatchewan, the transit manager has complete authority from elected officials to return to the drawing board any subdivision plan which cannot effectively be served by public transit." CASE STUDIES OF CANADIAN CITIES NOTE: Unless otherwise specified, all data comes from the Canadian Urban Transit Association and is for the year 1989. METROPOLITAN TORONTO TRANSIT OPERATOR: TORONTO TRANSIT COMMISSION (TTC) The TTC is an independent commission composed of 5 members appointed from the Metropolitan Toronto Council. SERVICE AREA: THE MUNICIPALITY OF METROPOLITAN TORONTO Size: 632 km2 Population: 2,200,00) Pop. density: 3,500 persons/km2 Metro Toronto is a regional government composed of six member municipalities of Toronto, North York, Scarborough, East York, York, and Etobicoke. When it was formed in 1953 it took over responsibility for transportation from the local governments. CITY OF TORONTO (WITHIN METRO) Size: 101 kM2 Population: 597,126 Pop. density: 5,912 persons/km2 The city of Toronto, located at the heart of Metro, has a compact urban form based on a rectilinear grid, typical of areas planned and built before 1950. It is well-suited for pedestrians, with short blocks, buildings facing the street and wide sidewalks. Traffic lights, cross-walks, bus stops and subway stations are closely spaced. Downtown, subway stations and major buildings are connected by a network of underground walkways. An important feature of Toronto is its commercial shopping strips which line most major arterial roads and serve adjacent residential neighbourhoods. Thus, the city is a collection of 'multi-use' urban villages, each containing housing, shops, schools, services and green space within a relatively small area. There is little provision in Toronto for bicycles as a serious form of transportation. There are recreational bike paths in some ravines and along the waterfront and a network of bike routes designated on city streets. There are, however, no on- street reserved bike lanes leading into the city core. SUBURBS (WITHIN METRO) Area 531 kM2 Population 1,600,000 Pop. density 3,000 persons/km2 Much of the Metropolitan area beyond the old city developed according to the car-oriented suburban model at a density half that of Toronto. Empty streetscapes and long walking distances create a poor pedestrian atmosphere and physical barriers to mobility. Although the arterial road system is on a grid, the residential streets often follow the typical subdivision pattern with winding streets, cul-de-sacs and reversed frontages. Commercial and institutional buildings may be widely scattered with entrances set back behind parking lots. On the newest subway lines, stations such as Kipling and Wilson are virtually inaccessible to pedestrians and the Eglinton West station is located between the on-ramp and off-ramp of an expressway. THE GREATER TORONTO AREA Size (urban area): 1,500 km2 Pop. (urban area): 4,000,000 Pop. density: 2,700 persons/km2 REGIONS (EXCLUDING METRO) Population (urban area): 1,800,000 Pop. density (urban area): 2,100 persons/km2 Metro is at the centre of a larger commuter watershed, referred to as 'The Greater Toronto Area' (GTA). The GTA is made up of five regional municipalities: Halton, Peel, York, Durham, and Metro Toronto. These regions have also developed almost entirely according to the car-oriented suburban model at a lower density than the Metro suburbs and about one third of Toronto's. TRANSIT SYSTEM: METRO TORONTO Total passengers: 450,700,000 Total vehicle km: 189,751,000 Vehicles (1988): 1,597 motor buses 139 trolley coaches 90 artic. buses 300 light rail veh. 629 heavy rail 28 Scarborough RT In Metro, transit routes largely follow a grid pattern served by buses, electric trolley coaches, streetcars, two subway lines and the Scarborough RT extension. Before the second world war, the TTC operated only in the city of Toronto and was almost entirely self-supporting from the fare box. When the TTC expanded in 1953 to include all of Metro, it was no longer self-supporting at the lower levels of density. Because of the lower levels of ridership, service in the suburbs is correspondingly less frequent, except for certain main routes. From 1949 to 1974, the subway was constructed, consisting of an east-west line along Bloor-Danforth and a north-south line along Yonge Street with a loop at the bottom extending up University Avenue. In 1978, the University line was extended from BIoor up north to Wilson and called the Spadina line. To save construction costs, the new line was built under a ravine system and up the centre of the Allan expressway, rather than along a main arterial road, as were the previous two. As a result, the stations are isolated from the 'urban fabric' and off-peak ridership is low. During this period, after strong citizen opposition, the construction of the Spadina Expressway (now called the Allan Roadway) was halted at Eglinton Avenue. The designation for a future 'Cross-town' expressway was also removed from the Metropolitan Official Plan. In the regional municipalities beyond Metro, the Province operates the GO Transit commuter rail system, which consists of seven rail lines into downtown Toronto. As well, GO Bus routes are used to extend service farther out from the end of rail lines and, in other areas, to bring commuters to 'gateway' terminals located at subway stations. Transportation in the regions is largely car-oriented however, with cars used for 80% of all trips on a 24-hour basis. SERVICE STANDARDS Frequency peak off-peak Subway 2.5 min. 5.5 min. Main bus routes 5 min. 10 min. Lesser bus routes 10 min. 20 min. Maximum on any route: 20 min. 30 min. Scheduling They try to use clockface scheduling but it is a function of the length of the route. They will make small changes, for example, from 14 minutes to 15 minutes, but the first criteria is to set a service level that will carry the loads. All buses are equipped with CIS - a computer and communication system. Passengers can call the TIME LINE service for information about schedules for specific stops. (There have been complaints about drivers going through stops ahead of schedule.) Transfers Toronto is based on a grid, so they don't use a 'nodal' system. It is harder to plan timed transfers on a grid but they do it for the night service. Timed transfers are less necessary in Toronto because a large percentage of transfers take place at subway stations where service is very frequent. FARES cash ticket pass Adult $1.10 8/$7.50 $49.00 Child $0.50 4/$1.10 - Student $0.70 8/$3.75 - Senior - 8/$3.75 $32.00 PERFORMANCE OF THE SYSTEM 1986 1987 1988 1989 Service Utilization Rides per capita per year: 207.0 208.4 218.1 211.3 Passengers per vehicle hour: 52.4 53.3 53.5 53.1 Amount of Service Vehicle hours per capita: 3.9 3.9 4.07 3.98 Cost Efficiency Operating cost per vehicle hour: $53.79 $56.68 $60.34 $64.38 Cost Effectiveness Operating cost per passenger: $1.03 $1.06 $1.13 $1.21 Financial Performance Revenue to cost ratio: 70.9% 70.6% 69.9% 69.6% Average Fare Fare box revenue per passenger: $0.69 $0.71 $0.74 $0.80 in terms of size of service area and total number of passengers, the TTC is the largest transit system in Canada. Toronto, along with Montreal, has the highest per capita ridership level in North America. Among the ten cities studied, the TTC has average fare levels, low operating costs per passenger and the lowest operating subsidy level. About 68% of operating expenses are paid from the fare box. From 1979 to 1989 ridership increased by 35%. In 1989 a lengthy labour 'disruption' had a major impact and ridership fell off. The 2nd reason for the decline was a deterioration in the quality of service and of courtesy by TTC staff and the 3rd reason an increase in traffic congestion. In 1990, ridership recovered almost to 1988 levels. However, in late 1990 and early 1991, ridership again fell in response to economic recession. This decline has created serious budget problems and threatens to bring about some decrease in service levels. GOVERNMENT ROLES & RESPONSIBILITIES ONTARIO Urban transportation is a municipal responsibility in Ontario. The operation of the system may be carried out either by an independent transit commission or by a department of municipal government. Policies and plans may be developed by operating agencies, municipal planning departments and/or committees of Council. At the provincial level, the Ministry of Transportation of Ontario (MTO) is responsible for the construction and maintenance of highways and the funding of municipal roads and transit. The MTO helps establish local systems and funds 75% of capital costs. Along with municipalities, the MTO funds 50% of operating costs not covered by the fare box (50% of the theoretical operating deficit established by legislation for each municipality). According to Dr. Juri Pill of the TTC, the Province had shied away from regional planning since the 1973/74 election in which voters reacted negatively to the PC government's introduction of regional governments and the Toronto Centered Region Plan. In the most recent five years, under the Liberals, the province became involved again but as a 'broker'. The election of the NDP in September 1991 may bring a renewed provincial interest in transportation planning. In Ontario, there is no direct relationship between land development and transportation planning. The Ontario Planning Act sets out a land-use planning and development approval process by means of official plans, zoning by-laws, site plans and subdivision agreements. The Act does not, however, mandate the "adequate and economic provision of public transit" as the Ontario Urban Transit Association (OUTA) has suggested it should. The Ministry of Municipal Affairs (MMA) is responsible for approval of official plans and subdivision agreements, except where delegated to regional governments. The ministry circulates the plans to all relevant agencies for comment. However, neither the MTO nor local transit agencies have the power to require specific changes that would support future transit service. They can only comment and request, at best. METRO TORONTO The TTC operates the system but long-range plans are developed jointly by staff of the TTC and the Metro Planning Department. The Metro Official Plan contains long-range transportation goals and designates future rapid transit routes. The Economic Development and Planning Committee of Metro Council is the focus for discussion of long-range policies and plans and the committee forwards its recommendations to Metro Council for adoption. The TTC automatically receives copies of planning, zoning and development proposals from all Metro municipalities. However, it can only make comments and requests. The local municipalities have the final say in land-development. TTC officials point to many examples where their concerns were ignored. In the case of one hospital development, they had asked that the building be located close to the street rather than be set far back behind a parking lot. Inevitably, after the facility was built, they received a request to have the bus come to the front door of the hospital. This would involve the bus making a detour off the main road onto the hospital grounds, inconveniencing other passengers and extending the trip time. If such a pattern is repeated throughout a suburban area, it becomes impossible to provide efficient and economic service. Due to lower housing costs, the residential population of the regions beyond Metro is growing at a much faster rate than that within Metro. Correspondingly, concentration of employment is higher in Metro and especially the core area of Toronto. During the 1980s, a development oriented Toronto City Council approved extensive amendments to the city's Official Plan to permit construction of more office development. Thus, as growth occurs within the Greater Toronto Area, there is an increasing regional imbalance between housing and jobs, necessitating longer commuting trips by more people. In addition, the low densities in the regions (2,100 persons/km2) make it difficult to provide adequate local transit service - either for local trips or to feed the GO system. In the early 80s the province had plans for constructing an electrified commuter rail line, called GO ALRT, from the eastern part of the GTA across the top of Metro to Hamilton in the west. However, the project was cancelled largely because of cost. In 1985, Metro Council produced the report called Network 2011 in which it set out a transportation strategy for Metro recommending a Sheppard subway line from Yonge Street to the Scarborough centre, an Eglinton Rapid Transit line from Eglinton West station to the 427, and a Downtown Relief Line. The Provincial government rejected that and opted instead to build the highway 407 over the top of Metro. The Region of York and its developers said they needed the 407 because there is a lot of traffic congestion. Thus, for 10 years, there was no significant investment made in either roads or rapid transit in Metro Toronto. In general, southern Ontario lacks the kind of integrated and comprehensive public transportation network found in Europe, where it is possible to obtain schedule information and purchase tickets for all steps of a trip from one agency. Due to gaps in systems and service it is not possible to rely on public transportation to travel around southern Ontario. CONCERNS There are serious problems associated with present growth patterns in the Greater Toronto Area. Random, scattered, low- density development is destroying the rural landscape, eliminating farmland and natural areas. The rising level of car ownership and use is responsible for increasing congestion on regional roads and on highways leading into Toronto and locking people into highly polluting and energy-consuming lifestyles. The level of car pollution on Toronto's main streets often reaches unacceptable levels, intensified by many people who leave vehicle engines idling while standing or parked. From a distance, a brown haze is visible over Toronto on many days of the year. In Metro Toronto, and downtown Toronto, the problem of traffic congestion is compounded by the large number of cars coming from the surrounding regions. Transit vehicles are delayed by the traffic congestion, resulting in a decrease in efficiency and increase in costs, making transit a less attractive alternative. The 80s saw a decline in the quality of TTC service, characterized by frequent breakdowns and delays. This was due to a variety of factors, including congestion on the road system, cut-backs in maintenance, an extended labour 'slow-down', and sometimes poor attitudes by staff toward riders. The potential for lengthy strikes in what is an essential service is a serious concern that may have to be addressed by the provincial government. According to Mike Colle, a member of Metro Council who sits on the TTC Commission, says that there is a lot of stress on TTC workers. They get little support and a lot of abuse from customers and motorists. He also said that there is a dilemma between reliability and safety and care. If TTC drivers extend themselves to help people in various situations, then they get behind schedule and inconvenience other people. Colle says that "The budget and ridership problems at the TTC are part of the crisis in mobility that is manifesting itself. The TTC is under attack by those who see public transit as a user-pay system and see the solution to the mobility crisis as more roads and cheaper fossil fuels. They don't accept transit as an essential human service." CURRENT PLANS. ROAD EXPANSION: The common response to the problem of traffic congestion is to increase the capacity of the road system. Throughout the GTA there are numerous projects underway to widen local roads and regional highways and build new interchanges, many of the projects costing $100 million dollars apiece. Other major projects include the widening of highway 401 and construction of the new highway 407 north of Toronto. Within Metro, there are plans and proposals for the Bayview/Leslie extension, the Front street extension onto the Gardiner Expressway, the widening of the Gardener, and the completion of missing links such as that on Lawrence Avenue East. At the same time, it is interesting to note that the Metro budget is inadequate to keep up with the repair of existing streets and bridges. CONCERNS There is an ongoing process of incremental, ad-hoc expansion of the road system throughout the GTA. The issue is whether this is a waste of money and encouragement to urban sprawl because the additional capacity will simply attract more cars. Critics such as Steve Munroe say that it is time to "confront the boundaries on road expansion" because the experience of American cities has been that it is impossible to ever meet the demand for roads. Attempting to do so destroys the form and efficiency of an urban area. Members of the Green Transportation Campaign suggested in the spring of 1991 that the key to relieving road congestion is to reduce the number of cars on the road. They called for a halt to further expansion of highways and roads in the GTA and instead advocated programs for traffic reduction and improved public transportation. CURRENT PLANS. TRANSIT IMPROVEMENTS: 'LET'S MOVE' FUNDING PROGRAM In the spring of 1990, the provincial Liberal government announced the 'Let's Move' funding program for new transit projects. It provided for expansion of regional GO services and in Metro for additional rapid transit lines: the 'Finch Loop' which would join the Yonge subway line with the top of the Spadina line to the west; some support for the Sheppard East subway line; an extension of the Scarborough RT; the creation of the Eglinton West Rapid Transit Line and Mississauga Busway; a Lakeshore LRT route east from Union Station; an extension of the BIoor subway line west to Sherway Gardens shopping mall in Etobicoke. NDP INITIATIVES In November 1990, the new NDP government reaffirmed its commitment to the Let's Move program. In addition they announced the following initiatives: an additional $70 million to the TTC over 5 years to improve subway maintenance and cooperation to improve training programs for transit maintenance workers; discussions with regional and local governments to find new ways to link the services of the 17 transit systems in the GTA; work with municipalities to encourage and define a network of HOV lanes in the major urban areas; protect transit corridors in the GTA, such as in the planning of highways 403 and 407; cooperate in the Federal/Provincial study on ground transportation for the Pearson International Airport (to be released in spring '91 for discussion); discussion with CN, CP and Transport Canada regarding the use of existing rail freight corridors for commuter and passenger rail services; the purchase of abandoned railway rights-of-way. TTC IMPROVEMENTS In Metro, the Toronto Transit Commission, according to Dr. Pill, is making a major effort to improve reliability of service. He said that one problem has been the poor quality of the latest order of subway cars from UTDC. 1. Bay Street Urban Clearway Downtown, an experiment has been undertaken, called the 'Bay Street Urban Clearway', in which the outside lanes are reserved for buses, taxi cabs and bicycles and cars making right turns. It appears to be successful in speeding up service of the Bay trolley bus. The TTC has developed plans for reserved lanes on many other Metro roads and believes that such transit right-of-ways are key to improving service in Metro. The implementation of these plans will, however, depend upon the political will to remove lanes from use by cars. 2. Community Bus Service The TTC has started a 'community bus service' pilot project in North York. A small bus goes on a fixed route in the Lawrence Square area to seniors homes, local neighbourhoods, shopping and community and medical services. 3. Key Stations Program With provincial funding, the TTC is undertaking a 'key stations program' to make 22 subway stations accessible to the handicapped, with elevators, etc. 4. Harbourfront Streetcar Line A new Harbourfront streetcar line, on its own right-of-way, has recently been constructed from Union Station, under the Gardiner Expressway, west along Queen's Quay. It is planned to continue up Spadina Avenue to the Spadina Subway station at BIoor. The construction of the Harbourfront section was delayed and over budget due to the problems of tunnelling from Union Station to Queen's Quay. The Spadina portion of the line has been delayed because of opposition by local residents and business people who feared that the design would create a barrier to traffic and pedestrian movements, take away parking from the local businesses and encourage office development on the railway lands. CONCERNS 1. Go Service Does it encourage further urban sprawl? It would seem that it does encourage the continued spread of low-cost, low-density housing developments in the regions. However, it is preferable that these commuters travel by train rather than by car. It has been suggested in Metro's Concept report that creation of more inter-regional rail links could offset this over-emphasis on downtown Toronto. Steve Munroe has called for a clear distinction between regional and local service. He criticizes the 'gateway' programs whereby GO commuters are transported to subway stations at the periphery of Toronto, thereby overloading the local subway system. 2. Rapid Transit Routes The alignment of the new rapid transit lines planned under the Let's Move program is crucial to their success in attracting riders and long-term cost-efficiency. Dr. Pill said the TTC is pleased at the commitment by the Province to complete the rapid transit grid in Toronto, which he believes is essential to the future of Metro. However, the following concerns have been raised by others about specific lines: FINCH LOOP - It will improve the performance of the Yonge/Spadina lines and offer alternatives in the case of breakdown of one line. However, the loop would go through low- density residential areas in North York without much prospect for fulfilling the potential of such an expensive infrastructure. It is also questionable whether the Loop will relieve congestion on the Yonge line because those boarding at Finch have access to seats and not much incentive to take the western route. SHEPPARD EAST LINE - This is one of the most heavily travelled bus routes in Metro and therefore a prime candidate for upgrading to rapid transit. It will also add to the rapid transit grid in the north of Metro and, it is hoped, take some local traffic off of the 401. There is some concern that, as planned, it will just dump more riders on the Yonge subway line. Some transit planners believe that it should not stop at Yonge street - that Metro's primary need is for a complete new east- west line across either Sheppard or Eglinton Ave. The other concern about the Sheppard line is that of funding. Major property owners along the route put together a proposal for private sector funding, because the Province had been unwilling so far to provide all of the money for the line. However, the proposal is in limbo at the time of publication of this report. EGLINTON WEST/MISSISSAUGA BUSWAY - This is a heavily travelled route and there is a great need for rapid transit in the north- west portion of Metro. Concern has been raised, however, about the location of the Busway. Mississauga presently intends to locate in a transit corridor inside the highway 403. Critics say that it should go down the middle of Burnhamthorpe Road, where a right-of-way already exists for just this purpose. They believe that rapid transit, to be successful, should be closely integrated with existing streets. 3. Surface Transit Steve Munro believes that surface transit should not be starved of operating funds because of investment in transit 'mega-projects'. He recommends that the TTC substantially improve the quality and reliability of bus service because potential riders will not be attracted by buses that run every half-hour. He says that good local service is essential to the success of the whole system and a fine-grained network of routes is needed. This will require a long-term commitment of sufficient operating funds. 4. Technology LIGHT RAIL TRANSIT (LRT) - Transport 2000 believes that the LRT should be given more consideration as an alternative to subway construction. Because of the overhead power source it can travel anywhere, giving it great flexibility. If LRTs were given reserved lanes on wide suburban roads, such lines could be constructed quickly at low expense, thereby offering the potential to cover far more territory. In the case of the Harbourfront and Spadina lines, the TTC has been criticized for 'overbuilding' and thereby losing the advantages of LRT construction. The tunnel from Union Station was constructed at great cost and another tunnel was planned underneath the Spadina subway station until critics forced the TTC to consider other alternatives. SCARBOROUGH RT EXPANSION - The Scarborough RT line was the result of PC provincial government pressure, in the early 80s, to purchase technology from the Urban Transportation Development Corporation, which was owned by the Ontario Government. The line had to be fully grade separated and therefore cost more than a streetcar (or LRT) line. As well, the TTC had to incur the additional expense of testing and maintaining a new technology that was not compatible with its existing equipment. Many critics believe a more sensible alternative would have been to extend the BIoor subway line, eliminating the unnecessary transfer between the RT and subway. Now that the RT needs to be extended, with additional capacity, there was some suggestion that, rather than incurring great additional costs, the system should be scrapped and the subway extended. The decision, as it stands, is to expand the existing RT. TROLLEY BUSES - Now that existing equipment is aging, the TTC wants to scrap Toronto's trolley buses and replace them with diesel or natural gas powered vehicles. Transport 2000 has objected and produced a report which documents the higher energy-efficiency and lower pollution levels of the electrified system. As a result, the MTO has asked the TTC to put the matter on hold. The TTC, along with Hamilton, is running an experimental program of natural gas-powered buses. 5. Traffic Management/Transit Priority Reducing conflict between cars and transit vehicles is essential to the future operation of the system. Traffic engineering solutions can be implemented to give transit vehicles signal priority and other exemptions and prohibit left-turns by automobiles. Reserved transit lanes encourage transit ridership and more efficient use of cars on the existing road system. Implementing such measures will, however, depend upon the political will to give the private automobile less priority. Metro has undertaken a study of HOV lanes and the TTC has already identified a potential network of reserved transit lanes. 6. Decision-Making Transportation planning, including the selection of routes and technology, is rarely the rational and cooperative exercise it should be. Developers and manufacturers have their interests to promote. Staff and politicians may have 'pet projects'. Residents often take a narrow view, excluding the interests of the larger community. In these situations, the process becomes one of horsetrading rather than comprehensive planning. CURRENT PLANS. REGIONAL PLANNING: GREATER TORONTO AREA: URBAN STRUCTURE CONCEPTS STUDY Faced with uncontrolled urban sprawl, traffic congestion and the need to plan major new investments in roads, transit, water and sewage treatment facilities, the Liberal government established a planning exercise for the Greater Toronto Area and commissioned the IBI consulting firm to prepare a series of background studies for the purposes of discussion among all the regional governments. This study has been continued by the new NDP government. Three alternatives were defined: SPRAWL, or business as usual; NODAL, which would see development focused in subcentres throughout the GTA; and CONCENTRATION, in which future population growth would take place in Metro Toronto to make most efficient use of existing infrastructure. METRO RESPONSE In January 1991, Metro Planning staff presented a report called The GTA: Concepts for the Future, for consideration by the public and Metro Council. Staff recommended another alternative which it called "Re-Investment Centres". This called for: confining future growth to the existing urban envelope; aiming for an average area wide density for the GTA of 4000 persons/km2; creating more inter-regional transit links; promoting a better regional balance between housing and jobs; focusing growth in linear and nodal centres served by public transit; planning for well-designed housing intensification programs. Staff recommended increased investment in public transit facilities and aiming for an increase in modal split from 29% to 35% for non-auto trips throughout the GTA. CONCERNS Member groups of the Green Transportation Campaign have criticized the provincial GTA study for not establishing stringent environmental parameters for the reduction of CO2 emissions and energy consumption and for the preservation of farmland. All of the three alternatives would involve increased auto use and expanded 'greenfield' development. The same groups endorsed the principles set out in Metro's Re- Investment Centre alternative but strongly recommended that a transportation strategy be developed for a modal split of 50% non-automobile trips. MMA/MTO JOINT STUDY The province has just initiated a project to develop transit-oriented land use planning guidelines for the use of its own planners and for local governments. This is an important exercise and its progress should be monitored and encouraged. METRO OFFICIAL PLAN REVIEW Metro Council's response to the GTA study will create policy which will carry over to Metro's own planning goals. Currently the Metro Official Plan provides for a transportation system based on the grid pattern and which supports the growth of suburban sub-centres. It calls for appropriate housing densities to support these objectives. CONCLUSION In order for public transportation to become a real alternative throughout Metro and the GTA, it win be essential to improve upon the existing pattern of urban sprawl. The creation of traditional 'main streets' on empty arterials and the infilling of shopping mall parking lots and other underutilized spaces are some of the proposals for 'retrofitting' the suburbs. In order for this to work and to be acceptable to local residents, however, great care will have to be taken to create human-scale design guidelines. Mike Colle, Chairman of Metro's Economic Development and Planning Committee, believes that ultimately, land-use planning is the answer to transportation problems. It is most important, he says, to get a strong policy giving public transportation priority in the Metro Official Plan, integrating transit decision-making with land-use decision-making. There should be policies and guidelines regarding pedestrians and accessibility. Metro should be pro-active rather than re-active, he says. Macro solutions are needed, especially the concept of trip-reduction planning. OTTAWA/CARLTON TRANSIT OPERATOR: OC TRANSPO OC Transpo is an independent commission composed of 9 members appointed from the Council of the Regional Municipality of Ottawa/Carlton. SERVICE AREA: THE REGIONAL MUNICIPALITY OF OTTAWA/CARLTON Size: 358 km2 Population: 568,252 Pop. density: 1,585 persons/km2 The city of Ottawa is built around two major rivers, which create significant barriers to transportation. As a result, the major streets follow a meandering and confusing pattern. Within this framework, the old part of the city is built according to the traditional compact urban form on a rectilinear grid of local streets. However, the newer parts of Ottawa and the suburban municipalities of the Region are characterized by typical car- oriented subdivisions and shopping malls. The presence of large tracts of open space within the service area further lowers the densities to an average of 1,585 persons per square kilometre - less than half that of Metro Toronto. Pedestrians Outside of downtown, the pedestrian environment in Ottawa is poor (other than for recreational walking). Local roads within subdivisions often lack sidewalks entirely, although collector roads are required to have sidewalks on one side. Walking distances are often great because of the scattered development pattern, large setbacks of buildings, meandering suburban streets, and low densities. Bicycles Ottawa has many off-street bike paths and there are ordinary bike racks at many transit stations. TRANSIT SYSTEM: Total passengers: 80,045,000 Total vehicle km: 41,157,879 Equipment (1988): 642 motor buses 164 articulated buses Composed of local and express bus routes, the system is basically radial in orientation, emphasizing service into the downtown core. The service into downtown follows a system of 'Busways' that are completely separated from traffic. Since 1983 they have constructed 22 kilometres and expect to have 31 kilometres in place by 1993. They have used land from old rail and streetcar lines, from corridors reserved for transportation by the National Capital Commission, and other Federal land. According to senior transit planner, Sean Rathwell, the Busways provide a more reliable operation, avoiding delays caused by congestion. In many cases the ride downtown is as fast or faster than by car. They believe the buses provide more flexibility than subways and streetcars because the buses can go to local neighbourhoods and then become express service to downtown, avoiding the need for transfers. He said there is not much cross-town service because there is not much demand, although he acknowledged that that may be because of the way they have structured the system. SERVICE STANDARDS: Frequency peak offpeak Busways: 3 min. 5-7 min. Express suburban: 7 - 8, 15 min. - Local routes: 30 min. 30 min. Special school service: 15 min. Scheduling Schedules are according to modules that double: 7.5 minutes, 15 minutes, 30 minutes. They try to implement 'clockface' schedules on 30 minute routes, however this can reduce flexibility in planning timed transfers. There is a phone-in system (560 + number on bus stop) which gives the schedule. Transfers In the Ottawa climate, reducing waiting time for transfers is the priority. Their system is based on 'pulsing' (time transfers at focal points). There are six major terminals and six minor terminals and all the buses arrive at the same time, allowing people to make immediate transfers. Walking Distances The regional Official Plan mandates that bus stops be within 400 metres of all homes and 95% of Ottawa meets that criteria. Mr. Rathwell said that OC Transpo is concerned about the ability of riders to get to bus service. The 400 metre rule is enforced in subdivision design and there is a sidewalk on at least one side of every collector and arterial. He did not consider it significant that most suburban neighbourhoods in Ottawa do not have sidewalks, saying traffic is light there. He said the matter of sidewalks and pedestrian flow is the responsibility of local municipalities, not the Region. FARE STRUCTURE 1989 The fare structure is very complicated. The base fare is 85 cents and premiums are added on for the peak period and express routes. 65% to 70% of riders use passes. The theory behind the system is to get some correlation between cost of service and use. The peak period requires provision of additional buses and thus work-trip commuters pay more. This system is also intended to encourage more flexible work hours in order to make better use of the system during off-peak periods. BASE FARES cash ticket pass Adult $0.85 $0.85 $44.00 Child - - - Student - $29.00 Senior - $15.00 PERFORMANCE OF THE SYSTEM 1986 1987 1988 1989 Service Utilization Rides per capita per year: 152.2 148.7 143.8 140.9 Passengers per vehicle hour: 49.5 - 46.4 46.6 Amount of Service Vehicle hours per capita: 3.07 - 3.10 3.03 Cost Efficiency Operating cost per vehicle hr: $58.9 - $64.8 $66.5 Cost Effectiveness Operating cost per passenger: $1.19 $1.28 $1.40 $1.43 Financial Performance Revenue to cost ratio: 58.0% 57.0% 56.2% 59.9% Average Fare Fare box revenue per passenger: $0.68 $0.72 $0.77 $0.83 Ottawa has a higher level, of ridership than other medium size cities such as Calgary, Edmonton and Winnipeg. The bulk of this ridership is in work trips into the downtown core, 70% of which are by transit. Ridership climbed between 1972 and 1985 after the system was made regional. GOVERNMENT ROLES & RESPONSIBILITIES: ONTARIO Urban transportation is a municipal responsibility in Ontario. The operation of the system may be carried out either by an independent transit commission or by a department of municipal government. Policies and plans may be developed by operating agencies, municipal planning departments and committees of Council. At the provincial level, the Ministry of Transportation of Ontario (MTO) is responsible for the construction and maintenance of highways and the funding of municipal roads and transit. The MTO helps establish local transit systems and funds 75% of capital costs and 50% of operating costs. In Ontario, there is no direct relationship between land development and transportation planning. The Ontario Planning Act sets out a land-use planning and development approval process by means of official plans, zoning by-laws, site plans and subdivision agreements. The Act does not, however, mandate the "adequate and economic provision of public transit" as the Ontario Urban Transit Association (OUTA) has suggested it should. In those cases where The Ministry of Municipal Affairs (MMA) is responsible for approval of planning or development proposals, the ministry circulates the plans to all relevant agencies for comment. However, neither the MTO nor local transit agencies have the power to require specific changes that would support future transit service. They can only comment and request. OTTAWA/CARLTON The Regional Municipality of Ottawa/Carlton (RMOC) has a Transportation Planning Department which plans the construction of Transit Ways and reviews subdivision plans. They have informal links with OC Transpo, the operator of the system. In the RMOC, the approval of subdivision plans is delegated to planning staff, although the developer can appeal to Council if he is unhappy. Staff identify where and what kinds of roads will be needed for transit and exactly where bus stops will be. They can prevent houses from being occupied until all conditions are met. BACKGROUND: The Ottawa system is quite successful in bringing people to and from the downtown during peak periods. This is due both to the existence of a strong downtown core and to some enlightened policies. The RMOC's Official Plan states that priority will be given to public transit improvements over road improvements where appropriate. It is this policy which has generated the Busways. The City of Ottawa has discouraged the provision of long-term downtown parking by not requiring it in the zoning by-law. New developments during the past decade have been required to accommodate only parking needs for short-term purposes like shopping and deliveries. The Federal Government does not provide free parking for most employees and monthly parking costs downtown can amount from $100 to $140. Thus government parking policies are a significant factor in encouraging high transit ridership into the downtown. The biggest issue for OC Transpo is reliability of the express services, with unexpected breakdowns occurring due to maintenance problems. Another issue that has received publicity in Ottawa is that of accessibility for mothers with baby strollers. The Regional By- law which governs the conduct of people on the bus restricts transport of 'awkward' articles to off-peak hours. So, strollers must be folded and children held in the lap. Such a policy can create serious hardship for and impediments to the mobility of mothers with small children. Given the lack of sidewalks and the winter climate, it is unlikely that mothers would transport young infants in flimsy 'umbrella' strollers. The expectation that a mother should remove a sleeping infant from its bedding to hold it, along with diaper bags, parcels and perhaps other children would seem to be unrealistic and should be re-examined. While serving downtown commuters well, the system provides poor off-peak service for local trips, as is typical of suburban areas everywhere. The RMOC area would benefit from intensification and infill programs to improve the urban form and density. Outside of the downtown area, congestion and pollution are not big problems in comparison to larger cities like Toronto. In terms of the environment, according to Mr. Rathwell, people know it is best to take the bus. Ironically, the biggest complaints are about the buses themselves being noisy and polluting, especially downtown. OC Transpo is trying to promote environmental considerations. For Earth Day, they sponsored a Transit Challenge Day in which peak fares were eliminated. CURRENT PLANS: Planners are now working on extension of the Busways through downtown. Presently, they extend from the suburbs to the edge of downtown and from there, buses use the street system. There are now a pair of one-way streets which carry about 180 to 200 buses per hour. The main hindrance to efficiency is the traffic on cross-streets. There are two options being proposed for improvements: at-grade or below-grade. 'At-grade' would involve improvements to signalling, transit operations and boarding methods, etc. The second option would be a deep tunnel through downtown. A recent consultant's report recommended the deep-tunnel option. Planners want permission to do a detailed functional design. There is some disagreement over this proposal. For example, Tony Turrittin, a Director of Transport 2000, predicts that the cost of the tunnel would be prohibitive and that the fumes produced by so many buses would require a powerful ventilation system that would also be expensive to install and operate. He believes that this large capital expense could be put to better use in upgrading the entire transit system and recommends that LRT lines be installed on the busways and through downtown (the Busways were built to accommodate possible conversion to LRT). Supporters of the current system point to the flexibility of buses. A commuter in downtown Ottawa can board a bus destined for his/her specific part of town, and make the entire trip without a transfer. LRT supporters point out that the great variety of buses downtown creates confusion, congestion and long waits for particular buses. They suggest that an LRT line downtown could operate with great frequency, high capacity and no local pollution. Once outside downtown, transfers to local bus routes would be necessary for some people. However, they believe the local transfer time would be balanced out by the high frequency service downtown, plus solve the downtown congestion and pollution problems. VANCOUVER REGIONAL TRANSIT SYSTEM (VRTS) TRANSIT OPERATOR: B.C. TRANSIT B.C. Transit is a provincial crown corporation, established under the B.C. Transit Act. The Transit Commission is a subcommittee of the Board of Directors. The Commission is composed of the mayors representing each of six transit regions. Vancouver is represented by its Mayor and one Alderman. SERVICE AREA: THE GREATER VANCOUVER REGIONAL DISTRICT (GVRO) Area: 1,482 km2 Population: 1,240,900 (municipal population = 1,446,000) Pop. density: 837 persons/km2 The transit system of the Greater Vancouver Regional District (GVRD) serves 15 municipalities, 2 villages and 3 electoral areas and at 1,482 km2, is the largest transit district in Canada. The regional government itself, however, plays no role in transit. At an average density of 837 per-sons/km2 the GVRD has, along with Halifax, the lowest population density of the systems studied. However, this area includes a lot of mountainous and rural terrain which brings the average down. CITY OF VANCOUVER Area: 114 km2 Population 427,131 Density: 3,748 persons/km2 Located within the GVRD, the city of Vancouver, like all older cities, is compact and based on a grid pattern. Its area is about the same as that of Toronto at two-thirds the density. Vancouver is bounded by water on three sides. On the north is Burrard Inlet (across which is the community of North Vancouver). On the west is the ocean and to the south the Fraser River. Directly south of Vancouver is the community of Richmond. Directly east are Burnaby, New Westminster and Coquitlam, while southeast across the Fraser River is Surrey. The Fraser Valley follows the Fraser River to the east. SUBURBAN AREAS OF CVRD Area: 1,368 km2 (includes a lot of rural land) Population: 813,769 Pop. density: 595 persons/km2 Densities vary greatly across the GVRD. Because of the rugged terrain to the north and the ocean on the west, growth can go only to the south and east of Vancouver. These areas are being developed according to the suburban pattern, some with extremely low densities. Pedestrians According to Mr. Leicester of B.C. Transit, better planning for pedestrians is needed in the suburbs, including sidewalks, shelters, cross-walks and safe-crossings. Some 6 to 8 lane roads have free-flowing right-hand turns, multi-phase signals which create too long a wait for crossing. Medians are needed in the middle of such streets as refuges. Bus stops are often too far apart. Large set-backs are a problem as well. Bicycles Vancouver has an estimated 50,000 bicycle commuters as well as a Mayor who is a dedicated cyclist. However, bicycles are not allowed on Skytrain or city buses, which means that, sometimes, families with children must drive to reach the city's best bike path. TRANSIT SYSTEM Total passengers: 110,072,000 Total vehicle km: 69,534,167 Vehicles (1988): 610 motor buses 114 LRV (57 two-car units) 244 trolley coaches The VRTS is a totally integrated regional system run by B.C. Transit. It includes local and commuter bus routes, trolley coach lines, the Vancouver SkyTrain, and the SeaBus. People can travel for 60 miles on one ticket. Vancouver has the second largest trolley fleet in North America, next to San Francisco. Over 60% of the VRTS passengers are carried by electrically powered vehicles. Routes within the City of Vancouver are operated on a grid pattern. In suburban areas, buses will follow a local route within the municipality, meet at a focal point - usually a municipal town centre - where they connect with express buses to downtown or SkyTrain. There are pockets of rural areas in the GVRD which are not served by transit at all. The SkyTrain (starting from the old CPR main railway station on the harbour of Vancouver) follows an old streetcar corridor southeast to New Westminster and then crosses the Fraser River to Surrey. The first two kilometres of its route are under the city in an old railway tunnel, the next six are at grade and the last 13 to Surrey are elevated. Locations of the Sky Train stations were chosen on the basis of integration with the bus system. It is the most popular route in the GVRD and the recent extension across the Fraser River has increased ridership, to approximately 110,000 per day. Powered by linear induction motors, the train is fully automated with no drivers or ticket-takers. Roving station attendants do spot checks for payment. Within every station there are remote cameras and within every car there is a means of contacting the control centre. According to officials, this system saves them millions of dollars a year in labour costs. The SeaBus is a ferry service across the Burrard Inlet, from Vancouver to North Vancouver. It connects with bus services in North Vancouver and bus and SkyTrain services in downtown Vancouver. SERVICE STANDARDS The service standards dating back to 1983 are being revised. The new standards have been followed informally for some time. Frequency peak off-peak Vancouver routes: 15 min. 15-20 min. Suburban routes: 15-30 min. 30-60 min. Rural areas: limited service Walking Distances Between major streets: 1/2 mile, 900 metres To transit: the new standards will be 450 metres to bus stops and 900 metres to rapid transit stations (in Vancouver almost 100% of the population is now within 1000 feet of transit). Rural: in some areas it is 10 km to the nearest bus Transfers In suburban areas there are timed transfers at focal points. In Vancouver, which is on a grid system, service is fairly frequent so most routes have random transfers. FARES cash ticket PM Adult 1 zone $1.25 10/$11.75 $50.00 2 zones $1.75 10/$15.75 $67.00 3 zones $2.50 10/$22.50 $90.00 Child/ 1 zone $0.65 10/$6.50 $29.00 Adult/ 2 zones $0.90 - Senior 3 zones $1.25 Day pass = $3.50 Zone fares only in effect on weekdays before 9:30 a.m. and between 3:00 pm and 6:30 pm PERFORMANCE OF THE SYSTEM 1986 1987 1988 1989 Service Utilization Rides per capita per year: 107.46 92.37 88.1 88.7 Passengers per vehicle hour: 36.25 34.00 36.40 36.1 Amount of Service Vehicle hours per capita: 2.96 2.72 2.42 2.45 Cost Efficiency Operating cost per vehicle hour: $56.72 $59.28 $71.52 $65.99 Cost Effectiveness Operating cost per passenger: $1.56 $1.74 $1.96 $1.83 Financial Performance Revenue to cost ratio: 58.5% 50.4% 49.7% 53.0% Average Fare Fare box revenue per passenger $0.89 $0.86 $0.96 $0.95 Ridership in 1990 increased 12% over 1989, according to Mr. Leicester. Although total ridership has been gradually increasing over the past five years, it has not kept pace with population growth, as is reflected in ridership per capita figures. 1987 was an anomaly due to unusually high ridership during Expo 86. AM peak period travel into downtown Vancouver is 40% transit. With regard to crowded rush hour and SkyTrain routes, he said they needed to provide more capacity. During 1991/1992 there are plans to expand service by up to 10%. Although rush hour and SkyTrain vehicles may be operating near capacity, there is overall a fairly low level of ridership. 50% of ridership is in Vancouver but the extensive low-density suburban network contributes to lower overall ridership and increased average costs. The VRTS has one of the highest operating costs per passenger of the systems studied. One Vancouver resident has commented that, "Skytrain cuts a diagonal swath through the city. If you're not near the route, transit is unbelievably slow. With one exception, there are no express bus routes running east/west." GOVERNMENT ROLES & RESPONSIBILITIES: BRITISH COLUMBIA From the turn of the century, the British Columbia Electric Railway (BCER) provided transit service in the Vancouver area. A private company under franchise, it was a division of the main electric utility company of B.C. It built local streetcar lines and several interurban routes. In 1962, B.C. Hydro was created by the province to take over B.C. Electric, and BCER transit operations became part of Hydro as well. Both under BCER and Hydro, transit was subsidized by the income from electricity and gas distribution. In 1972, the provincial Bureau of Transit Services, under the new government, "began to take a leading role in transit planning. For the first time, bus service was expanded to new suburbs outside the city of Vancouver." In 1980, B.C. transit, a provincial crown corporation, took over the planning and operation of transit service. B.C. Transit reports to the Minister of Transportation. Under the B.C. Transit Act, the Vancouver Regional Transit Commission is responsible for determining routes and service levels, setting fares and sharing in a portion of the cost of operating transit. The Commission has four funding sources: 1) passenger fares, 2) a three-cent-per-litre gas tax which is levied within the service region, 3) the commercial property tax, and 4) a Hydro residential surcharge of $1.60 per month. In addition, there are cost-sharing arrangements between the Provincial government and the Vancouver Regional Transit Commission. The Province pays 31% of operating costs and non- rail capital costs. According to the latest agreement, the Province will pay 100% of rail capital costs and 74% of vehicle costs. MUNICIPAL GOVERNMENT According to Mr. Leicester, the Regional Commission does liaise with the local municipalities and circulates its annual service plan in advance. However, as Turrittin points out, "British Columbia is the only province... giving local regions no real role in transit planning and decision-making" at a time when they need to link transit planning to other municipal responsibilities regarding land-use and traffic management. Each municipality controls its own growth and there is no formal process to involve the Transit agency in the development approval process. The agency would like to have more input into development of plans and some approval powers. However, officials say the system has managed to work fairly well at an informal level. Regional Planning, be it transit, land-use or transportation in general is notably absent. BACKGROUND: The interurban lines built by British Columbia Electric Railway "directed residential growth, creating main travel corridors that would ultimately justify rapid transit development". The most important route was the Central Park line, built in 1891 between Vancouver and New Westminster, which ultimately became the corridor for SkyTrain. After World War II BCER "replaced its streetcars with a new network of trolley buses and diesel buses". In the late 1950s there were plans for the construction of a superhighway network in Vancouver and the GVRD and for a third bridge from Vancouver to North Vancouver. However, public opposition defeated these proposals and, by the 1970s, sentiment turned toward public transit. Plans for rapid transit lines waxed and waned until 1979. At that time the GVRD was pushing for the construction of an LRT line. However, the decision was made by the provincial government, after a meeting between Premier Bennett and Premier Davis of Ontario, to use the UTDC technology and build Sky Train as a showpiece for Expo '86. Former President and current Director of Transport 2000, Tony Turrittin is a critic of SkyTrain, saying that. "As rapid transit, Sky Train has been highly successful ... it has attracted riders" and "attracts a sizable number of sightseers. It can be fast, reliable and move large numbers of people." However, "there were less costly and equally high quality alternatives." (see ALRT, page 16) However, according to Mr. Leicester, the LRT system was inferior to the SkyTrain as it offered neither the travel time, the frequency or the capacity. Concern over grade crossings and expensive downtown tunnelling ruled it out, he says. Turittin believes that the choice of SkyTrain technology had significant financial implications for B.C. Transit, with debt servicing costs contributing to high operating costs. Although they received $60 million from the federal government, the "rest of the cost was financed by borrowing, with the transit riders and local govemment required to pay both capital costs and interest charges. That brings the real cost of the system to $1.037 billion after 5 years of construction." It was calculated that amortization of the debt over 30 years would raise the cost to over $4 billion. "In 1986 - 87, nearly half of B. C. Transit's budget of $269 million for the Vancouver region went for the operation, maintenance, and debt servicing costs of SkyTrain, though SkyTrain carried ... only one-quarter of the riders on the VRTS." REDEVELOPMENT ISSUES Redevelopment issues are very big in Vancouver. There is a problem with affordability in the inner city and the potential for higher density residential development around rapid transit stations, but older single-family residential areas are being protected. Commercial and industrial areas are being redeveloped for higher density residential. SECOND RAPID TRANSIT A second rapid transit line from Vancouver south to Richmond is planned for 1996. However, it has encountered some opposition from residents groups in those areas. CONGESTION Congestion is a growing concern in Vancouver. Because the city is built around bodies of water, there are strategic points of congestion at bridges and tunnels. Transit lanes and queue jumpers have been successfully introduced to relieve those problems. Vancouver does not have many miles of highways. The public mood is to expand transit rather than the highway system. GROWTH Most growth is occurring outside of Vancouver, spreading south and east onto agricultural land. As the Fraser Valley is being suburbanized, groups there are fighting for the preservation of the farmland. Vancouver environmentalists recommend instead that expansion should be north, with high density housing built on the North Shore. However, in the new areas to the south and east, some better planning is being done without any formal coordination. Communities are being designed around transit focal points, with mixed-uses, higher densities around transit stations, and walkways in the subdivisions. SMOG Smog is an important issue in Vancouver as people are conscious of changes to their pristine environment. In Vancouver, motor vehicles as a group are responsible for 80% of the pollution and the private auto for 75%. "Scientists from the University of British Columbia and Environment Canada reported last spring (1990) that motor- vehicle pollution blowing out of the Lower Mainland is destroying 10 per cent of the crops in the Fraser Valley and costing valley farmers $8.8 million a year." During the last two years, according to Mr. Leicester, there has been more awareness of the environment and how transit can be helpful. CURRENT PLANS: PROVINCE Two years ago the provincial government promised to begin a testing program for motor vehicle emissions in 1990, but it has been delayed until 1992. The plan is to charge vehicle owners a fee to have the mandatory test and require that any problems be rectified. The GVRD has estimated the program could cut carbon dioxide emissions in the region by 30 per cent. The Province has announced a $1 billion commitment for capital costs but more operating funds are required as well, according to Mr. Leicester. To serve their growing ridership the Commission needs to buy more buses and hire and train more operators. There is always lag time between the provision of funding and the provision of the service. The economy is good and both levels of government support transit, but they haven't committed themselves to a 10-year funding strategy. He says that the Commission needs a more stable, long-term source of funding. Vancouver has just completed a review of future growth and transit needs. Under current zoning there is still significant development potential in the City, but the street and transit system would not currently be adequate to serve it. Mr. Leicester listed some important concerns that need to be addressed: 1) Better urban design and densities. 3) Transit improvements including better design of the road system, bus lanes, turn lanes for buses and transit priority measures. He also described some new and innovative programs they are proceeding with as part of their five-year plan: 1. Park and Ride They have 14 in suburban areas and need double that. 2. Bike and Ride As a pilot project, they have introduced a bicycle locker system at three locations. 3. Car Pooling Their GO GREEN campaign is directed toward companies which are encouraged to buy monthly passes for employees at a small discount and then discount them further. The company gets recognition by having their names printed on the sleeve of the pass card. B.C. Transit provides car pooling and transit information about each location and will provide a counsellor to come out and help set up car-pools. They win also provide a software computer package which can be used by a company car-pool coordinator. They are in the process of establishing a 'guaranteed-ride-home' program. This would allow someone who missed their car-pool ride to phone a taxi and B.C. Transit would subsidize the ride. In Seattle, where this program already exists, it is rarely abused according to the authorities there. 4. Mini-buses These are being considered for low-density areas and areas that are geographically cut off. Such operations could be run by community organizations and private operators. With mini-bus service, fuel consumption and capital costs would be cheaper, and wage rates lower because the vans don't require the same driver qualifications as buses. 5. Big, Articulated Buses On heavily travelled routes, these would provide more comfort and seating. By relaxing loading standards they would have less standees. 6. Highway Commuter Buses They are ensuring that there are comfortable seats, good reading lights, etc. 7. HOV Lanes The Ministry of Highways took the initiative in introducing the first HOV lane in Canada on the Barnet Highway in Burnaby and Port Moody. A second HOV lane project has been initiated on Highway #99. VANCOUVER In October 1990, city Council adopted the Final Report of the City of Vancouver Task Force on Atmospheric Change, titled Clouds of Change. An ambitious and comprehensive 35-point plan, it sets a target for reduction of CO2 emissions at 20% of 1988 levels by the year 2005. "In the next two years, Council says it intends to find ways to, among other things, persuade people to carpool by offering them dedicated traffic lanes heading downtown, parking concessions when they get there and lower annual licence fees. Council also wants to require businesses with 25 or more employees to offer car-pooling incentives. The city is to set the pace by exchanging civic employees free parking permits for transit passes. ... Developers of new buildings are to provide showers, lockers and parking for cyclists." In order to achieve its targets, the report establishes the following objectives for changes in transportation planning, traffic management and land-use planning: Reduce the number of automobile trips in the City and Region; Increase opportunities for non-auto transportation, including bicycles, walking, rail, buses and alternative vehicles; Reduce the use of gasoline and diesel fuel in conventional buses, autos and trucks; and Reduce the need for transportation in the City and Region, through land-use planning. Council adopted a recommendation requesting that staff study and develop energy-efficient land use policies based on these recommendations from the Federation of Canadian Municipalities: Encourage greater density through multiple unit residential developments; Integrate work, residence and shopping in mixed use development; Encourage residential clustering; Zone higher density development along established routes; Decentralize commercial and community services to reduce travel distances, creating self-contained communities with a better balance between employment and population; Place controls on outlying shopping centres, strip development and urban sprawl; Encourage the infilling (development of existing vacant land in built-up areas; Ensure that major public facilities have provision for walking and bicycling access to transit; Encourage the development of high quality walking and bicycling facilities, including development design guidelines to support transportation alternatives to private automobile use, such as provision of on-site lunchrooms, daycare facilities, automated bank teller machines and other facilities. REGINA TRANSIT OPERATOR THE CITY OF REGINA TRANSIT Regina Transit is a department of the municipal government. SERVICE AREA: THE CITY OF REGINA Area: 111 km2 Population: 179,000 Pop. density: 1,613 persons/km2 The older part of Regina is built on the traditional grid pattern. Provincial parliament and government office buildings are located downtown, across from a large park at the heart of the city. Surrounding the older city are low density suburbs with 50-60 foot lots and 3 or 4 units to the acre. In total land area, Regina is about the same size as the city of Toronto, but with less than a third of the population density. The sense of unlimited open space on the prairies does not engender constraint in the use of land. Pedestrians The older part of Regina is a relatively small area and easily traversed on foot. Like most traditional cities, it is good for walking. In the newer areas they have made strides in subdivision design, according to the Director of Transit, Don Hnetka. Discussions with developers have led to good transit access. Although most subdivisions still back onto arterial roads, they have walkways, sidewalks on both sides and cul-de-sacs that point toward the arterial road. In the newer shopping malls, transit goes onto the property and a transit terminal is planned for one location. A couple of malls have been built with one side close to the street to make for better pedestrian access. Bicycles A lot of bicycles are being used to and from downtown but there is no special provision for them. TRANSIT SYSTEM: Total passengers: 8,532,630 Total vehicle km: 4,911,204 Equipment (1988): 111 motor buses In the inner city, the route pattern is a grid. In the other areas it is the "usual suburban pattern". SERVICE STANDARDS Frequency peak off-peak Main routes: 10, 15, 20 min. 30 min. Sundays: 60 min. Scheduling At 1.45 vehicle hours per capita, Regina has a low frequency of service in comparison to the larger cities studied. It is about average for Canadian cities of that size, however. They don't have the money to post a schedule for each stop, but they do have an information line staffed from 7 am until 9 pm. They don't know what percentage of the population is dependent upon transit. When Sunday service was reduced from half hour to one hour, the transit department received 8 complaints. However, none of these were directed to the politicians, said Mr. Hnetka. "Captive riders in Regina have experienced a number of service cuts and they make-do." Transfers They are not timed (except in the evening hours), they can't afford to coordinate meets downtown. They hope sometime to run a time-transfer service in the south-east sector of the city but don't know if they will get the budget money in 1991. Walking Distances 1200 feet is standard distance to a bus stop. FARES cash ticket pass Adult $0.90 10/$9.00 $32.50 Child $0.50 15/$7.00 - Student $0.60 10/$6.00 $21.50 Senior $0.90 10/$9.00 - PERFORMANCE OF THE SYSTEM 1986 1987 1988 1989 Service Utilization Rides per capita per year: 52.01 48.74 47.1 47.7 Passengers per vehicle hour: 34.28 32.17 30.08 33.0 Amount of Service Vehicle hours per capita: 1.52 1.51 1.53 1.45 Cost Efficiency Operating cost per veh. hour: $40.97 $42.41 $41.22 $43.69 Cost Effectiveness Operating cost per passenger: $1.19 $1.32 $1.34 $1.33 Financial Performance Revenue to cost ratio: 53.0% 55.0% 58.3% 57.9% Average Fare Fare box revenue per passenger: $0.61 $0.70 $0.76 $0.74 Ridership has declined over the last few years in conjunction with service cuts, fare increases and a reduction in the provincial gas tax. The buses are full or crowded only for short periods during rush hour. In winter, there is good ridership into downtown. GOVERNMENT ROLES & RESPONSIBILITIES: SASKATCHEWAN In Saskatchewan, both operation and funding of transit are now entirely municipal responsibilities. The Province used to pay 50% of capital purchases as well as a subsidy to the operating deficit and per capita operation program but, as of 1990, it discontinued transit subsidies. The only exception is transportation for the disabled, to which the Province has held to the 1988 subsidy level for the last three budgets. In contrast to the deplorable funding situation, according to he Canadian Transit Handbook, Saskatchewan has the best legislation of all the provinces for integrating land-use and transportation planning. The Planning and Development Act gives municipalities the power to create standards and conditions for the provision of public transit in development plans, zoning by-laws, and subdivision regulations. REGINA The Director of Transit receives copies of plans and can make comments but, according to Mr. Hnetka, he has no formal power in the development approval process. It would appear that the city of Regina does not make full use of the powers available to it under provincial legislation. BACKGROUND: The removal of provincial funding for transit is obviously a big blow to municipal transit operators and their efforts to increase ridership. The provincial government's bias toward automobiles was established in 1985-86 when the newly elected PC government removed most fuel taxes, which had amounted to 17-18 cents per litre. Two years later they reinstated a 10 cent gas tax, but rebated 7 cents of that to private motorists. Thus the motorists are taxed less than transit riders. The city of Regina doesn't have a balanced transportation policy, according to Mr. Hnetka. The engineering department continues to want to build and widen roads. People who are pro- transit and anti-auto are a small minority. A recent survey showed that people would pay up to $3 a litre in order to have the use of their car. It is possible to drive across town in 20 minutes and people expect to be able to take their car everywhere and park next to their destination. Homes in newer subdivisions have two and three-car garages that are all full. Parking is widely available in Regina. The university at the edge of town has mammoth parking lots with virtually a space for every student. The city government is the worst offender. Free parking is provided for 1/3 of the staff and the rest can easily obtain it for $20-$25 per month. Provincial government offices routinely provide free parking. Three new office towers will be built with more than adequate parkades. Environmental issues at the local and provincial levels relate to industry, hazardous wastes and recycling. However, air pollution is not evident in Regina and people don't understand that they are contributing to a global problem. Nor do they believe that there is a potential shortage of oil. A public education campaign by an organization such as Greenpeace would be most helpful. The Director took the CUTA environmental report to Council and they endorsed it in principle. However, that is about as far as it will go, because car is king in Saskatchewan. CURRENT PLANS: The Municipal Development Plan (official plan) is under review, as required by the provincial Urban Municipal Act. City staff - an administrative task team - will create development options and hold public meetings. They are working on a separate Transportation Study, using a new computer program, which will forecast the impacts of all the development proposals and project the costs of transit versus road construction. ISSUES Mr. Hnetka hopes that this planning review process will provide a framework for re-examining Regina's car-oriented approach to transportation planning and land development. Regina, he said, will have to decide how long it can continue on the present path. For example, a current study examines the congested intersection in front of a new mall. Although the study deals with the mall, it is really a peak hour problem that could be alleviated by transit improvements. Instead of expanding the road, they should consider adding to the transit system, he says. SASKATOON TRANSIT OPERATOR: SASKATOON TRANSIT SYSTEM" Saskatoon Transit is a department of the municipal government. SERVICE AREA: THE CITY OF SASKATOON Area 144 km2 Population: 177,659 Pop. density: 1,230 persons/km2 Saskatoon, like Ottawa, is built around a river which presents a barrier to transportation, creating a meandering pattern in the major streets. Within this framework, however, the older part of the city is compact with local streets on a grid. Since they have no mega-malls, the biggest stores are located downtown. The newer areas follow the normal suburban model and sprawl is extensive. Saskatoon covers more area than the city of Toronto, at a density even lower than that of Regina. Pedestrians Like Regina, the old part of Saskatoon is a walking city. In the newer parts, Transit Manager, Al Ross, says that the pedestrian situation is improving and that they have always required walkways and sidewalks in subdivisions. His department works with the University of Saskatchewan in campus planning. Transit goes to the front door of the Student Union Building and 60% to 70% of the campus is within a 1000 feet of there, all connected by a system of walkways. Bicycles There is nothing major - a few committees - interest comes and goes, according to Mr. Ross. There is a conflict, in deciding where bikes belong - on the road or on the sidewalk. There is a pathway the length of the river valley which goes across town, but there is no overall plan being actively implemented. TRANSIT SYSTEM: Total passengers: 11,844,100 Total vehicle km: 5,396,100 Vehicles (1988): 130 motor buses The route pattern is a focal-point system, not a grid. There is a bus terminal at each of three shopping centres and they funnel all service into those and provide downtown express service from there. SERVICE STANDARDS Frequency peak off-peak Regular 15 min. 30 min. Nights, Sundays 60 min. Scheduling They have 'clockface' scheduling, Mr. Ross used to work with John Bakker in Edmonton to develop these methods. Transfers They have a reasonably efficient time-transfer system, which was introduced between 1975 and 1980. It is a regional system with multiple centres, not just home-to-work. FARES cash ticket pan Adult $0.75 10/$7.50 $22.00 Child $0.40 10/$4.00 - Student $0.50 10/$5.00 $15.00 Senior $0.75 - - PERFORMANCE OF THE SYSTEM 1986 1987 1988 1989 Service Utilization Rides per capita per year: 74.27 67.90 67.00 66.7 Passengers per vehicle hour: 44.22 41.16 40.0 38.0 Amount of Service Vehicle hours per capita: 1.68 1.65 1.67 1.75 Cost Efficiency Operating cost per veh. hour: $36.78 $37.69 $39.41 $39.73 Cost Effectiveness Operating cost per passenger: $0.83 $0.92 $0.98 $1.04 Financial Performance Revenue to cost ratio: 56.6% 56.3% 55.6% 53.0% Average Fare Fare box revenue per pass: $0.46 $0.50 $0.53 $0.54 The city's ridership has been in decline and its Transit Manager blamed the decline on the economic recession in Saskatchewan, as well as the Provincial Fuel Tax rebate to automobile drivers. In a soft economy, he says the reaction to transit fares is very elastic. In 1987 the fares were increased from $.60 to $.75 and ridership dropped by 700,000. Some ridership was again lost when the fare was increased by $.05 in March 1990, in spite of the fact that Saskatoon has the lowest average fares among the cities studied. The last three months of 1990 saw a ten percent increase in ridership, which may have been related, he guesses, to advertising about the environmental benefits of transit or to an increase in the price of fuel. Saskatoon had the lowest operating costs of all the cities studied, as well as the lowest fares. Although the frequency of service is low compared to larger cities, the rides per capita are comparable to a lot of larger centres and the service better utilized by passengers in Saskatoon than in Regina. In 1989, Saskatoon showed 66.7 rides per person in comparison to Regina's 47.7. Saskatoon's system carries 12 million trips a year, compared to Regina's 8.5 million. The manager believes in an aggressive program of community outreach - visiting schools, universities and business associations - to try to acquaint people with transit and get them involved in planning new approaches. Secondly, he employs 'time-transfer' and 'clockface' scheduling programs to make the existing system as efficient and convenient as possible for its users. And, thirdly, he seems to be assisted in his efforts by a 'community culture' that is more supportive of public transit than is Regina's. The Provincial government is car-oriented and this creates a different atmosphere for transit in the city of Regina, where the Province is the biggest employer. GOVERNMENT ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES: SASKATCHEWAN In Saskatchewan, both operation and funding of transit are now entirely municipal responsibilities. The Province used to pay 50% of vehicle capital purchases as well as a subsidy to the operating deficit and per capita operation program but, as of 1990, discontinued transit subsidies. The only exception is transportation for the disabled, to which the Province has held to the 1988 subsidy level for the last three budgets. In contrast to the deplorable funding situation, Saskatchewan has the best legislation of all the provinces for integrating land-use and transportation planning. The Planning and Development Act gives municipalities the power to create standards and conditions for the provision of public transit in development plans, zoning bylaws, and subdivision regulations. SASKATOON Because the transit system is a municipal department, Mr. Ross believes there is more contact and co-operation between engineers, planners and transit operators. When a developer decides on an area, the transit department will give him a sketch plan in advance suggesting the layout of streets and walkways. The transit department has one member on the Technical Planning Committee which reviews plans and makes recommendations to the Municipal Planning Committee (planning board). The transit department also reports to the Works and Utilities Committee of Council. Saskatoon appears to make more use of transit planning powers and support the transit Manager in his requests to a greater extent than other cities. He said they were successful in getting roadways where they needed them in the 1970s and early '80s. However, during hard times, Council will allow homes to be added to a subdivision, even if those homes will not be adequately served. The city itself is also a major developer. BACKGROUND: Since the population of Saskatoon is not growing very much, Urban Planning is not a major issue, nor is there any major initiative to expand services. The current Provincial Fuel Tax is a problem. Until 1987, public transit vehicles had been exempt from fuel tax. Back in 1982, the new PC government removed the fuel tax from private autos. In 1987, they restored the fuel tax on all vehicles, but virtually exempted the private auto. There is not a problem with congestion, relative to Toronto. Speaking generally, Mr. Ross said that land-use is a key factor in transit and that transit should lead in development. New bedroom communities should be built around a strong transit core, such as rail or busways and should be as self-sufficient as possible. The planning of industrial areas is important. You don't want industry to move to lightly used areas and then expect transit, he said. One story office buildings and strip parking lots create the need for expressways. Smog is not a problem, but people are beginning to change their attitude about issues such as global warming. CUTA's environmental report was endorsed by Council and sent to the Ministry of the Environment. They are using the CUTA report in their advertising: "Help save the environment and money too." A radio ad features an environmental group running toward a bus stop, doing their thing. CURRENT PLANS: In the fall of 1990, City Council approved a resolution to the effect that increased use of public transit will result in a reduction of fossil fuel pollutants, urging the provincial government to remove the Fuel Tax on transit systems and to restore Transit Assistance Grants to the municipalities. This resolution was sent to the Saskatchewan Urban Municipal Association (SUMA) for consideration at their meeting in January 1991. This could very well become part of a political campaign in the next election. Mr. Ross suggested that Greenpeace could make a contribution by promoting a different style of living in Canada. We must become unmarried to our cars in the next 10 years, he said. NOTES 1 Canadian Urban Transit Association (CUTA), Operating Characteristics of Member Systems (1986- 1987, 1987-1988, 1988-1989), Suite 1101, 55 York St. Toronto, Ont. M5J IR7 2 A.H. Turrittin, "Urban Transit in Canada's Cities", unpublished manuscript Jan. 31, 1987, Department of Sociology, York University, North York, Ontario. 3 Ibid. 4 Ibid. 5 Information from Ontario Urban Transit Association (OUTA), Suite 1101, 55 York Street, Toronto, Ontario M5J IR7. 6 Ibid. 7 Michael Renner, Rethinking the Role of the Automobile, Worldwatch Paper #84, (Washington D.C.: Worldwatch Institute, June 1988), p. 9. 8 Ibid., p. 35. 9 Marcia D. Lowe, Alternatives to the Automobile: Transport for Livable Cities, Worldwatch Paper #98, (Washington D.C.: Worldwatch Institute, October 1990), p. 12. 10 Renner, Paper #84. 11 Canadian Urban Transit Assoc. and the Roads and Transportation Association of Canada (CUTA/RTAC), Canadian Transit Handbook, 2nd ed., 27-18. 12 Transport 2000, Ontario. "Environmental, Social and Economic/Technical Considerations in the Choice of Public Transit Technology: Engine and Electric Buses for Toronto Transit Commission", Report #91.1. P.O. Box 6418 Station A, Toronto M5W IX3 13 Turrittin, Canadian Cities. 14 Ibid. 15 Ibid. 16 Patricia Lush, "Transit Weaknesses leave riders in the cold", The Globe and Mail, January 14, 199 1, p. 15. 17 Brian Fawcett, Fifth Column, The Globe and Mail, Dec. 7, 1990. 18 Jeffrey Kenworthy and Peter Newman, Cities and Automobile Dependence: An International Sourcebook (Aldershot, England: Gower, 1989). 19 G.S. Pushkarev and J.M. Zupan, Public Transportation and Land Use Policy (Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1977). 20 CUTA/RTAC, Handbook. 21 Pushkarev and Zupan, Public Transportation. 22 Metropolitan Toronto Planning Department, The GTA: Concepts for the Future, November 1990. 23 CUTA/RTAC Handbook. 24 Jane Jacobs, The Death and Life of Great American Cities, (Vintage Books, New York, 1961). 25 Michael Replogle, President, Institute for Transportation and Development Policy, Washington D.C. "Sustainable Transportation Strategies for World Development", presented at the World Conference of Local Governments for a Sustainable Future. The United Nations, New York, September 7, 1990. 26 Ibid. 27 CUTA/RTAC, Handbook. 28 Ibid. 29 Presentation by the Ontario Urban Transit Association to the Standing Committee on General Government re: "Bill 159, An Act to Amend the Planning Act", Queen's park, Ontario, February 24, 1982. 30 CUTA/RTAC, Handbook. 31 Ibid. 32 Ibid. 33 Ibid. 31 Ibid. 32 Ibid. 33 Ibid. 34 Dr. Juri Pill, General Manager, Administration and Planning, Toronto Transit Commission, 1900 Yonge Street, Toronto M4S 1Z2, 416-393-3913, interviewed October 1990. 35 University of Toronto/York University Joint Program in Transportation Data Management Group, Transportation Tomorrow Survey: Travel Survey Summary for the Greater Toronto Area, June 1989. 36 OUTA, Presentation re: Bitt 159. 37 "Greening Ontario's Transportation: A Public Campaign", Brief presented at press conference on June 12, 1990, by Greenpeace, Pollution Probe, Environmentalists Plan Transportation (EPT), and Transport 2000, Ontario. 38 Udo Stillich, Presentation to Mississauga City Council, on behalf of Environmentalists Plan Transportation, March 1991. 39 Steve Munroe, Presentation to public hearing by Economic Development and Planning Committee of Metro Toronto Council, February 4, 1991. 40 Turittin, Canadian Cities. 41 Ibid. 42 Transport 2000, "Engine and Electric Buses 43 IBI Group, Greater Toronto Area: Urban Structure Concepts Study, prepared for the Greater Toronto Co-ordinating Committee, June 1990. 44 Presentations to Economic Development and Planning Committee of Metro Toronto Council, February 4, 1991, by Greenpeace, Pollution Probe, Transport 2000, Toronto Environmental Alliance and Environmentalists Plan Transportation. 45 Sean Rathwell, Senior Transit Planner, OC Transpo, 1500 St. Laurent Blvd., Ottawa K1G OZ8, 613-748-4414, interviewed Oct. 1990 46 Glen Leicester, Service Planning Manager, B.C. Transit, 1200 West 73rd Avenue, Vancouver, B.C. V6P 6M2, 613-264-5228. Wayne Pledger, Transit Engineer, City of Vancouver, 748-4414. Interviews held October 1990. 47,48,49,50,51,52,53,54 Turrittin, Canadian Cities. 55 Patricia Lush, "Blue-faced cyclists waiting for Greenprint", The Globe and Mail, October 22, 1990. 56 Ibid. 57 City of Vancouver, Clouds of Change: Final Report of the City of Vancouver Task Force on Atmospheric Change, June 1990. Adopted with amendments by Council on October 22, 1990. 58 The Globe and Mail, October 22, 1990. 59 Don Hnetka, Director, City of Regina Transit, P.O. Box 1790, Regina, Saskatchewan S4P 3C8, 306-777-7775, interview October 1990. 60 CUTA, The Environmental benefits of Urban Transit: A Report of the Transit/Environment Task Force, Toronto, April 1990. 61 Al Ross, Transit Manager, Saskatoon Transit System, 301-24th Street, Saskatoon, Sask. S7L 6R8, 306-975-3140, interview Oct. 1990. GENERAL INTERVIEWS WITH EXPERTS IN THE FIELDS OF TRANSPORTATION & LAND-USE PLANNING John Bakker, Ph.D. Professor of Civil Engineering in Transportation, University of Alberta Al Cormier Executive Vice-President, Canadian Urban Transit Association, and Transportation Advisor to the Federation of Canadian Municipalities (FCM) John Livey Director of Policy Development, Metropolitan Toronto Planning Department Dave Roberts Manager, Centre for Transit Improvement, Ontario Urban Transit Association (OUTA) Doug Thwaites Director, Transportation Policy, The Regional Municipality of Peel and former Transportation Advisor to the FCM