TDM SUPPORTIVE GUIDELINESFOR DEVELOPMENT APPROVALS

ACT TDM Summit HalifaxOctober, 2008

2

Purpose

INTRODUCTION

• Includes cities from east to west (Vancouver to Halifax)

• All shapes and sizes

To review current TDM practice related to land development in Canada for the purpose of establishing a set of guidelines for implementing TDM into the land development approvals process

＋ Reviewed TDM experience with land development

across the country:

＋ Funded by Transport Canada, ACT Canada, and

several municipalities across Canada

3

Presentation Overview

＋ Current Practices: What are municipalities doing?

＋ Recommendations: How can TDM in the approvals

process be improved?

INTRODUCTION

＋ Case Studies

＋ Prototype Documents

4

Overview – TDM Implementation Tools

＋ Long Term Policy Approaches

＋ Transportation Master Plans

＋ Non Policy Approaches

WHAT ARE THE MUNICIPALITIES DOING?

＋ Council Resolutions

＋ Parking Policy

＋ Official Plans

＋ Short Term Policy Approaches

＋ Guidelines

5

Calgary

Use parking supply and demand as a specific transportation demand management tool: manage the supply of long-stay parking in the Downtown to match a downtown travel to work modal split objective, target the modal split to transit to 60% when a population of 1.25 million is reached, gradually reduce the supply of long-stay parking

Halifax

"HRM shall prepare a Transportation Demand Management Functional Plan as part of the overall Transportation Master Plan to balance the demand for transportation infrastructure with supply and to reduce costs and improve efficiency."

Long Term Approaches: Official Plans

WHAT ARE THE MUNICIPALITIES DOING?

HRM Official Plan, Policy T-10

Calgary Official Plan, 3.3.2.A

6

City of Toronto

Toronto city council passed a resolution in 1990 that requires commercial / employment uses with more than 75 parking spaces to prepare a TDM Plan in support of the development application.

City of Kelowna

Kelowna civic council passed a resolution that required all municipally owned parking lots in the downtown area to set the cost of monthly parking fees at 10% above that of a monthly transit pass to encourage transit usage.

Short Term Approaches: Council Resolutions

WHAT ARE THE MUNICIPALITIES DOING?

7

Short Term Approaches: TDM Supportive Parking Policies in the Zoning By-Law

WHAT ARE THE MUNICIPALITIES DOING?

＋ Requirements for vanpool / carpool / car-sharing spaces

＋ Parking maximums

＋ Examples: Toronto, Vancouver, Calgary, Ottawa, Regina

＋ Cash-In-Lieu (CIL) provisions

＋ Bicycle parking requirements

＋ Encourage shared parking

＋ Parking requirements for different uses not excessive (e.g.

shopping centres)

＋ Parking reductions / credits for sustainable measures

8

Zoning By-Law: Examples

WHAT ARE THE MUNICIPALITIES DOING?

9

Non-Policy Approaches: Municipalities in A Leadership Role

＋ Many municipalities establishing TDM programs for municipal employees

＋ Some have hired TDM co-ordinators to manage TDM

programs

“To demonstrate its commitment to leadership, the City will act as a role model by implementing measures that enhance its employee’s options for commuting and business travel”.

City of Ottawa Official Plan, Section 2.3.1.3

WHAT ARE THE MUNICIPALITIES DOING?

＋ Creation of TMA’s to support sustainable transportation

options

Photo Credit: Colin McConnell/Toronto Star

10

＋ Municipalities are encouraging LEED, but many developers

are doing it on their own accord

＋ Is a good way to capitalize on current trend of ‘green-

thinking’

＋ There are 5 transportation related credits through LEED:

Non-Policy Approaches: LEED Incorporation

WHAT ARE THE MUNICIPALITIES DOING?

＋ Credit 4.1 - Public Transportation Access ＋ Credit 4.2 - Bicycle Storage and Changing Rooms＋ Credit 4.3 - Hybrid and Alternate Fuel Vehicles＋ Credit 4.4 - Parking Capacity＋ Credit 7.1 - Heat Island Effect: Non-Roof

＋ New LEED Neighbourhood Development

(ND) Certification in Canada

11

＋ Some municipalities require TDM checklists

＋ Examples include: City of Edmonton: Smart

Choices; Regional Municipality of York; Town of

Markham, Ontario; New Westminster BC

＋ Work best for rezoning applications, but can be

applied to many processes

TDM Checklists

WHAT ARE THE MUNICIPALITIES DOING?

12

＋ Larger municipalities are requiring TDM plans for significant

development

＋ Toronto and Montreal require TDM plans for specific

development

＋ Hospitals, Universities, Large Employment Sites

＋ Outlines TDM measures that will be implemented

TDM Plans / Mobility Management Plans

WHAT ARE THE MUNICIPALITIES DOING?

＋ Often TDM Plans are prepared not because they are

required but because there is a need to improve mobility

13

Context is Everything

＋ Municipalities vary greatly in size, shape, make-up, and level of traffic congestion

HOW CAN TDM IN LAND DEVELOPMENT BE IMPROVED?

＋ Three classes developed to represent the different types of urban contexts that exist:

＋ Class 1: Low Density / Low Congestion

＋ Class 2: Medium Density / Moderate Congestion

＋ Class 3: High Density / Heavy Congestion

＋ Three TDM Approaches developed based on the three types of urban contexts:

TDM Light, TDM Moderate, and TDM Aggressive

＋ Approach to TDM and land development will depend on the urban context of the area

14

Context is Everything: Three Urban Contexts, Three TDM Approaches

HOW CAN TDM IN LAND DEVELOPMENT BE IMPROVED?

Class 1Low Density / Low Congestion

Approach: TDM Light

Class 2Medium Density / Moderate Congestion

Approach: “TDM Moderate”

Class 3High Density / Heavy Congestion

Approach: TDM Aggressive

Density Least dense Medium to high density High density

Mobility Greatest mobility challengesMixed presence of mobility choice in area

Large number of accessible competitive mobility choices

Congestion Minimal Moderate to heavy during peak periodsExtended levels of congestion throughout the day

Mixed UseLittle or none. Wide separation of land uses

Moderate amounts of mixed usesLarge mix of uses with walk-able services located throughout the area

Transit Service Non-competitiveBus-based, with headways of 10 – 15 minutes during peak periods

Well developed with elements of high-order transit

Modal SplitCar dominated. Typical mode split is 5 percent or less

Car-oriented, typical transit mode split 10 – 15 percent

Modal split with a substantial use of walking, automobile, transit and cycling

Population Range Less than 100,000 100,000 – 500,000 Greater than 500,000

ExamplesKelowna BC, Lethbridge AB, Stratford ON, Waterloo ON, St. John NB, Charlottetown PEI

Hamilton ON, Halifax NS, Regina SK, Mississauga ON, London ON, Kelowna, BC, Laval QC, Surrey BC

Ottawa ON, Calgary AB, Winnipeg MB, Montreal QC, Vancouver BC, Toronto, ON, Edmonton AB, Mississauga ON

15

Two Sets of Recommendations Developed

＋ Municipal staff interact with TDM in the approvals process in two ways

HOW CAN TDM IN LAND DEVELOPMENT BE IMPROVED?

＋ Policy Planning

＋ Development Review (Planning and Engineering)

TDM and Land Development

Policy Planning Development Review

TDM Light TDM Moderate TDM Aggressive

＋ Each department applies TDM differently, but maintains the three TDM approaches

TDM Light TDM Moderate TDM Aggressive

Applied through: Policy Applied though: Checklists, TDM Plans

16

Policy Planning Recommendations

＋ TDM program for municipal employees

＋ Implement short term TDM policies

HOW CAN TDM IN LAND DEVELOPMENT BE IMPROVED?

＋ Promote relationship between parking and TDM

＋ Educate municipal staff

＋ Review parking standards

＋ Implement long term polices

17

Policy Planning Recommendations

HOW CAN TDM IN LAND DEVELOPMENT BE IMPROVED?

＋ Integrated with land use, transportation and

implementation sections

＋ Recommended policies

＋ Based on three TDM approaches

18

＋ Key steps provided for planning and engineering staff to

follow when reviewing development applications

Development Review Recommendations

HOW CAN TDM IN LAND DEVELOPMENT BE IMPROVED?

1. Determine the urban context

2. Review elements of the proposal and determine TDM applicability

3. Apply TDM evaluation

4. Review TDM evaluation with applicant (and seek improvements if necessary)

＋ TDM Checklist

＋ TDM Plans

5. Incorporate TDM recommendations into staff report to council

19

Overview

＋ Assembled case studies from across the country

＋ Reflect various types of developments

＋ Generally were required through other processes

(i.e. rezoning) rather than lack of TDM land use

policies

CASE STUDIES

＋ Useful background documents and attachments

provided

20

＋ 270 dwelling units and 6,500m2

commercial and office space

uses.

＋ Rezoning and site specific by-

law for the project approved in

late January 2008

Grovenor / Glenora Redevelopment Edmonton, AB

Case Studies

＋ Established low density

neighbourhood.

＋ NE corner of Stony Plain Road

and 142 Street.

Source: Glenora Towers sales website:

http://67.15.243.6/~lovemyki/vision_register/index.html

21

＋ Provided several recommendations:

＋ Resulted in checklists to rate new

developments

Grovenor / Glenora Redevelopment

Case Studies

＋ Evolved from council directive

＋ TOD implementation strategy

＋ Integrated approach to land

development

＋ Improved consideration of

pedestrians

22

＋ Achieved 5 star score

＋ Used as part of approval rationale

Grovenor / Glenora Redevelopment

Case Studies

＋ Extensive public consultation process in 2007

＋ Community very concerned with redevelopment

23

Southeast False Creek (SEFC), Vancouver, BC

Case Studies

＋ 36 hectares

＋ Brownfield development

＋ Mixed-use

＋ 14,000 residents

＋ Athlete’s village for 2010

Olympics

24

Southeast False Creek (SEFC)

Case Studies

＋ Initiated in 1990

＋ ODP finalized in 2007 and Green Building Strategy

updated in July 2008.

＋ SEFC Transportation Study completed in

2002.

＋ SEFC Policy Statement adopted in 1999

(amended in 2004).

＋ Draft Official Development Plan (ODP) and

Green Building Strategy released in 2004.

25

Southeast False Creek (SEFC)

Case Studies

＋ SEFC Policy Statement (1999)

＋ Reinforces priority of sustainable

transportation modes

＋ TDM plans required to reduce traffic and

parking demand in SEFC.

＋ Based on the development of a streetcar /

LRT system

26

Southeast False Creek (SEFC)

Case Studies

＋ SEFC Transportation Study – TDM Policies (Nov 2002)

＋ Reviewed the impacts of applying TDM measures in SEFC

＋ Short-list of sustainable transportation strategies:

＋ Community transit pass

＋ Community transportation co-ordinator

＋ Car-sharing service

＋ Parking management

＋ Transit Oriented Design

＋ Other

27

Southeast False Creek (SEFC)

Case Studies

＋ SEFC ODP TDM Policies – TDM Policies

(April 2007)

＋ Specific land use and transportation

policies.

＋ Implementation and ongoing

monitoring.

＋ Requires minimum parking.

28

Southeast False Creek (SEFC)

Case Studies

＋ SEFC Green Building Strategy – TDM Policies (July 2008)

＋ Requirement of co-op (car-share) vehicle spaces as required by City

＋ Minimum LEED scoring requirements

29

＋ Office development, suburban location,

adjacent to freeway interchange

＋ 672,000 sq. ft. of floor area, 3600

employees over several shifts, 4100

parking spaces

＋ An example of a TDM Plan that would have

been produced, following a LEED approach

Sample Project: Meadowvale Business Park, Mississauga

Prototype Documents

Credit LEED RequirementPotential Constructed

SSc4.1Public Transportation Access

Locate building within 800m of a commuter rail, light rail or subway station or within 400m of 2 or more public bus lines with frequent service.

Located within 400m of Derry Rd Bus Routes and 350m of Mississauga Rd Bus Routes

SSc4.2Bicycle Storage & Change Rooms

Secure bicycle storage with change/shower facilities within 183 m of building entrance for 5% of building occupants or as per Zoning By-law subject to CIR due to regional variations.

104 bicycle storage spaces

Change/shower facilities for each gender, with a total of 13 showers

None

SSc4.3Parking Capacity

Provide minimum parking & designated parking for carpools or car co-ops equal to 10% of non-visitor parking spaces.

2016 stalls 202 preferred

parking spaces designated for carpools

4100 stalls No carpool spaces

SSc4.4Hybrid & Alternative Fuel Vehicles

Provide hybrid/alternative fuel vehicles for 3% of full-time building occupants and provide preferred parking for these vehicles (subject to CIR for car-share vehicles).

Three (3) hybrid car-share vehicles onsite in designated stalls

None

SSc7.1Heat Island Effect: Non-Roof

Minimum 50% of parking spaces underground or covered by structured parking. 60% covered by structural parking or underground

IDc1Innovation in Design

Identify intent, compliance requirements, submittals, and strategies for the proposed innovation credit.

None

Notes:1. Gross office floor area = 62,430 m2 LEED carpool spaces = 2,016 * 10% = 202**

Space per building occupant = N/A LEED bicycle parking spaces = 2,073 * 5% = 104**Daytime attendance = N/A LEED showers = 104 bicycle spaces ÷ 8 = 13 showers Building Occupants = 3,610 in total; 2,073 at one time LEED hybrid vehicles = 2,073 * 3% ÷ 20 pers/veh = 3** vehiclesMinimum Permitted Zoning By-Law parking = 2,016 spaces

2. Assume 20 members per car share vehicle. ** Subject to verification of building occupancy

Prototype Document – TDM Plan – LEED Approach

31

Prototype Document: TDM Checklist

AS BUILT IMPROVED TDM

32

Prototype Document: TDM Checklist

AS BUILT IMPROVED TDM

33

Prototype Document: TDM Checklist

AS BUILT IMPROVED TDM

34

＋ TDM policies related to land development approvals are currently limited

＋ Improved transportation, land use and implementation policies are important

＋ Context is everything, TDM approach depends on the type of urban context that exists

Summary

＋ TDM supportive parking policies are critical

＋ TDM Checklists and TDM Plans are helpful important implementation tools

35

＋ Study complete

Next Steps

＋ Posted to ACT Canada website….soon!

＋ Available for use by all TDM practitioners

36

Thank You!