subsidizing inefficiencies in public transport

Public transit operators around the world rely on government subsidies to stay afloat. While this ensures that communities are served where unprofitable routes might otherwise be dropped, it does little to encourage operators to be efficient or communities to use the service. Bill 137 was recently introduced to the Ontario Provincial Legislature to amend the Income Tax Act, providing taxpayers with an income tax credit for a portion of the transit fare. This user subsidy would be a direct motivator for transit use. If the Bill is passed, employers who subsidize staff using transit would also be eligible for a tax credit. Legislative debate is expected in the spring of 2005.

transport modelling as a behavioural science

Computer simulation models have been a staple of transportation planning for years, predicting traffic demand to help government agencies establish priorities for improving the transportation system. Generally these models don't take into account the complexities of urban transportation decisions, the interaction between where people live and work, and how we travel to work and other destinations. As a result they tend to be rather rudimentary tools for road network planning. In most cases the models develop travel patterns from an assumed distribution of land uses: land use decisions are an input to the model rather than part of the model process itself.

The University of Toronto is now collaborating with other Canadian universities in the development of an Integrated Land Use, Transportation, Environment Modeling System (ILUTE). This model looks at the behavioural aspects of land development, location choice, auto ownership and activity/travel - and the interaction between these components. For example, land use evolves in response to location needs of households and firms, and people relocate their homes and/or jobs at least partially in response to accessibility factors. In modelling travel, ILUTE adopts an explicit activity-based approach, in which travel derives from the need to participate in activities, and the spatial/temporal pattern of travel is the dynamic outcome of each person's activity scheduling/re-scheduling process.

This approach should help improve the sustainability of communities by providing a planning tool that is better tuned to travel needs and current policy requirements. The model developers intend to make this available for municipalities to assist with transportation planning, but there is a lot of work still to be done.

Footnote: There are a number of software models that integrate land use and transportation planning, but most of them, like the ILUTE model, are developed in an academic environment and are not widely used. An exception is the MEPLAN model developed by Marcial Echenique and Partners in the UK. This one has been in use for many years, and one of its applications has been with the ongoing (since 1996) Cambridge Futures project.

how much GHG does one home produce?

The average Canadian home emits 5 tonnes of greenhouse gases a year. A study commissioned last year by EnerQuality found that average homes in the Greater Toronto Area emit 6.6 tonnes, and R-2000 homes emit about 4 tonnes. Houses built to Canada's R-2000 standard are designed to reduce energy consumption and maintain air quality that is healthier than average, but the federal government is doing little to encourage new houses to be built to the R-2000 standard. The government has incentives in place to encourage improved energy efficiency in older homes, but no similar programs for new homes.

need more focus on sprawl

The Province of Ontario currently has in force a 1996 Policy Statement that has been criticized for effectively "requiring municipalities to facilitate urban sprawl by maintaining perpetually expanding supplies of developable land." As reported in the October 20, 2004 issue of Novae Res Urbis (GTA Edition), a revised Provincial Policy Statement proposed this year is attempting to reduce sprawl by increasing intensification and redevelopment. However, the Pembina Institute believes that the June 2004 draft does not go far enough in providing incentives that would reduce greenfield development.

The institute has proposed greater focus on the utilization of development capacity, as opposed to simple land availability. Development capacity should be "defined to include both the potential for redevelopment of existing urban areas, and development potential of the currently undeveloped portions of settlement areas designated in official plans." The institute says development potential should also be determined by considering a minimum density requirement for expansions beyond the existing urban area and for transit corridors. The province's Places to Grow document proposes that 40% of growth over the next 10 years should be within current urban boundaries, but is not clear on how to define, target or monitor urban intensification.

transit-oriented vs transit ready development

A concept closely tied to the ideas of new urbanism is that developments should be designed to support transit through considerations such as density, mix of uses, walkability, and location in relation to transit services. Transit-oriented developments (TODs), as they are called, are still the exception, rather than the rule, but a study released in August 2004 shows that more than 100 have been built in the US. The report, Transit-Oriented Development in the United States: Experiences, Challenges and Prospects, shows that TOD boosts transit ridership and increases land values.

As reported in the October/November 2004 edition of New Urban News, the TOD report "cites specific new urban projects as evidence of a shift in the relationship between transit and development." An interesting finding is that the most dramatic changes may be achieved on greenfield sites, which suggests that where sprawl cannot be avoided, there are still opportunities to mitigate some of its negative impacts. The report contends that there is the possibility of inducing suburban residents to ride transit through design and proximity. However:

The problem with this strategy is that the opportunities for immediate transit connections are rare on greenfield sites. The report therefore recommends making developments on these sites "transit ready" - meaning that they should not only have sufficient density and walkability, but also a plan that considers the location and right of way for potential transit.

energy objectives in planning policy

Western Australia's Draft Liveable Neighbourhoods Edition 3 policy, updated in October 2004, is an innovative, performance-based approach to urban planning. It operates as a development control policy, or code, to facilitate the development of sustainable communities.

One area where this policy departs from the norm is in specifying how communities can reduce energy consumption. The Community Design section acknowledges that "street and lot orientation and lot dimensions should facilitate the siting and design of dwellings that can minimize non-renewable energy use and be appropriate for the climatic conditions."

The Lot Layout section goes further in encouraging lot design that allows for climate-responsive dwellings. Recognizing the different climatic zones in Western Australia, the policy suggests that "correctly orientated lots should have guidelines specifying appropriate building setback from the northern property boundary to enable good winter sun access to suitably located and sized windows." The guidelines provide a rating system that "scores" dwellings for solar access based on lot orientation and width. Lots in temperate climates should be oriented to facilitate siting of dwellings and private open space to take advantage of winter solar access and summer sun deflection. Lots in hot humid and hot arid climates should be oriented to facilitate the siting of dwellings to take advantage of micro-climate benefits, including cooling breezes, shading and canopy vegetation.

I have not seen Australian residential subdivisions, but in southern Ontario (Canada) most - if not all - new subdivisions completely ignore these principles. Developers are not responsive to the climate or the site itself, typically clearing trees and topsoil and establishing street and lot layouts that provide the greatest cost efficiency within municipal requirements. Many have single-dwelling lots where houses are only a few feet apart: too close for solar access in the winter and for cooling breezes in the humid summer, and no benefit from the winter heat savings that would accrue if the houses were actually attached. The result is greater consumption of energy for heating and cooling.

carbon credits 101

Now that Russia has ratified the Kyoto Protocol, paving the way for it to come into force globally, it will be interesting to see governments that have ratified the protocol scrambling to reduce GHG emissions during the first period (2008 to 2012). Canada issued a Climate Change Action Plan back in 2002, but as Dianne Saxe writes in the latest edition of Municipal World, the country has relied mainly on education and altruism, using programs such as the One Tonne Challenge. As a result, the Canadian government expects to miss their Kyoto target by at least 60 megatonnes a year.

Saxe writes that Canada's federal system of government makes it difficult to implement international commitments. The federal Liberal government needs to negotiate with the provinces and enact legislation - a task made more difficult by its minority mandate. And some provinces are already acting on their own. Alberta, responsible for 30% of Canada's GHG emissions, "has already asserted jurisdiction over its emissions through its Climate Change and Emissions Management Act, with its own GHG reduction target and emission trading system."

Several federal departments deal with climate change, but Natural Resources Canada will regulate GHGs from the "large final emitters" (LFEs). These include companies in the oil and gas sector, electricity production, mining, and energy-intensive manufacturing. Each LFE will have to monitor and report on its GHGs, not unlike income tax reporting. LFEs will then pay the federal government in accordance with its emissions. This system will result in a market for emission reduction credits. The federal government can sell credits to LFEs, but in order to do so the government must reduce its own emissions or buy credits on the open market.

LFEs can also buy credits from those who either reduce their own emissions or who absorb GHGs through offsets. This opens the way for anyone to sell credits within Canada. Saxe quotes the municipal examples of capturing landfill gases (Winnipeg), district energy systems (Markham or Revelstoke), community-wide emission reduction plans (Edmonton), conversion of municipal fleets (Regina), and reforestation of municipal lands.

Then, once the Kyoto Protocol comes into force, this Canadian system will become part of international carbon trading through the Clean Development Mechanism (to earn abatement credits by investing in projects in developing countries) and Joint Implementation (to participate in projects with other developed nations).