URBAN TRANSPORTATION AND DESIGN:
GETTING WHERE WE NEED TO GO
SUSTAINABILITY NETWORKING CONFERENCE
SUMMARY REPORT
MAY 2014
URBAN TRANSPORTATION AND DESIGN:
GETTING WHERE WE NEED TO GO
SUSTAINABILITY NETWORKING CONFERENCE
SUMMARY REPORT
MAY 2014
Prepared by: Jania Chilima and Sharla Daviduik
School of Environment and Sustainability
University of Saskatchewan
Conference Hosts:
Table of Contents
Executive Summary _________________________________________________________________________________________________________1
Conference Overview________________________________________________________________________________________________________2
Panel Discussions ____________________________________________________________________________________________________________3
Themes from the Roundtable Discussions ________________________________________________________________________________9
Conclusion __________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 15
Attendees ___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 16
Facilitators _________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 17
Planning Committee _______________________________________________________________________________________________________ 17
Urban Transportation Resources ________________________________________________________________________________________ 17
Executive Summary
On January 24, 2014, a sustainability networking conference entitled “Urban Transportation and Design: Getting
Where We Need to Go” was held at the Parktown Hotel in Saskatoon. Hosted by the Association of Professional
Engineers and Geoscientists – Saskatchewan (APEGS), the City of Saskatoon, and the School of Environment and
Sustainability (SENS) at the University of Saskatchewan, the conference was intended to give a diverse group of
stakeholders the opportunity to discuss urban transportation issues, addressing both physical infrastructure and
social aspects.
Speakers from the City of Saskatoon, the City of Edmonton, and the University of Saskatchewan introduced the
themes of sprawl and density, lessons learned from other municipalities, transportation behaviour, greenhouse
gas reductions and designing cities for multiple modes of transportation. Conference attendees discussed these
themes at length, reflecting on the information provided by the speakers, and identifying issues, challenges, and
implications, before proposing solutions. The resulting solutions that emerged from these discussions included
increasing general awareness about transportation options in the city, providing mobility education, discouraging
the use of single-occupant vehicles and moving towards the use of public transit, introducing new full costing
price mechanisms for infrastructure, and introducing smart and inclusive community and urban designs.
To implement these solutions, attendees indicated that the creation of a comprehensive growth and development
plan would be key, as would enforcement, the initiation of pilot projects relating to urban transportation prior to
full scale implementation, changing fiscal policy around transportation budgeting, and the adoption of new technologies for efficiency and effectiveness.
This report is being made available to conference attendees, stakeholders in the areas of urban design and transportation, as well as the general public, with the hope that its contents will help prompt dialogue, inspire change,
and guide solutions for Saskatoon and other prairie cities.
Page 1
Conference Overview
The idea to hold a sustainability networking conference first emerged in January 2013. Hosted by the Association
of Professional Engineers and Geoscientists – Saskatchewan (APEGS), the City of Saskatoon, and the School of
Environment and Sustainability (SENS) at the University of Saskatchewan, the conference would provide an opportunity for those in the sustainability sector to meet and discuss different aspects of a selected theme. Given
that the hosts were a professional organization, a municipal government, and a graduate school, the potential to
draw a diverse audience was compelling.
Urban transportation was selected as a theme, and the conference was structured to allow participants considerable time for discussion and networking. The day-long conference, which occurred on January 24, 2014, at the
Parktown Hotel in Saskatoon, was divided into two sessions. The first session focused on the physical infrastructure related to urban transportation, and the second focused on the social aspects. Speakers from the City of Saskatoon, the City of Edmonton, and the University of Saskatchewan were invited. The final conference agenda is
given below:
Table 1. Conference agenda
8:00-8:30 am
Registration and Light Breakfast
8:30-8:45 am
8:45-9:50 am
Welcome
Speakers’ Panel 1
• Introduce speakers and panel themes
• Balancing Sprawl and Density
9:50-10:20 am
10:20-11:10 am
11:10 -11:55 am
11:55 am-12:40 pm
12:40-1:45 pm
1:45-2:15 pm
2:15-3:05 pm
• Growing Forward! Shaping Saskatoon
• Lessons Learned from other Municipalities
• Question and Answer
Networking and Nutrition Break
Derek Thompson, City of Saskatoon
Alan Wallace, City of Saskatoon
Rhonda Toohey, City of Edmonton
Roundtable Discussion
• Balancing sprawl and density
• Saskatoon's urban design and transportation system – getting where we want to go
• Learning from other cities
Report Back
Lunch
Speakers’ Panel 2
• Introduce speakers and panel themes
• Transportation Behaviour, Trends and Adaptation
• Saskatoon Survey on Transportation Behaviour
• Greenhouse Gas Reductions and Transportation
• Question and Answer
Networking and Nutrition Break
Roundtable Discussion
• Creating a new transportation “culture” in our city
3:05-3:50 pm
3:50-4:00 pm
• Strategies to impact transportation choices
• Greenhouse gas reduction and the role of policy
Report Back
Closing Remarks
4:00-6:30 pm
Social at The Bassment (202 4th Ave. N)
Bob Patrick, University of Saskatchewan
Angela Gardiner, City of Saskatoon
Ian Loughran, City of Saskatoon
Page 2
Graduate students from SENS volunteered as roundtable facilitators and note-takers.
The conference was attended by more than fifty people, representing a diverse range of non-government organizations, educational institutions, and private firms. Grade Eleven students from the Outdoor School at Marion M.
Graham Collegiate in Saskatoon attended the morning session, and Grade Eight students from the Science Trek
program at Montgomery School were at the afternoon session.
Sponsorship for the conference was provided by the Saskatchewan Transportation Company, the University of
Saskatchewan Office of Sustainability, and the University of Saskatchewan Regional and Urban Planning Program.
Photographs were taken by Ranjan Datta, a PhD candidate in the School of Environment and Sustainability.
Graduate student Colleen
George chats with students
from the Science Trek program.
Panel Discussions
Panel presentations took place at the beginning of both sessions, with time for questions afterwards. The presentations were intended to provide information for attendees to reflect upon for roundtable discussions. Attendees
were encouraged to make connections between the information presented with their lived experiences with urban transportation, particularly in Saskatoon. The panel presentations are summarized below.
Session 1: Balancing Sprawl and Density
Derek Thompson, Land Development Project Manager, City of Saskatoon
Mr. Thompson explained how land owned by the City of Saskatoon is developed with the intention of providing
sustainable neighbourhoods, while reducing urban sprawl. Achieving this depends on building density and creating a mixed live-work neighbourhood design. Urban sprawl occurs when the number of units per acre (upa) is
low, resulting in low density (upa is equal to the number of dwellings per acre). Single-use developments and
excessive vehicle use are contributing factors to urban sprawl.
New neighbourhoods, such as Evergreen, are designed to be the densest in Saskatoon, at 8.7 upa. In Saskatoon, a
neighbourhood is considered to be low density if it has 4 upa (or less). Mr. Thompson noted that this is still dense
in comparison to many places in the United States, where many areas are sparsely populated, with 2.5 – 3.0 upa.
Page 3
Other dense neighbourhoods in Saskatoon include City Park and Nutana, which have 8 upa. Mr. Thompson
shared plans for newer neighbourhoods, such as Aspen Ridge, which are expected to be denser than Evergreen.
With respect to mixed live-work neighbourhood designs, Mr. Thompson discussed the urban village design concept, which increases housing density per acre. Cities in Europe have been successful in implementing such designs, and the idea is slowly making its way to North America, where it is seen as a way to combat urban sprawl.
A typical urban village contains a village square, mixed commercial and institutional development, and residential
buildings. As demonstrated in European cities, such urban village design lends itself to the development of more
sustainable transportation systems, such as light rail transit, walking, and cycling. This type of design also permits more choices regarding where residences are located, as amenities are close by and easily accessible.
The first panel focused on
physical infrastructure
associated with urban
transportation. From left:
Derek Thompson, Alan
Wallace, and Rhonda
Toohey.
Mr. Thompson provided details about the City of Saskatoon’s strategies for developing infill, green fields, and
brown fields to accommodate the expected growth of Saskatoon’s population to 500,000 people in the near future. He emphasized the need to evaluate these strategies, especially the land for infill projects, because continuous expansion of the city will be costly, and infill projects will save considerable infrastructure costs. These strategies are part of the Growing Forward! Shaping Saskatoon plan, as well as the City of Saskatoon’s 2013-2023 Strategic Plan. The City of Saskatoon’s vision will address problematic areas that encompass both transportation and
sprawl: the need to change attitudes and shape the city’s growth, addressing the needs of an aging population,
the lack of pedestrian-friendly infrastructure in the current traffic model, linking the City’s plans with those of the
University of Saskatchewan (for example, the University’s Land Use Plan: Vision 2057, includes developing agricultural land), and the need to consider sustainable future growth.
Session 1: Growing Forward! Shaping Saskatoon
Alan Wallace, Director, Planning and Development, City of Saskatoon
Mr. Wallace spoke further about Growing Forward! Shaping Saskatoon. This plan includes initiatives such as a
growth plan as Saskatoon approaches a population of 500,000 people, as well as a city centre plan, a north downtown master plan, neighbourhood level infill design guidelines, and a north commuter parkway project. 1 The
1
City of Saskatoon. 2014. Growing Forward! Shaping Saskatoon. http://www.growingfwd.ca/
Page 4
new growth plan to 500,000 people will be developed by Fall 2015. This initiative is open to the public, and five
specific public engagement sessions are planned – one occurred in February 2014, and the next is scheduled for
September 2014. People can also participate at www.growingfwd.ca. Saskatoon has implemented this initiative,
because without a future growth plan, expenses will be incurred – for example, 5,000 to 6,000 new Canadians
migrate to Saskatoon annually. Saskatoon’s population is predicted to surpass 250,000 by June 2014 (it is currently 247,000). The City needs to plan in advance of rapid population growth, including accommodating the
wishes of newcomers who prefer to walk – Saskatoon’s typically narrow sidewalks are not ideal for this.
In terms of urban transportation, shaping growth means managing growth around corridors and implementing
better transit systems. Currently, public transit ridership is low, and fares are high. Improved transit systems
would benefit everyone.
Session 1: Lessons Learned from Other Municipalities
Rhonda Toohey, Director, Policy Implementation and Evaluation, Transportation Planning Branch,
City of Edmonton
Ms. Toohey began by noting that the City of Saskatoon and the City of Edmonton have experienced similar challenges regarding how to make spaces more livable. In Edmonton, they have crafted “livability plans,” which hinge
on transportation and land use, as well as well-maintained and managed infrastructure.
Edmonton’s transportation master plan is entitled The Way We Move. It has seven strategic goals, all of which are
centred on transportation, land use, and their integration (see: http://www.edmonton.ca/city_government
/city_vision_and_strategic_plan/the-way-we-move-goals.aspx). By integrating planning efforts, Edmonton’s city
vision will result in a more livable and financially sustainable city.
Support for sustainable transportation in Edmonton includes initiatives such as the infill guidelines, Active
Transportation Policy and the development of a Complete Streets policy – such a policy recognizes that “one size
does not fit all” and that streets can be a destination in and of themselves. As such, the City of Edmonton has
adopted a more holistic view of street design to incorporate the needs of all users and adjacent land uses. Connection to land use is a major component of developing a sustainable transportation system. Lessons learned
include the need to provide resources to inform and support the public regarding sustainable transportation
choices; the use of pilot projects to roll out new programs; and the development of initiatives and plans to translate higher level strategic goals into action that will support the city through further growth.
Session 2: Saskatoon Survey on Transportation Behaviour
Angela Gardiner, Director, Transportation, City of Saskatoon
Angela Gardiner
The first Saskatoon Household Travel Survey (HTS) was conducted in 1991 to
characterize travel behaviours of city dwellers, with the aim of being able to
provide better choices, and to prioritize transportation-related infrastructure
improvements. As Ms. Gardiner explained, the City of Saskatoon recently conducted a new survey to update the data, and in anticipation of Saskatoon’s
growth to a population of 500,000 people. Broadly, the survey asked, “How
are people getting to where they are going?”
The survey collected information on trip origin and purpose, travel mode, and
start and end times. It was administered as an onboard transit survey, and
was distributed with a focus on university students and outlying communities
Page 5
such as Warman and Corman Park.
When data analysis is complete, the results will be released publicly. Ms. Gardiner indicated that the survey will
provide information needed to determine transportation trends, which will then be used to calibrate transportation and land use planning. The HTS data will be used, in combination with actual transportation demand, to
complete an enhanced transportation model. She cautioned that although the HTS will be used as a business case
for rapid transit, the response rate for the section of the survey concerning transportation patterns in outlying
communities had been low, and the data would need further analysis to determine their validity.
Session 2: Transportation Behaviour, Trends and Adaptation
Robert Patrick, Associate Professor, Department of Geography and Planning, University of Saskatchewan
Dr. Patrick began with a synopsis of the development of automobile-dependent communities in North America.
Prior to the 1950s, streets were arranged in grid patterns, with street cars serving neighbourhoods. Post-1950s,
with the birth of suburbia, this style of design was abandoned. Suburban neighbourhoods changed how North
Americans think about transportation, as road design began to feature curvilinear street plans, cul de sacs, low
density, expansion, and small green spaces, all of which made communities further automobile-dependent.
Road infrastructure became the prevalent method of relieving congestion, with road networks expanding further
and further. Eventually, freeways were proposed for city core areas, such as in New York City, as a way to move
cars. Although this focus on auto-dependence did provide a solution regarding increased mobility, it was only a
temporary fix, and many of these projects were abandoned. Such freeways demonstrated that urban transportation problems can’t be addressed by considering infrastructure alone. Community design, land use, and the
transportation itself also need to be considered.
Dr. Patrick emphasized that the time for auto-dependence is over, as we now have to consider many other factors
related to mobility, such as an aging community, a health-aware populace, and climate change. People have started thinking differently about cars. He added that engineers are not to blame for our auto-centric communities;
city design also needs to be considered.
To curb traffic congestion and to deal with transportation issues more generally, the conventional wisdom now is
to concentrate on a number of aspects such as integrating community design, land use, and transportation. This
includes increasing neighbourhood density, leading to decreased energy use; changing behaviours related to
transportation; and, considering urban design and community sustainability. Employers can provide incentives
to change behaviour, such as staggered start and end times for the work day, a compressed work week, and the
elimination of free parking. For example, in California, employers give out bus passes instead of parking spaces
and now employees have a very different attitude about transit.
Dr. Patrick concluded that Saskatoon can learn by considering case studies from other cities. For instance, clean
buses make using public transit more enjoyable, and can help to effect behaviour change. Unhappy riders go back
to their single-occupant vehicles, leading to road congestion and empty buses.
Session 2: Greenhouse Gas Reductions and Transportation
Ian Loughran, Manager, Energy and Sustainability Engineering, City of Saskatoon
Many attendees were astonished to learn that Saskatchewan has the highest greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions per
capita in Canada, and that 86% of these emissions come from cars. Mr. Loughran commented that Saskatoon is a
“car hungry city,” and that taking public transit is stigmatized, as it’s “not cool.” The City has worked to refurbish
Page 6
old buses to run on natural gas, which is 21% cleaner than conventional fuel, and is continuing to acquire a fleet
of hybrid buses, which emit fewer GHGs. However, while a full bus does equal lower emissions, many buses in
Saskatoon run empty. In Calgary, transit ridership is 15%; in Saskatoon, it’s 4%.
Ian Loughran
Saskatoon is revising its business plan related to energy use
and GHGs. Eighty percent of people who drive in Saskatoon are
in single occupant vehicles; the City is working to promote carpooling and car sharing, which, in turn, reduce congestion and
pollution. Increasing public transit ridership is key to reducing
GHG emissions. The City is also considering providing financing
for solar panel installation at businesses, and including
chargers for electric vehicles with that. Mr. Loughran indicated
that more community engagement is necessary to embrace
these forward-thinking ideas.
Last, Mr. Loughran discussed lower emissions and economic
savings. As we rely on cars, we are continuing to finance gas
instead of efficient electric vehicles. While the industry is starting to slowly shift to non-GHG emitting fuel
sources, switching to electric vehicles requires a large up-front investment.
Questions from the Audience
The variety and number of questions are indicative of the level of engagement at the conference. Below is a sample of the types of questions asked:
Table 2. A selection of questions asked following expert panel presentations.
How to balance bike lanes and parking lanes?
How to address issues of vehicular transport and traffic into city? A specific example was given: Martensville needs a regional network, as its currently growing quickly.
How to mitigate issues to allow people to live, grow and die in the same community?
How to get transit issues on the provincial radar (in terms of making it a priority for the financing of transit costs)?
What is the role of environmental sustainability in urban transportation?
How to integrate transit planning efforts with other plans?
In Singapore, you need a parking permit to drive into the downtown. What about Saskatoon?
Will Saskatoon be fined for its GHGs emissions?
What is our mitigation and adaptation plan for GHGs in Saskatoon?
What about pollution that comes from production of consumer products? Who is responsible for that?
What about the agriculture industry?
In terms of action based on the Household Transportation Survey, are there plans to accommodate transport demand or will
the survey just look at patterns?
Are we going to see other modes of transport considered after the HTS is done? Have they (the City) created a model about
cycling from the household survey?
How are you going to get everyone on the “plan” – creating change is hard.
Why not remove driving lanes to accommodate bike paths?
Will the provincial government fund public transit in the future?
How are academic (recommendations) integrated into the overall plan?
Are we going to see grocery stores downtown?
Is there a plan to look at transportation issues more frequently?
Page 7
Summary of Reflections on the Experts’ Presentations
Some of the content of the expert presentations clearly surprised attendees, while other points seemed to be
commonly understood. For example, many attendees had not realized that planners consider many Saskatoon
neighbourhoods to be dense. So, although Saskatoon has several new neighbourhoods, the City is not technically
experiencing urban sprawl. Additionally, older neighbourhoods such as Riversdale are less dense compared to
newer ones. Considerable effort is needed to increase the number of units per acre in such neighbourhoods. The
urban village concept, which has been implemented in newer neighbourhoods, does lead to increased density,
while offering amenities closer to residences.
Quality of life – income levels, housing quality and transit availability – comes into play in relation to neighbourhood density. Many attendees preferred to have mixed communities in suburban neighbourhoods, with both
younger and older residents, with a mix of modest houses, condos, and townhouses. Options for mixed residences with commercial and office space were also suggested.
Attendees observed that while Edmonton was similar to Saskatoon in terms of the transportation issues it faced,
the two cities are taking different approaches to addressing them. For instance, Edmonton seemed to be focusing
on frameworks and higher level policies, setting principles to guide future decisions, while Saskatoon seemed to
take a project-by-project approach with little integration among policies and frameworks. Attendees wondered,
then, if Saskatoon has gaps in its planning. Many attendees were also intrigued by the “complete streets” concept;
this features design to accommodate various transportation modes, while decreasing parking space, and improving green space and pedestrian space. The discussion about complete streets hinged on the connection between
the public and the transportation culture, with a focus on changing attitudes to impact how we move.
Many attendees acknowledged the need to take action to move away from the status quo. Saskatoon can learn
tremendously from Edmonton’s approach. Saskatoon needs to ask critical questions, so that transportation systems can be changed and so that people can adapt. For example, Edmonton expanded its LRT (light rail transportation) system based on need. Attendees questioned whether Saskatoon would ever have an LRT, given current
public transit trends and attitudes? Incentives and disincentives are needed to change transit culture – doing so
would require a considerable shift in mindset.
Attendees noted their concern about the assumption that growth is always good. Growth is expensive, and needs
to be sustainable, in the true sense of the word – populations should be healthy, and neighbourhoods should be
diverse, with access to public services. A tendency exists to focus too much on infrastructure investments, while
neglecting service, design, and education. Attendees also expressed a desire to discuss the economics of infrastructure investment further; this conference did not address this to any great extent. Putting prices on everything and telling people to pay will force people to consider whether they really need something or if they just
want it.
The presentation on GHGs was most surprising to many attendees, as they did not realize that Saskatchewan’s
per capita emissions were so high. Some tried to rationalize how this could be possible, while others admitted
that Saskatchewan was at “the top of the class at something terrible.” Possible solutions were suggested: involving politicians and municipal governments to a greater extent to address the problem, and entrenching environmental activism in the school system, making it acceptable, rather than antagonistic.
Finally, a realization emerged that as the city grows and more people choose to live in Saskatoon, the municipal
government can’t afford to continue operating with a “small city mentality.” While the general feeling was that
Saskatoon was “a bit behind,” people felt that changes will be made, even if implementation is imperfect. Being
Page 8
less connected to the provincial government in terms of transportation infrastructure could allow for innovative
design, thus allowing for a revamp of the public transit system so that people are interested in utilizing it. But,
again, how can people’s perception about transportation be changed, when it encompasses personal decisions,
personal perceptions, social stigma, and commuting time?
Themes from the Roundtable Discussions
Roundtable discussions followed each set of panel presentations. Facilitators guided the discussions using predetermined questions, allowing attendees to consider their own experiences, and to put the information learned
from the panel presentations into perspective. The questions were designed to spur thinking about urban transportation challenges and implications, as well as possible solutions and how they could be implemented. The
themes which emerged during these discussions are summarized below.
Issues, Challenges, and Implications
Many attendees observed that in Saskatchewan,
the provincial government does not provide
funding for municipal transportation infrastructure. In many other provinces, funding is provided via provincial-municipal partnerships.
The challenge identified, then, is how to best
lobby the provincial government for funding to
support the financing of transportation infrastructure.
Currently, infrastructure in Saskatoon is not
adequate to support multiple transportation
modes. The onus is on the City to ensure that
neighbourhoods are developed accordingly –
developers need to have proper guidelines to
accommodate multiple transportation modes,
and engineers need incentives to change practice; they won’t if what they have done to date
has been considered satisfactory. Private land
versus public land development and the rules
and regulations concerning those is another issue.
Graduate student
Katie Suek
Saskatoon features many older city designs with less walkable options. Incompatible policies and incentive structures confound this issue. For example, the City has provided a property tax incentive to encourage individuals
and families to move to core neighbourhoods and the central business district, but these areas don’t have the infrastructure for primary and secondary school students to walk to school. Sidewalks are rarely cleared of snow in
winter, which deters pedestrians, particularly children and the elderly. Snowbanks are not removed, and snow is
not ploughed in a timely manner, preventing buses from servicing some areas. This further discourages people
from taking the bus, as they may have to use a stop that is far from their destination. Additionally, none of the
bridges in Saskatoon seems to have been built to prioritize pedestrians.
Page 9
Saskatoon’s public transit system was widely criticized by conference attendees. Someone in every roundtable
discussion mentioned that the buses never run on time. This certainly contributes to low ridership in Saskatoon.
Other public transit issues discussed were:
• Longer loops and fewer direct routes mean that people perceive taking public transit to waste considerable time. Many comments were made about the bus being good for going downtown, but nowhere else.
Having most routes stop at the main terminals (Place Riel, downtown) was viewed as inefficient, and
some commented that they feel nervous and uncomfortable when at the downtown bus mall. Many
commented that the bus was often slow.
• The bus is viewed as often being inconvenient, especially in the early morning. Some attendees mentioned that they have to wake up an hour earlier than usual if taking the bus instead of driving themselves.
• Buses and bus stops were considered to be cold, dirty, and generally unpleasant, impacting the journey
experience, again discouraging people from taking the bus. As winter temperatures in Saskatoon can
reach -30 degrees Celsius or lower, the lack of heated bus shelters indicates the level of priority the City
places on having a modern transit system that encourages ridership.
Attendees perceived transportation choices to be linked to socioeconomic status. Stereotypes exist regarding who
uses the bus in Saskatoon. While the City is emphasizing the core neighbourhoods, some attendees were pessimistic about whether an accompanying shift to using public transit would take place, or whether people would
continue to drive their cars if they moved to these neighbourhoods. Should new infrastructure for both public
transit and living spaces in the core neighbourhoods be put into place, or should the City work harder to change
people’s perceptions of the public transit system first?
Some argued that the issue is that Saskatoon is still too small to warrant an expansion of expensive transportation infrastructure. The current size of the city makes transitioning to other transportation options harder. The
tax base does not exist to accommodate such changes. For example, one attendee commented that France and
Saskatchewan are roughly the same size, but 65 million people live in France – providing a much larger tax base
to cover transportation costs. Those who pursued this line of argument felt that caution is needed regarding the
attitude of “build it and they will come,” as “everyone is an environmentalist until it hits their pocket.”
Others argued that, in Saskatoon, people tend to live in one area and work in another; this has been an ongoing
trend. The main roads are constantly congested. No matter how many roads are built, the problem doesn’t dissipate. A 30-million dollar infrastructure upgrade isn’t the solution. An example was provided – the west side of
Saskatoon is changing, with more people working there now. The neighbourhood of Hampton Village has opened
up possibilities for easier commuting to the North Industrial area.
Attendees expressed disappointment regarding backlash from politicians about sustainable urban transportation.
Attendees thought that some political leaders do not believe in multi-modal transportation system initiatives, and
thus, they don’t endorse them. Other politicians seem uninformed, or allow their length of time in office to influence decision-making, rather than considering what is important for the city in the long run. A comment was
made that some political leaders just “interfere with good plans” to satisfy their political base.
In North America generally, the prevailing attitude is that “bigger is better” – in combination with market forces,
this leads to bigger vehicles and bigger homes, and promotes a lifestyle of excess.
Page 10
Proposed Solutions
Increase general awareness about transportation in the city.
The roundtable participants discussed the need to continuously build awareness in the general public about urban transportation issues, so that all stakeholders can constantly add input to reach appropriate solutions. Specifically:
•
•
•
•
Lead by example. Councillors, mayors, administrators and other decision-makers wield considerable
influence and they can work to change attitudes towards transportation. This includes participating in
town halls, talks, exhibits and demonstrations about mixed modes of transportation and how they are
beneficial. This will also help to share knowledge and best practices, while building a “community of
practice” among city dwellers. Opportunities to try public transit for free such as “Car-Free Sundays”
could be introduced. Experiences like these can transform mindsets, and can encourage young citizens
to choose public transit, diminishing negative stereotypes about it.
Encourage and thoughtfully consider input from community organizations. Saskatoon has several
groups dedicated to urban transportation, such as the Bridge City Bicycle Co-op and Saskatoon Cycles,
and their suggestions should be considered. Attendees indicated that they were encouraged that City
Council voted unanimously for the Better Bike Lanes project. This also cultivates respect – even if a person never uses a certain type of transportation, she still needs to respect both it and those who rely upon
it.
Be open-minded about other modes of transportation. This includes being mindful of the language
used to describe transportation, as it can be divisive instead of unifying, creating a sense that one mode
is prioritized more highly. An example is using “alternative transportation” to encompass all modes other than motor vehicles – it can create the perception that motor vehicles are more important. Transportation choices need to be promoted, as does societal decision-making about them.
Promoting all modes of transit. In particular, the Meewasin Valley Authority trail system could be better utilized, which would help to prioritize pedestrians, possibly leading to behaviour change.
Page 11
Provide mobility education.
As previously noted, calling modes of transportation apart from motor vehicles “alternative transportation” can
create perceptions that these modes are not as ideal. In addition to carefully choosing the language to discuss
transportation modes, the City of Saskatoon also needs to enhance its mix of transportation options. Solutions
suggested by roundtable participants were:
•
•
•
•
•
Offer “Transport Driver’s Ed.” This could be incorporated into secondary school curricula and offered
by citizen groups, the City, and the private sector. Such a course would provide education about the real
risks involved with each mode of transportation, including how the modes interact (i.e., cars and bicycles
need to share the road). The rules associated with each mode would be discussed, as well as the benefits
and expenses of using them. This could include pedestrian safety for children, and how to make sustainable transportation choices. Such a course would increase transportation literacy.
Improve street design to better accommodate a wider range of transportation modes. This includes options such as enhanced street design, improved bike lanes, walking pathways, and connections
between buildings.
Have political champions on City Council. An example of this is the city councillor who rode his bike
for a day, at the invitation of Saskatoon Cycles, to gain first-hand experience of the difficulties that cyclists face. This was perceived to have more influence on city councillors regarding cycling infrastructure improvements.
Provide education about the costs of an unhealthy population. Education about transportation options can include information about possible consequences of an overly dormant lifestyle – that is, one
that depends on cars for transportation. Promoting the health-related aspects of transportation options
such as walking or cycling can lead to health care savings. Savings could then be directed to libraries,
community centres, and even schools.
Be creative in encouraging a shift to commuting by public transit. Attendees offered creative ideas,
such as making a driver’s licence a transit pass as well, and encouraging ridership by offering free transit
to special events and festivals, especially those which are family-focused. Other creative gradual moves
to public transit include initiatives such as “Car-Free Sundays.”
Discourage the use of single-occupant vehicles and move towards the use of public transit.
Many attendees indicated that behaviour change in this area needs to be forced. The prevalent attitude is that
buses are an inferior option, insufficient for everyday use, and are for those who are less well off. Solutions to
increase public transit ridership were as follows:
• Change parking policies. Smart phone technologies and mobile trackers can provide information
about available parking, which may discourage personal vehicle use. Parking permits should be graduated in price, to incorporate such things as place, time of day, and vehicle type. Employees who have
parking spots at work could be given the option to swap free parking for other transportation incentives,
such as transit passes. A suggestion was made that a market analysis should be conducted by the City to
determine at what cost will people change from driving personal vehicles to taking public transit.
• Create transit hubs and Park and Go locations. These would lead to less congestion, reducing traffic
into the city centre, the University, the North End Industrial, on Warman Road, etc. Individuals who
would otherwise drive could take public transit from a Park and Go into these areas, allowing them to
leave their cars near their places of residence. This would require the creation of direct bus routes, or
Page 12
•
•
•
•
even of an LRT, to serve the Park and Go locations. Dedicated bus lanes and high-occupancy vehicle
lanes should also be created.
Provide facilities to encourage bicycle use. This includes having facilities to shower at work, thus allowing employees to cycle to work and still adhere to dress code.
Provide incentives for employers to provide bus passes for employees. Cities such as Vancouver
and Toronto have introduced such incentives and have seen traffic congestion decrease. Employers
could introduce a “sustainable mobility program” or an “ecopass,” promoting ride shares, parking spot
shares, and bike servicing, for example. A “commuter challenge” among employees or companies would
highlight such incentives further.
Create controlled lanes and switching lanes. Restricting some lanes for use by high-occupancy vehicles or bicycles only would encourage more sustainable modes of transportation and may encourage
some drivers to move to public transit. Switching lanes, whereby middle lanes are used for travel in one
direction during the morning peak hours and the opposite direction during afternoon peak hours, depending on the prevalent traffic flow, would effectively “retrofit” roads, creating an alternative to building new roads.
Construct a rail line between Regina and Saskatoon. Given the growth in Saskatchewan’s population,
the construction of a rail line between the province’s two largest cities would ease traffic in the centres
of both. The rail line could then link to “Park and Go” locations at malls. This concept is similar to the Go
Train in Ontario.
Introduce new full costing price mechanisms for infrastructure.
As transportation infrastructure is an expensive investment, moving to full cost accounting will provide the City
with funds for repairs and upgrades. A few examples of how to implement these price mechanisms were given:
• Establish user-pay systems. The City could introduce bridge tolls for out-of-town commuters and introduce a vehicle tax for those who live outside of the neighbourhood or area where they work.
• Vary the length of bus routes. Some buses could be scheduled to make trips outside of Saskatoon, to
outlying communities, while others continue to run along the core circuit. These routes would need to
be cost effective and convenient – for example, those who travel to the central business district by bus
still need to be able to run errands there conveniently. This will reduce both traffic congestion and the
need for parking.
• Reduce the subsidization of the transit system by the public utilities sector. The introduction of
full cost pricing mechanisms will effectively bring about this reduction, providing decision-makers with
better information regarding the performance of each sector. By separating utilities from transit, City
Council can show how transit infrastructure is actually a capital asset and not an expense, as it generates
its own funds for its maintenance. This will foster greater fiscal transparency, which will assist in educating citizens about the cost of public infrastructure.
• Plan over longer time horizons. By introducing full price costing, the City can learn about the “economics of no plan,” caused by short-term goals which are not sufficiently comprehensive. This will assist
in the re-assessing of the cost of public transit, and may also help to align directions for the future, making it easier to plan over a longer time horizon.
Page 13
Utilize smart and inclusive community and urban designs.
A few options for smart design community and urban centres were discussed. Such centres will not age with
time, and will accommodate changing demographics. As a first step, better integration between the work of engineers, developers and planners is needed. This would be followed by securing buy-in from community members
and politicians, so that a community vision can be created. Other solutions discussed were:
• Neighbourhood guidelines incorporating “complete streets” should be developed. This would require collaboration between planners and developers, and could incorporate the lessons learned from
cities such as Edmonton. The criteria for road capacity should be reconsidered, with changes implemented, as standards for cyclists do not exist at the moment. This makes cycling in Saskatoon dangerous, especially when road detours are in effect. Detours provide information for cars, but not for other
modes of transportation. The walkability of the city should also be considered and enhanced.
• New public and municipal building standards should be developed. These would include green retrofit and new construction standards. This would lead to savings in operating the buildings, and would
showcase sustainable infrastructure for the public.
• Continue to plan; continue to share plans. Even though change is slow, planning and sharing those
plans is necessary. Edmonton had success doing this. Also, sharing plans can lead to public-private cooperation, such as partnerships between the City and transportation cooperatives and other private industries.
Next Steps: Implementing Solutions
Conference attendees discussed the following:
A comprehensive growth and development plan: Such a plan set limits, avoiding any unprojected growth.
The plan should result from concerted efforts, integrating community design and urban design components along
with transportation infrastructure and design. With foresight, the City can future proof itself for the next twenty
to fifty years, with only minor alternations to the comprehensive plan. To start, the newly-completed 2010
transportation management plan could be incorporated into the comprehensive plan.
Enforcement: Plans alone don’t necessarily change day to day actions. Proper enforcement of new behaviours
needs to occur – this includes new public zoning bylaws and fines. For example, cyclists and others need to adhere to traffic laws and use designated and appropriate infrastructure.
Initiate pilot projects: Implementation can begin on a small scale, instead of with massive projects. Taking the
time for proper evaluation of these projects is essential. The Saskatoon Outdoor School and the School of Environment and Sustainability would be ideal venues for pilot projects. Completing more studies means that informed decisions are easier to make.
Change fiscal policy around transportation budgeting: A certain amount of the municipal budget should be
allocated to each mode of transportation, and the transportation budget should be uncoupled from the general
public utilities budget.
Adopt new technologies for efficiency and effectiveness: These include technologies such as GPS, smart
phone apps, electric car plug-ins, lane switches, and social marketing campaigns.
Page 14
Conclusion
As was hoped, the conference attendees represented a diverse cross-section of urban transportation stakeholders. The range of solutions generated indicated that urban transportation issues should be addressed with a mix
of development of new policies, public education efforts, and new infrastructure development and retrofitting.
Initiatives such as Growing Forward! Shaping Saskatoon are encouraging, as the City anticipates a doubling of its
population. Moving away from the status quo is critical to reach aspirations of sustainable living – collaborations
between engineers, developers, governments, and the public will become increasingly important to shift current
urban transportation preferences in the direction of more sustainable transportation modes. As the predictions
of climate change become reality, the time to reduce fossil fuel use is now. The ideas contained in this report are
but a small way to begin.
Page 15
Attendees
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Lyle Benko, L*A*M*B* Consulting Inc.
Krystle Blachford, University of Saskatchewan
Angie Bugg, Saskatchewan Environmental Society
Rosemarie Draskovic, MMM Group
Michael Dyer, University of Saskatchewan
Terry Fonstad, College of Engineering, University of Saskatchewan
Bryan Gurney, Science Trek
Brian Hoessler, Strong Roots Consulting
James Johansen, Scheffer Andrew Ltd.
Louise Jones, Swalewatchers
Monique Kealey, Associated Engineering
John Klein, Regina Car Share Co-op
Anna Leighton, Swalewatchers
Stella Madsen, Associated Engineering
Jay Magus, CIMA+
Megan Marcoux, Bridge City Bike Co-op
Justin McArthur, CIMA+
Shawn McDowell, College of Engineering, University of Saskatchewan
Kylie McLean, Associated Engineering
Jeff Nattress, CP Rail
Nwakaku Okere, Facilities Management, University of Regina
Mike Pawluski, Associated Engineering
Rodney Peacock, ISL Engineering
Leah Rampton, Crosby Hanna and Associates
Kelly Richardson, School of Environment and Sustainability, University of Saskatchewan
Kamil Rogowski, University of Saskatchewan
Lee Smith, Crosby Hanna and Associates
Kevin Sturgeon, Associated Engineering
Doug Thomson, Associated Engineering
Connor Traves, University of Saskatchewan
Erik Trenouth, Planning for Growth North
Heather Trueman, University of Saskatchewan
David Vanderberg, Regina Green Ride
Cathy Watts, Saskatoon Cycles
Ryan Wolfe, Allnorth
Shane Wolffe, Future Proof Software
Sean Zoerb, University of Saskatchewan
Page 16
Facilitators
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Jania Chilima, School of Environment and Sustainability, University of Saskatchewan
Ranjan Datta, School of Environment and Sustainability, University of Saskatchewan
Sharla Daviduik, School of Environment and Sustainability, University of Saskatchewan
Shannon Dyck, City of Saskatoon
Noel Galuschik, School of Environment and Sustainability, University of Saskatchewan
Colleen George, School of Environment and Sustainability, University of Saskatchewan
Megan Marcoux, Bridge City Bicycle Co-op
Kelly Richardson, School of Environment and Sustainability, University of Saskatchewan
Shea Shirley, School of Environment and Sustainability, University of Saskatchewan
Katie Suek, School of Environment and Sustainability, University of Saskatchewan
Lisa White, APEGS/Clifton and Associates
Planning Committee
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Sharla Daviduik, School of Environment and Sustainability, University of Saskatchewan
Shannon Dyck, City of Saskatoon
Meagan Hinther, School of Environment and Sustainability, University of Saskatchewan
Marina Melchiorre, APEGS Professional Development committee
Lesley Porter, School of Environment and Sustainability, University of Saskatchewan
Sheri Praski, APEGS Environment and Sustainability committee chair
Toddi Steelman, School of Environment and Sustainability, University of Saskatchewan
Doug Thomson, APEGS Professional Development committee
Terry Werbovetski, APEGS Professional Development committee
Lisa White, APEGS Environment and Sustainability committee
Urban Transportation Resources
Canadian Urban Transit Association. 2011. National Transit Policy Frameworks: What Will Canada Learn From
Other Countries? http://www.cutaactu.ca/en/publictransit/publicationsandresearch/resources/Issue_Paper_40_E2.pdf
City of Edmonton. 2014. The Way We Move: Transportation Master Plan.
http://www.edmonton.ca/city_government/city_vision_and_strategic_plan/the-way-we-move.aspx
City of Saskatoon. 2011. The Saskatoon Speak Community Vision. http://www.saskatoonspeaks.com/
City of Saskatoon. 2013. Shaping Saskatoon. http://shapingsaskatoon.ca/
City of Saskatoon. 2013. City of Saskatoon Strategic Plan, 2013 – 2023.
http://www.saskatoon.ca/DEPARTMENTS/
City%20Managers%20Office/CityManagersReports/Documents/2013-2023%20Strategic%20Plan.pdf
City of Saskatoon. 2014. Growing Forward! Shaping Saskatoon. http://www.growingfwd.ca/
Transportation Association of Canada. 2014. Councils and Committees: Urban Transportation Council, Environment Council and Climate Change Task Force. http://tac-atc.ca/en/councils-and-committees.
Page 17