Last week I had the opportunity to attend the second day of the Ontario Bike Summit (#OBS2012) in downtown Toronto. I went as part of the Morning Glory Cycling Club’s Advocacy Committee, but I was thinking as a cycling commuter, recreational cyclist, driver, engineer and planner. It was a great event to promote cycling in Ontario. #OBS2012 is the brain child of Share the Road [www.sharetheroad.ca]. This year Share the Road set the following mandate for the conference (partial):

• To share information on how to develop a “Share the Road’ campaign in partnership with local law enforcement, media and other community partners
• To demonstrate innovative methods for mobilizing community resources, creating momentum and achieving success
• To share research and information on the connection between public health and the built environment
• To share tips and ideas on how to work more effectively with local governments to advance cycling – including strategies for securing more support from the province
• To share data and research that you will help you “make the case” for enhanced cycling
• To Inspire bicycle friendly cities on the 5 “Es” of a Bicycle Friendly Community: Environment, Encouragement, Environment, Education and Evaluation and Planning

Here are some of the great things I learned at the Conference:

1.  CAA Bike Assist Program: Have a CAA membership? Good news, it covers you on your bike! “If you run into a problem that cannot be fixed on the spot, CAA will transport you and your bicycle to wherever.” More on the CA Bike Assist program can be found here
2. More people would ride more if cycling was Safer and there was more cycling Infrastructure (i.e bike lanes, shared lanes, etc). Some numbers from CAA: 60% of members and non-members from CAA want to see more cycling infrastructure in cities, 70% of Ontario’s population thinks more needs to be done for cycling (i.e. Share the road campaigns, safety, awareness, etc). Share the Road is asking the Ministry of Transportation (MTO) to dedicate $25M (1/8th of 1% of MTO’s budget) of their budget to cycling infrastructure.
3. Cycling safety and an increase in infrastructure will only be improved through collaboration. Partnerships must be formed with municipal, provincial and federal governments. Governments must work together and not in silos; health care, transportation, planning, municipal housing and affairs, culture, tourism, etc. Partnerships must be made with the public and private sectors.

Ask The Tough Questions:

I challenged the members of parliament on their current cycling strategy. A lot of the discussion on Wednesday circled around the ‘war on cars’. I know that it has been at the forefront of discussion in Toronto because of Mayor Ford. I challenged the MPPs to move away from the polarized discussion of cycling commuters and cars. I asked why cycling as a recreation was not a part of their discussion. I tabled my question stating that I was an engineer, an environmental planner, occasionally a cycling commuter but I was asking the question as a recreational cyclist.

What I heard back. Recreational cycling used to be a part of the discussion, but cycling was not a popular sport at the time. The shift was then to commuters since they were the most visible. But no MPP answered the question! Share the Road Board Members and a few other key speakers really appreciated the question. The idea of bringing recreational cycling back into the conversation is on the horizon. Let’s see what happens next.

Share the Road:

Learn more about Share the Road and sign up for their newsletter here. Share the Road’s goal is to make Ontario more bicycle friendly for everyone by: Enhancing access for bicyclists on roads and trails, Improving safety for all bicyclists, and Educating citizens on the value and importance of safe bicycling for healthy lifestyles and communities. Share the Road represents all cyclists – children, tourists, commuters, recreational riders, mountain bikers and racers.

I had a great time at #OBS2012 and look forward to attending again next year. If you have any other questions about the conference send me an email and I’d be happy to try and answer your question.

Happy Cycling.

(A slightly different version of this blog post can be found on the Morning Glory Blog Site)

A co-worker was going on mat leave so we all decided to have lunch together. We picked a restaurant close to work and agreed to meet at the lobby 15 minutes before our reservation. We congregated in the lobby chatting, waiting for the stragglers to come down from their offices, and then the debate over who was going to drive began!

Drive!? ‘You want to drive?’ I asked. I was absolutely adamant that I was walking. It was a beautiful sunny day. I wanted to stretch my legs. But my friends insisted on driving. I overheard ‘I want to make sure I’m back in good time.’

I just GoogleMaps’d the location and it is 850m! I think I arrived one minute after they did. Returning back to the office, with the left turns and the lights, I was back at my desk before my office mates.

We relate our cars to efficient, time-saving machines, but sometimes they are quite the opposite.

I decided to look up what the average distance people are willing to walk to amenities.

In order to get the points for being close to amenities under the CaGBC/USGBC LEED for New Homes one has to construct within a half mile/800m of a frequent transit stop or community resources. I also did a quick Google search and found on average people are willing to walk between 1/4 mile/400m and 1/2 mile/800m.

Physical and mental health is on the decline and obesity is on the rise. A simple way to help combat this is to walk to lunch.

According to Commute Solutions: The True Cost of Driving it costs me $18.50 per day to drive to work!

Driving is not just the cost of gas and the amortization of your vehicle; do not forget to include insurance, license and registration, tires, maintenance, etc. And there are all the other things we so frequently forget to include, the costs to maintain the roadways, pollution, noise, etc.

Although I drive to work most days I have made changes to try and reduce my carbon footprint. I am fortunate and have some flexibility in my schedule, so I either work and earlier or later shift to avoid peak congestion. I also plan to start split commute; subway and biking, again at off peak times to bring my bike on the subway and to avoid as many cars as possible. If I get really adventurous I may even start running to or from work to try and bump up my running mileage!

On October 25th all of Ontario goes to vote their municipal leaders. Here in Toronto the race for mayor seems to be cooling down. While candidates continue to campaign, Rob Ford seems to be storming ahead with the lead.

What? Rob Ford? The man who has insulted at least half of the city’s population; he announced he was opposed to gay marriage and does not support immigrants coming to Toronto. He’s been arrested for impaired driving. But this blog is not meant to be about bashing Ford (I’ll save that for another day).

When we go to the polls on October 25th we will all be voting for the future of our cities and towns. Toronto is at a cross-roads. With construction having started on the Spadina Subway extension and the current transit system somewhat in limbo the city needs a mayor that will revitalize transit and make it a priority of their term.

What does the city need for Transit?

Last week I vented about Rossi’s proposal to tunnel the Allen expressway down to the Gardiner. My theme with transit is similar; Toronto needs to work with what it has before unrolling expensive, ostentatious, impossible transit.

Currently Toronto is serviced by 3 subways, a Rapid Transit line (an extension of the Bloor-Danforth subway line), 11 streetcars and (≈) 144 daily bus routes. Wow, sounds pretty robust. But it’s still inefficient and people opt for their car over transit.

In addition each of the suburban communities has a transit system, Mississauga, Brampton, Viva (servicing York Region), as well as, GO Transit and VIA Rail (servicing a variety of communities). And while the transit operations are starting to ‘work’ together (under PRESTO) there is no seamless system for transit riders to move between the systems (something else to take into consideration when voting).

What can we do better?

1. Work with what we’ve got: When you look at the system map it’s clear that Toronto has the means to have a great transit system, it just needs some tweaks (see suggestions below). London, UK drastically improved reliability when it introduced a congestion charging scheme. First people chose transit over cars due to the cost savings. With fewer cars on the road and dedicated bus lanes, transit was more efficient, even faster than your personal automobile so people switched to transit for efficiency.
2. Dedicated streetcar and bus lanes: Not only do they improve transit times, they also improve transit reliability
3. Signal Priority: As a bus approaches an intersection the lights change in favour for the bus. This is necessary with dedicated lanes to keep transit vehicles moving on schedule
4. Add to the system: Not new routes, just more vehicles on the routes. People opt for their personal vehicle in off-peak hours because their bus runs every 30mins to hour. Reduce that to ten minutes and more people will choose transit over their vehicles.
5. Permit bicycles on subways during peak hours: The new buses and street cars are equipped with bicycle racks, but you’re still not permitted to bring on the subway during peak hours. People would be much more inclined to switch out of their cars given the means to travel efficiently through the city, which means bringing your bike on the subway any time of the day.

Aside from suggestion 4 all of these examples are very low cost to implement and can improve the reliability of the TTC. But what would cost more having more buses in a dedicated transit lane with signal priority or constructing dedicated streetcar and subway lines?

What are the Candidates Saying

Rob Ford: Ford wants to see more streetcar lines, but as the Transit Toronto blog argues this will only increase congestion. He also wants to see an additional 12km of subway lines along Sheppard Avenue. His final comittment was to for 100km of bike trails (rumour has it these are not to be on Toronto roads). His transit plan was released on youtube and just like the quality of the video, his plan is lackluster.

George Smitherman: Smitherman’s plan is called the Integrated Transit Plan. At the heart of the plan is customer service; including free service for seniors between 1oam and 2pm, a transit charter, and a promise to keep vehicles clean and maintained. Looking at a longer term horizon (10- and 20-years out) Smitherman is committed to extending subway lines and adding more LRT lines.

Rocco Rossi: Rossi has a 5 priorities for improving transit in Toronto, #1 being to build more subways. He also recognizes that Toronto cannot continue to operate as a silo, under priority #2 Rossi recommends a stronger partnership with Metrolinx. While this will improve regional transportation, Rossi ignores a massive part of our current local system, buses.

Sarah Thomson: Again she sees subways as queen bee. She’s going all-out, stating that the city needs another 58km of subway lines (the current system is 70km so she’s trying to almost double it). Thomson does have the most aggressive cycling plan with more than 1000km on-road and 40km off-road through utility corridors.

None of them look to our existing system and how to make it better. Instead they’re promising unrealistic, expensive systems. Smitherman’s plan seems best, work on the small things before tackling the big ones, create a better sense of ‘community’ our transit system and while he spells out big ticket plans, he understands that Toronto needs to keep moving – ‘faster, better, easier and safer’.

Over the next few weeks I’ll look at some of the other relevant issues for Toronto’s Mayoral campaign including municipal taxes, city roads and anything else relevant to sustainable cities and transportation.

A little history…

The Allen Expressway was originally designed to be a connection from the 401 all the way down to the Gardiner, known as the Spadina expressway. Construction began in 1963. Homes were demolished, neighbourhoods destroyed and air pollution was increasing for surrounding residents. Opposition continued to mount. Modifications to the Spadina Expressway were made in 1964, it meant the expropriation and demolition of more homes. by 1966 the city opened the first section from Wilson Avenue down to Lawrence, with a massive, highly efficient connection with the 401. Construction down to Eglinton continued but in 1969 a group led by Alan Powell and Jane Jacobs known as the “Stop Spadina, Save Our City Co-ordinating Committee” (SSSOCCC) formed committed to halting the progress of the Spadina Expressway.

Based on the Eglinton terminus the SSSOCCC won.

What does Toronto really need?

Does Toronto need a buried expressway? Didn’t we learn enough from Boston’s Big Dig? The multi-billion dollar project was way over budget, has not improved efficiency and has not helped reconnect citizens to the waterfront.

Toronto needs roads to function more efficiently, better bus transportation on existing roads and traffic engineers to work together to get our city moving again, from pedestrians, to cyclists, to buses and finally vehicles.

Toronto needs a mayor who can think about what the citizens really need. Do they need their taxes raised to fund more projects? Or do they need a mayor who can work with what the city already has and make it better?

Give me a KISS

Do you remember when you were much younger and someone told you to follow the KISS principle? Keep It Simple Stupid. While I was driving back from class I thought of a few things the city could do before it was forced to construct an underground expressway

• Eliminate illegal parking/stopping on streets during day hours: Bathurst was crawling today. Why? Because a delivery truck decided to park facing south on the northbound lanes. Instead of two lanes of traffic, it was reduced to one. In addition the one lane competed for right turn space, since the driver had parked so close to the intersection. Flow would have been uninterrupted without the truck illegally stopped.
• Dedicated Pedestrian Crossing at all major intersections: I wrote a blog on this before. The Dundas square intersection almost ‘gets’ it. But instead there should be no pedestrian crossing when traffic is moving. It is safer for pedestrians to cross when the intersection is completely stopped.
• Eliminate Street Parking: You cut capacity in half with street parking. Facilities can be built in nearby areas. I see the other side of the argument, that it hurts businesses where street parking has been eliminated. However, the loss of business due to congestion is likely greater than the cost of lost business.
• Dedicated Bus and Carpool lanes: Their benefits are well documented and require little infrastructure for implementation.
• Signal Timing: Ever feel like you get a green light as the one in front of you turns red? City Traffic Engineers need to set routes as ‘main lines.’ Consecutive green lights would allow people to come into and out of the city easily.

Instead of dreaming of elaborate, expensive, complicated infrastructure, lets go back to the basics. Instead the city should work with its existing infrastructure. Make the roads move efficiently. Make buses move along those routes efficiently. Make it attractive to live in the city again. Work with all the great infrastructure that exists in the city before we bring in more.

Maybe Rossi has a vision. Or maybe he thinks a massive elevator will transport vehicles up to meet the Gardiner.

While his end of camp tag line seems comical now, Toronto’s bus system is depleting so rapidly that it might take a year for you to see your friends again (ok, not really). Unless you live directly on the subway there is little hope that you can travel on the transit system efficiently.

40 minutes to go 5 kilometers?

Reported in the Globe and Mail yesterday, Toronto’s bus routes “fail those who need it most.” According to their research only those who are part of the ‘creative class‘ can afford to live on the subway routes. The remainder, the working and the service class can’t afford to live along the subway, despite needing it the most. Unable to afford a car, insurance and parking these people are forced to use ‘The Better Way‘.

Would a Congestion Charging Scheme Improve Bus Scheduling in Toronto?

In early 2003 London introduced a congestion charging scheme; camera’s were installed and charged people who drove into the city. Rates varied by time of day and day of the week. People who lived in Central London were charged a tax to own a car. And more buses were added to there vast route network just prior to the congestion charging scheme implementation.

The overall result: there was a 30% reduction in automobile traffic. Reliability of the buses increased. With reliability increasing more people saw buses as an attractive alternative to get in and an around town.

Toronto currently does not have a congestion charging scheme. Individuals commute to and from the suburbs, local Toronto residents drive anywhere and everywhere with no other viable option available. In the end the TTC, along with individual automobiles, competes for space on the road.

Forget “fancy, European-style light-rail transit” and subways. Create dedicated bus lanes and carpool lanes during rush-hour. Implement a congestion charging scheme. Promote living where we work. Once again make all aspects of the TTC ‘The Better Way.’

Through the month of January Toronto was plagued by a string of tragic pedestrian deaths. In total there were 14 deaths in Toronto, some of them quite tragic. Between transport trucks, streetcars and busses the pedestrians stood no chance.

Who was to Blame?

The debate as to who was at fault in these accidents has been a topic of discussion in the media. Whether it is the cars or the pedestrians who are not paying attention is the question. But either way isn’t it both parties faults?

As a pedestrian I don’t think I’m would want to play chicken with a transport truck. Even a SmartCar!

In 2007 the City of Toronto did a study, The Pedestrian Collision Study. Here is a selection of the conclusions of the study:

• 83% of pedestrian/motor vehicle collisions resulted in either minimal or minor injuries
• 12% of pedestrian/motor vehicle collisions resulted in major injuries or fatalities
• 50% of fatalities in pedestrian/motor vehicle collisions were seniors (aged 65+).
• 72% of pedestrian/motor vehicle collisions involved male drivers versus 28% for female drivers.
• Pedestrian/motor vehicle collisions occurred most during the autumn and winter seasons.
• Pedestrian/motor vehicle collisions occurred more often in the downtown area.
• Pedestrian/motor vehicle collisions occurred more often along arterial roads.
• Pedestrian/motor vehicle collisions distributed as follow: at intersections (47%), at non-intersections (37%), and other/unknown (16%).

The City of Toronto did a similar bike-car collision study in 2006. The results can be found here.

What I was reminded of yesterday was does it really matter who is at fault? In the end the pedestrian ends up dead or seriously injured.

How Can we Prevent Future Deaths

1. Alertness: Most importantly both drivers and pedestrians need to be more aware – pedestrian’s in particular. Again as a pedestrian if you play chicken with an automobile the automobile always wins
2. Turning – Left or right, as drivers we should be more aware when turning. Right turns are often worse. On a red light drivers are only looking for on-coming traffic. When lights are green drivers often forget about pedestrians and rush to make the turn
3. Updating Our Intersections: The ‘Scramble’ intersections of downtown Toronto are great, but we can make them even safer. In New Zealand and Japan pedestrians are only allowed to cross when all lights are red. In this manner cars and pedestrians are not competing entities
4. Slow Down: the issue of decreasing speed limits in cities has been raised. Unofficially people in Toronto drive 15-20km/hr over the speed limit so decreasing the speed limit would give drivers more response time
5. Txt Msgs, Email and iPods: Pedestrian’s cannot just walk in oblivion. Be aware of your surroundings and focus on the busy road around you, instead of the latest gadget.

As much as we try in North America, it is almost impossible to give up driving. Not because we aren’t trying but because we lack the infrastructure to get anywhere without a car.

Tips for efficiency

Thanks to Sierra Magazine’s The Green Life: Daily Tips for Living Well and Doing Good for providing these simple tips.

I think the most important tip of all is to drive a fuel efficient car. With the ‘cash for clunkers’ program in the US individuals can trade in their old, gas-guzzling, monsters for smaller more efficient cars; unfortunately at this time Canada does not have a similar program, but Chrysler Canada is offering an incentive.

The reality is everyone does have to drive at times. By reducing the amount we drive and following these simple tips we can all help to reduce the footprints of our cars.

When looking at the courses available this morning I was required to request permission from the instructor to enter the course, not an uncommon thing. I am interested in Dr. Heather MacLean’s Sustainability of Engineering Activities and what caught my attention were the questions she was asking.

Why do you want to take this course?

That was the first of the three questions she posed for our applications and really all students should ask that question before they take the course. Just because it is mandatory stop and think about why you need to take the course, it may change your perspective and improve your grade. Dr. MacLean asked what our previous research experience was and finally what our backgrounds were with sustainability.

My path to where I am now.

That last question really got me thinking about where I am today. In high school had you asked me if I would be a transportation engineer or interested in sustainable development I likely would have said, ‘No.’ Like so many before me somewhere along the way my focus shifted. I was first inspired to go into civil engineering after Laura Taylor’s Urban Geography class when I was doing my economics and urban geography degree. I didn’t believe you could affect urban form without understanding the science behind it and off I went to pursue engineering. While in engineering traffic congestion really frustrated me and I wanted to change it. What I have learned since then is that building more roads, building wider roads is not the answer. Instead it is about compromise, it is about shifting what is considered the cultural norm and accepting that not everyone will share my vision.

My quest for learning continues as I try to finish my masters this fall. Who knows where my learning path will lead me and what will inspire me next, but I’m sure whatever it is will lead to some interesting discussions on my blog!

GM – Forward Thinking? Future of Car Makers For North America? I just saw the new GM commercial last night that essentially apologizes to the Canadian citizens and asks for forgiveness; the new campaign is appropriately called ‘Re:Inventing GM.’ GM wants to be looked at as the future of ‘green’ cars and a North American leading auto producer. But is that really possible?

GM is trying to appeal to all the audiences – their world-wide interweb site boasts Flikr, Facebook and Twitter. They have a video on the Chevrolet volt, they have a letter to ‘all Canadians,’ directors statements and news on their restructuring plan. In their commercial they declare that they are getting rid of the unsuccessful brands (does this finally mean the end of the commercial Hummer?)

If fair is fair – are the governments going to bail out other companies that promise to restructure in an effort to be profitable, when in reality profitability is a lofty goal?

In the end I have much more respect for Ford. Ford has not applied for bankruptcy protection and is looking to become the leader in sustainable, environmentally friendly cars.

Is there enough room for GM, Chrysler and Ford?

The next few months will be interesting. With both GM and Chrysler receiving huge bailout packages, both the Canadian and US Governments are hoping to have a thriving auto industry again. The difference between now and the ‘old glory days,’ the world has caught up. Kia, Toyota, Hyundai, Honda, Audi, Volkswagen, Volvo, etc … all of these companies also offer affordable, environmentally friends .. and watch out Frank Stronach with Magna/Opel should make a push to lead the sustainable car market here. In the end I don’t think it is feasible to sustain all of these North American brands, meaning the US and Canadian citizens have possibly just sunk their money in two un-saveable companies!