Incubating Innovative Streets & Neighbourhoods – CIP, CITE, NCCHPP & HSF

Welcome to Fireside Chat # 407

September 16, 2014 1:00 – 3:00 PM Eastern Time

(Teleconference open for participants at 12:50 ET)

Moderators: Dot Bonnenfant, CHNET-Works! Animateur/Animatrice, University of Ottawa. Kim Perrotta, HCBD Knowledge Translation & Communications, Heart & Stroke Foundation

www.chnet-works.ca

Population Health Improvement Research Network University of Ottawa

1

Step #1 : Backup PowerPoint Presentation www.chnet-works.ca

Step #2 : Teleconference

All Audio by telephone

If your line is ‘bad’ – hang up and call back in

Participant lines muted

Recording announcement

Step #3: The Internet Conference (via ‘ADOBE CONNECT’)

From our computer to yours No audio via internet A transmission delay of 1-2 seconds is normal Difficulties? Firewalls - slow reception, disconnection : Use the Backup PowerPoint Presentation (Instruction Step #1) For assistance: animateur@chnet-works.ca

Housekeeping : how a fireside chat works…

2

How to post comments/questions during the Fireside Chat

Joining in by Telephone +

Adobe Connect Internet Conference

Use the text box!

Joining by

Telephone + Backup PowerPoint

By email: Respond to the ‘access instructions email

animateur@chnet-works.ca

3

Please introduce yourself!

• Name

• Organization

• Location

• Group in Attendance?

Healthy Canada by Design - Partners 5 National Organizations: Heart & Stroke Foundation Urban Public Health Network National Collaborating Centre Healthy Public Policy Canadian Institute of Planners Canadian Institute of Transportation Engineers 11 Health Authorities from 8 Provinces: British Columbia & Ontario & Quebec Saskatchewan & Manitoba Newfoundland, New Brunswick & Nova Scotia Several Academic Institutions: Simon Fraser University University of Montreal Dalhousie University Memorial University 2 Non-Government Organizations: Toronto Centre for Active Transportation Montreal Urban Ecology Centre

4

Healthy Canada by Design

5

Vision:

Health officials, planners, engineers and NGOs in communities across Canada collaborate seamlessly to:

• ensure built environments are designed to promote health and well-being,

• thus contributing to the reduction of risk factors for chronic diseases.

Advisors on Tap

• Advisors on Tap: George McKibbon, is a Registered Professional Planner in Ontario. He holds memberships in the Canadian Institute of Planners (CIP) and the American Institute of Certified Planners. He is a planning consultant and Adjunct Professor at the University of Guelph. He helped produce the CIP’s Healthy Communities Legislative Comparison Survey Report.

• Olivier Bellefleur has been working at the National Collaborating

Centre for Healthy Public Policy (NCCHPP) since 2010. H e has master’s degrees in philosophy and environmental sciences. His work is focused on public policies informing the built environment, particularly upon policies that favour safe, active and public transportation.

• François Gagnon has been working at the NCCHPP since 2006. He has a master’s in criminology and a PhD in Communications. He teaches courses in research methodology, media and popular culture at the Université de Montréal. He is currently researching interventions and public policies that can promote safe active travel for use by public health and NGOs.

• Continued… 6

Advisors on Tap

7

• Peter Truch is the Transportation Manager with Opus International Consultants. He has 15 years of experience doing transportation and mobility planning as both a consultant and for a municipal government. Peter is a fellow and serves as the President of the Canadian Institute of Transportation Engineers (CITE).

• Abdul Rahman Masoud is a student at the University of British Columbia Okanagan where he is doing his master’s degree on sustainable transportation safety in applied science under the direction of Dr. Gordon Lovegrove.

What province/territory are you from?

Answer via Adobe Connect : Poll

OR RSVP to access instruction email

– BC

– AB

– SK

– MB

– ON

– QC

– NB

– NS

– PEI

– NL

– YK

– NWT

– NU

– Other

8

What is your role?

√ Use the Adobe Connect Poll to enter your response!

9

• Public Health Professional

• Planning Professional

• Transportation Professional

• Non-Governmental Organization Staff or Volunteer

• Community Organization Staff or Volunteer

• Academic Researcher

• Other

CIP Healthy Communities Legislative Survey

Results and Next Steps

George McKibbon, MCIP, RPP, AICP CEP

CIP Healthy Communities Committee.

September 16, 2014

10

Project Overview

What is it?

How was it done?

What were the results/findings?

What’s next?

11

What?

12

• Project of CIP and CIP Healthy Communities Subcommittee

• A survey to help better understand:

– Legislative and regulatory differences between CIP affiliates

– Opportunities and obstacles that are affecting planners in their healthy communities work

How?

• 15 members took part in the survey

• Solicited through an open call in CIP’s newsletter and/or recruited through Healthy Communities Subcommittee

• Conducted during September and October 2013

• Included both a written component and a follow-up telephone interview

• All participants completed a short screening questionnaire to:

– Ensure their experience covered a range of geographic locations (different provinces and territories)

– Planning sectors (federal, provincial, municipal, private, etc.)

13

How?

• Two parts to the survey -- five general, introductory questions, 16 more specific questions on:

– Perceptions and experiences of the general policy and legislative environment for planning and health at the provincial, regional, & municipal levels

– The individuals/organizations/agencies/other levels of government they generally work with in their planning and health activities

– Respondent’s use of healthy community planning resources produced by CIP and other agencies

14

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Both

Urban

Rural

Planning Context: Urban or Rural

15

0 1 2 3 4 5 6

NS

NB

PQ

ON

MB

SK

AB

BC

Current Province or Region of Practice

16

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14

Academic

Non-Profit

Private

Local/Municipal

Regional

Provincial

Federal

Employment Sector

17

Findings

Provincial Comparison

• Policy support for healthy community design varies widely from province to province

– Some provinces take a more prescriptive approach to policy-making around growth management and healthy built environments

– Others maintain more flexible legislative environments that allow for change, but may not explicitly support building healthy communities

18

Provincial Comparison

• Mixed responses toward the effectiveness of a more flexible legislative environment – some appreciating the flexibility, others finding the lack of policy limiting

• Generally, the most active provinces have clear and supportive provincial policy

• Ontario Provincial Policy Statement (PPS) provides some general guidelines around land use that can be used to support incorporation of healthy community design principles into local planning documents

19

Findings

Opportunities

• Several shared, consistent and dominant themes (opportunities) for planners working to elevate, introduce, and implement healthy community design in their jurisdictions

• Opportunities are presented in a rough order of priority, BUT understood that no one avenue should be pursued alone

20

Findings

Opportunities

• A better legislative enabling environment

• Expanded, targeted and easier to access resources

• Building linkages and networks

• Ongoing education and advocacy

21

Obstacles

• Several shared, consistent obstacles were also identified

22

Findings

Obstacles

• It’s a nascent planning concern

• It can be a ‘siloed’ pursuit

• There are, of course, limited budgets

23

What’s next?

Leveraging opportunities and mitigating obstacles

• What can be done?

• What has been done?

• Who’s doing it?

• How?

24

Anchoring

Availability

Representativeness

Status quo bias

Gains and losses

Framing

25

26

Thanks!

https://www.cip-icu.ca/Topics-in-Planning/Healthy-Communities#

27

Integrating safe and active travel in

residential development projects

Webinar | CHNET-Works! | September 2014

Olivier Bellefleur & François Gagnon

National Collaborating Centre

for Healthy Public Policy

National Collaborating Centre for

Healthy Public Policy (NCCHPP)

Our mandate

– Support public health actors in their efforts to promote healthy

public policies

Our areas of expertise

– The effects of public policies on health

– Generating and using knowledge about policies

– Intersectoral actors and mechanisms

– Strategies to influence policy making

28

The National Collaborating Centres for

Public Health

29

HCBD CLASP: What did we do?

1. Provided input on a health impact assessment (HIA) of a residential development proposal

Credit: Dan Burden, WALC Institute 30

HCBD CLASP: What did we do?

1. Provided input on a health impact assessment (HIA) of a residential development proposal

Credit: Dan Burden, WALC Institute 31

HCBD CLASP: What did we do?

1. Provided input on a health impact assessment (HIA) of a residential development proposal

2. Published the report containing the analysis and recommendations

http://www.ncchpp.ca/175/Public

ations.ccnpps?id_article=1247 32

3. Developed a matrix to guide the analysis and a registry of examples of recommendation

HCBD CLASP: What did we do?

1. Provided input on a health impact assessment (HIA) of a residential development proposal

2. Published the report containing the analysis and recommendations

33

The project

• Transit-oriented development (TOD)

Bus platform

Park and ride: parkade

Residential

Commercial

Commercial & Residential

Sidewalk

Bike path

34

Situated…

Sidewalk

Bike Path

National

Road

Power

Centre Industrial

Zone Map data: Google, Cnes/Spot image, DigitalGlobe,

2014

Credit: Ville de Sainte-Catherine & Plania 35

35

1. Design woonerfs between parking areas to increase connectivity for pedestrians and cyclists.

2. Design streets in the TOD neighbourhood based on the Zone 30 concept

Some recommendations from the report

Credit: Ville de Sainte-Catherine & Plania

36

3. Install two crossings for pedestrians & cyclists connecting the TOD neighbourhood to the neighbourhood on the east.

4. Redesign the main entry point of the

TOD neighbourhood to strike a balance between traffic fluidity and the safety of drivers, cyclists and pedestrians • Roundabout? • Crossing times at 0.9 m/s?

Some recommendations from the report

Map data: Google, Cnes/Spot image, DigitalGlobe,

2014

Credit: Ville de Sainte-Catherine & Plania

37

To read the report:

http://www.ncchpp.ca/175/Publications.ccn

pps?id_article=1247 37

A matrix and a registry: why?

Formalization of analysis

Organization of recommendations

38

A matrix and a registry: what approach?

Yes No

Are there sidewalks?

Recommendation: Add sidewalks on every street.

Source: http://www.rita.dot.gov/bts/sites/rita.dot.gov.bts/files/publications/special_reports_and_issue_briefs/issue_briefs/number_12/html/entire.html

39

A matrix and a registry: what approach?

• Need flexibility to contextualize and dialogue with urban planners and traffic engineers

Yes No

Are there sidewalks?

Recommendation: Add sidewalks on every street.

Ph

oto

gra

ph

: w

att

le_

lea

f.

So

urc

e: h

ttp

://is.g

d/la

efB

N

40

1st axis: • Origins and destinations

Two axis

Home

Bus platform

Work

• Trips

Cycling

Bus

Credit: Ville de Sainte-Catherine & Plania

41

Two axis

45 D/ha

2nd axis:

Project area

Map data: Google, Cnes/Spot image, DigitalGlobe,

2014

Credit: Ville de Sainte-Catherine & Plania 42

42

Two axis

15 D/ha

45 D/ha

2nd axis:

Project area Influence area

Map data: Google, Cnes/Spot image, DigitalGlobe,

2014

Credit: Ville de Sainte-Catherine & Plania 43

43

The registry

44

The registry

45

The registry

46

Matrix and registry

If you want us to consider a recommandation for inclusion in the registry…. E-mail us!

47

Built environment and SAT: What else do we do?

Knowledge synthesis about effects and political contexts of interventions on street/road networks

Source:

http://www.ecologieurbaine.net/exemples/canada/apaisemen

t-de-la-circulation-dans-les-zones-scolaires

Source: commons.wikimedia.org. Photograph: Brest. 48

49

You’re interested in this topic? Visit us at www.ncchpp.ca for more

resources

Olivier Bellefleur

olivier.bellefleur@inspq.qc.ca

514-864-1600 x 3635

François Gagnon

Francois.gagnon@inspq.qc.ca

514-864-1600 x 3627

49

• Peter A. Truch, P.Eng., PTOE, FITE

• Ian Roth, EIT

Promoting Healthy Living Through Built Environments that Enable Active Transportation in

Clearwater, BC

September 16th,

2014

Great Partnerships are worth nurturing.

Presented by:

50

• Collaboration

• Partnership

• Community Interaction & Involvement

• Small Town

• Holistic Sustainability

• Knowledge Translation of Evidence into Reality

• Short-Term and Long-Term Benefits

• Anecdotal Evidence

• Economic Opportunities for the District

Why is this Study Important?

51

• Small Rural Community

• District Incorporated in 2007 from the Thompson-Nicola

Regional District (TNRD)

• Population of 2,331 with 4.8% growth from 2006 to 2011

(Statistics Canada, 2011)

• In 2013, District gains responsibility of maintaining and

operating its roads

Clearwater Context

52

Location of Clearwater • Regional Context within Thompson Cariboo Shuswap HSA

53

Location of Clearwater • Municipal Boundary

54

Physical Barriers to Active Transportation (AT)

Significant Vertical and Horizontal Grades

Bridge

Poor AT Crossing Hwy 5/Clearwater Village

Road Intersection

AT Must Use Highway Shoulder

Significant Grade Change

55

Image Source: Google

Maps

Hwy 5/Clearwater Village Road Intersection

• No Crosswalk Signage • No Crosswalk Pavement Markings • No Bicycle Lanes • No Wheelchair Curb Let-Downs on Islands

56

Image Source: Google

Maps

Hwy 5 – Just North of Same Intersection

• Most Direct Route From West Side to Central Business Area • No Sidewalk • No Designated Bicycle Lane • Insufficient Night Time Illumination • Travelling Next to Highway Instead of a Separated Path or Local Road

57

• Profile highlights key

health characteristics:

– Health Status / Social

Determinants of Health

– Health System

Performance

– Health Services

Local Area Health Profile

58

34.1%

64.0%

56.9%

0.0%

10.0%

20.0%

30.0%

40.0%

50.0%

60.0%

70.0%

Fruit and VegetableConsumption (5 or

more/day)

Physical Activity duringLeisure Time,

Moderatly Active orActive

Body Mass Index,Overweight or Obese

(18 yrs and over)

% S

elf

Re

po

rte

d

Health Behavior Indicators

IH

BC

ThompsonCaribooShuswap

Thompson Cariboo Shuswap HSA – Health Behaviors

59

Motor Vehicle Accidents 4.27

Arteries / Arterioles / Capillaries 3.01

Chronic Lung Disease 2.59

Digestive System 2.47

Alcohol- Related Deaths 2.23

Respiratory System 2.07

Smoking-Attributable Deaths 1.57

All Causes of Death 1.48

Circulatory System 1.48

Provincial Total 1.00

Standard Mortality Ratio – North Thompson

2006 - 2010

SMR > 1

Indicates

More

Deaths than

Expected

60

Chronic Disease Reduction

Increasing physical activity opportunities reduces obesity and early onset of chronic diseases.

Only 15% of Canadian Adults and 7% of children get the recommended daily activity.

Providing infrastructure that people will use to walk or cycle makes it the easy, convenient, safe, and the preferred method of transport

Provide infrastructure in priority places that will be used like town centres.

Healthier community reduces economic impacts of disease on the health care system

Created defined context zones.

Developed a flexible AT infrastructure focused cross-section framework.

Identified quick win projects to gain public support

61

Injury Prevention

Motor vehicle collisions account for 24% of unintentional deaths in BC.

Motor Vehicle collisions are the leading cause of injury-related death in children and youth.

Protect and emphasize VRU’s as the priority for infrastructure improvements.

Reduce vehicle speeds to intermix modes. Separate modes at higher speeds.

Transport incidents cost the economy $575 million.

Provide AT facilities increase safety for VRU’s and make them feel comfortable (lighting, signage, amenities).

Example: Robson Street a busy local road with shortcutting and speeding.

Clearwater willing to retrofit road to accommodate separated AT facility.

Wiling to increase taxes to facilitate it. 62

• Aims to improve health and wellness by working collaboratively with local governments and community partners to create policies and environments that support healthy living.

Healthy Communities Initiative

63

64

Physical Features of a Healthy Built Environment

Complete Streets Example: Robson Street

Commercial Shopping Area

Secondary School & Sportsplex

Residential & Some Commercial

Residential & Some Commercial

65

Complete Streets Example: Robson Street

66

Complete Streets Possibilities

67

Other Complete Streets Examples Road Width: 14.7 Metres

68

Other Complete Streets Examples Road Width: 18.2 Metres

69

• Met directly with Property Owners who would be affected by the future road network plan

• Held a “mobile” public open house to engage residents fully into the study’s purpose

Public Engagement Process

70

Public Engagement Process • Mobile Open House Format

71

• Participants asked to imagine moving through Clearwater as individuals with different mobility needs and document feedback

Public Engagement Process • Character Card Activity

72

“The path (beside Dutch Lake along Old North

Thompson Highway) is impassable for a

wheelchair.”

“Crossing

Highway 5 is

scary” “Paths should be separated for walkers and

cyclists – can’t hear traffic behind”

“For mothers with strollers, it is important to

have the pathway for pedestrians away from

traffic”

Group of School Children – no

designated crossings or traffic

calming methods Senior with Walker – “hills were

tough / I guess rest benches

would help”

“No roll-up curbs and

painted x-walks [at

Hwy]”

Public Engagement Process • Character Card Activity Responses

73

Bylaw already used and adhered to by:

• Bearview Development –

– Transportation Impact Study

• BuyLow Foods Development

– Plans Refined

– Council approved/paid for MUC

Bylaw In Action

74

Bylaw in Action

75 75

1. Is active transportation design currently implemented in your community (i.e. off-road multi-use paths, cycle lanes, cycle tracks, sidewalks)?

2. What incentives or obstacles help or hinder active transportation design in your community?

3. How do you see this framework process working in your community?

Questions For You!

76

Peter A. Truch (Now at Stantec) Ph: (250) 860-3225 Email: peter.truch@stantec.com Ian Roth Ph: (250) 868-4923 Email: Ian.Roth@opusinternational.ca Opus International Consultants (Canada) Ltd.

77

INVESTIGATING THE ENGINEER’S ROLE: HOW TO MAKE CANADIAN COMMUNITIES

HEALTHIER BY ENCOURAGING ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION

Dr. Gordon Lovegrove, P.Eng. MBA, PhD

Abdul Rahman Masoud, BASc, MASc student

78

Outline

• Motivation

• Objectives

• Methodology

• Results

• Conclusions

• Recommendations

79

Motivation

Converging forces cross Canada and the Globe:

• Increase in obesity rate.

• UN World Health Organization and Canadian road

authorities have declared 2010 to 2020 the decade of

road safety.

• Healthy Canada by Design aims to prevent chronic

diseases.

80

Objectives

1. Review the quantity of AT infrastructure.

2. Investigate attitudes on how governments, land

developers, and the public are embracing Active

Transportation efforts.

3. Identify supportive policies related to AT.

4. Document case studies for Projects that have never been

used in a particular community.

81

Methodology

Literature Review of Peer Reviewed Sources:

– Focus on Canadian Sources and Experiences.

– International Sources used for comparison.

Interview Random Sample Cross Canada:

– Government representatives.

– Advocacy Groups.

– Land Developers.

82

Interviews - Responses

83

AT Facilities

Bike Lanes:

Commonly used in Canadian cities as they provide more connectivity.

Bicycle collisions are reduced by 77% in Thunder Bay each time a bike lane is built.

Edmonton reported 14% increase in cycling after its implementation.

City of Guelph installs bike lanes on reconstructed or resurfaced arterial roads.

84

Active Transportation Facilities

Other on-road

facilities:

Cycle Track

Bicycle

Boulevard

Shared Lanes

Paved Shoulder

http://www.pedbikeimages.org- Dan Burden

City of Calgary, 2014

www.nacto.org

85

Active Transportation Facilities

Treatments to Increase Safety:

Colored Bike Lane

Bike Box

Elephant’s Feet

86

Snow Removal

• 10 cities reported having policies to clear snow from bike routes:

• Five cities clear both on-road and off-road facilities.

• Another five clear only on-road facilities.

• One city clears off-road facilities only.

• Roads are not well cleared from edge to edge.

• Lack of demand or fund are barriers.

87

Snow Removal

Solutions:

• Winter maintenance costs integrated to the budget at

planning and design stages of AT facilities.

• Long, continuous and homogeneous cycling routes.

• Allow cyclists to use sidewalks in the winter.

• Banning on-road parking.

• Provide enough space for snow storage.

88

Public Transit

AT can be increased by:

• Easy interconnectivity between AT

and public transit.

• Easy access to transit facilities.

• Implanted Facilities:

Bus Bike Racks.

Parking at Terminals.

Allowing bike on-board. Bike Slides at Montreal

89

90

Developments

Municipalities have started partnering with land

developers

Municipalities have introduced policies for

developers that require providing AT infrastructure

70 % have policies related to bicycle parking

facilities.

24% have comprehensive policies related to AT

infrastructures other than bicycle parking facilities.

Providing AT infrastructure is not enough!

BARRIERS

Do the interviewed communities face barriers in

AT?

1

0

10

3

5

3

4

14

2

2

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16

PEOPLE IN MY COMMUNITY FACE MANY BARRIERS TO GETTING OUT

MORE TO DO MORE BIKING AND/OR WALKING

PEOPLE IN MY COMMUNITY FACE NO BARRIERS TO GETTING OUT MORE

TO DO MORE BIKING AND/OR WALKING

Strongly Disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly Agree

91

Disagree

Barriers

AT Infrastructure

Length of the trip

Lack of fund

Social or Cultural

Perceptions

92

Cities Priorities

“If there is no priority given, it will always stay least priority”.

93

Conclusions

• All interviewed communities recognize the advantages of

AT infrastructure, however not all have been successful

at increasing its use.

• Easy access to public transportation adds value to AT.

• Cold weather is not a barrier, but lack of maintenance

discourages cycling.

• Discontinuity of AT system and Lack of Funds are main barriers for AT.

94

Recommendations

• Cycle track can be used to provide more connectivity

and sense of safety.

• Provide budget dedicated for AT Infrastructure –

including maintenance.

• Conduct studies to understand residents profile and

behavior toward AT.

• Monitor number of users before and after implementing

AT projects.

95

96

What actions will you take as a result of this Fireside Chat?

1. Share information with colleagues

2. Use information to inform your work

3. Use information to press for program or policy change in your organization or jurisdiction

4. Use information to support relationships with professionals from other sectors within your organization or jurisdiction

5. Use information to support relationships with other professionals within your own sector

6. Other 97

Healthy Canada by Design CLASP

For more information: •Visit our website •Subscribe to our newsletter •Follow us on Twitter Contact Information: Kim Perrotta, Knowledge Translation & Communications Healthy Canada by Design CLASP Initiative & Heart and Stroke Foundation kperrotta@hsf.ca Gene Chin, Project Manager Healthy Canada by Design CLASP Initiative & Heart and Stroke Foundation gchin@hsf.ca

98