Peel Healthy Urban Development Evaluation Tool

James Dunn, Marisa Creatore, Jonathan Weyman, Evan Peterson and Richard Glazier

Prepared for Peel Public Health byThe Centre for Research on Inner City Health (CRICH) at St. Michael's Hospital

with support fromThe Ministry of Health Promotion

Overview

• Background & Rationale

• Development of Tool

• The Initial Tool

• Consultation & Assessment Process

• Moving Forward

Background & Rationale

Alarmingly high rates of obesity, type 2 diabetes, cancer, and CVD in Canada.

Being physical active can reduce the risk of these diseases by up to 50%.

However, 54% of Peel adults were inactive in 2003.

The region has some of the lowest active transport rates in Canada.

Background & Rationale

Peel Health Report (2005) suggests that sprawling, auto-oriented development could be a cause of these problems.

Peel Council approves Resolution 2005-1395, directing Peel Public Health to make planning recommendations that provide greater opportunity for active living.

CRICH hired to create an evidence-based planning tool to encourage activity-friendly development.

CRICH previously developed the Toronto Diabetes Atlas and indices of health of built environment

Development of Tool

Literature review conducted on over 200 research and best practices articles relating to health and the built environment.

Emphasis on research-based evidence and quantitative recommendations.

Established 7 elements associated with healthy communities in the literature (e.g., density).

Each element broken into quantifiable measures with significant associations with physical activity and health (e.g., net residential density).

Development of Tool

• Strength of evidence (both scientific and expert) analysis determined measures:

• inclusion or exclusion • designation as prerequisite (for approval) or

credit (for bonus certification)• Targets/ranges established using research-based

benchmarks, expert recommendations, and similar planning tools (e.g., LEED-ND).

The Initial Tool

• 7 built environment elements associated with active living:

• Density• (residential, non-residential)

• Service Proximity• (to a variety of services, to transit, to employment)

• Land Use Mix• (mixed land use, mixed building use, mixed housing types)

• Street Connectivity• (intersection density or block size)

The Initial Tool

• 7 built environment elements continued…

• Road Network & Sidewalk Characteristics• (complete streets, traffic calming, traffic speed & pedestrian-

priority, sidewalks & buffer strips, cycle-friendly design, lighting)

• Parking• (elimination of minimums, unbundled/shared, price & difficulty,

location)

• Aesthetics & Human Scale• (setbacks & streetwalls, height to width ratio, tree

placement/characteristics)

1. Density

• Increased density significantly associated with both walking outcomes and lower BMI.

• Interacts with Proximity and Land Use mix to determine the concentration and distribution of people and destinations in the built environment.

• Higher residential densities can better support a variety of services, jobs, and other destinations within walking/cycling distance of where people live.

1. Density

Current trends: Autocentric Suburbs Driveways dominate < 10 units/hectare

Drive-up services

Strip Malls

FAR < 0.5

1. Density

Suggested new requirements:

Residential

Net Dwelling Density 35 units/ha (as shown)

Non-residential

• Floor Area Ratio• > 0.7 FAR • Compact, walkable

2. Service Proximity

Objective & subjective distance to neighbourhood services was significantly associated variety a variety of walking outcomes.

The greater the variety of services close by, the more likely people can visit multiple destinations in the same walk/cycle trip.

Proximity is most important for daily destinations (e.g., work, grocery, school, transit).

2. Service Proximity

• Current trends:• Separated uses

• Distant Destinations

2. Service Proximity

Nearby Destinations Mixed Uses

New requirements: Proximity to a variety of services Proximity to employment Proximity to transit

3. Land Use Mix

• Interacts with Proximity and Density to determine the relative distance between people and destinations and between destinations.

• Aids in reducing trip distance on a multi-destination trip. • Tool encourages a mix of habitual (e.g., work, grocery) and non-

habitual (e.g., entertainment, parks) land uses• Outcomes:

• livelier (more people at more times) neighbourhood, • more convenient (live, work, play) neighbourhood, • safer (more surveillance at more times) neighbourhood

=> all of these features encourage activity

4. Street Connectivity

• Higher connectivity significantly associated with walking outcomes and lower BMI.

• Increased connectivity encourages active transport by providing a more direct route to and between any given destinations, thereby shortening distances.

• Increased connectivity also dissipates vehicular traffic and enhance non-vehicular networks through specialized pathways.

4. Street Connectivity

• Small blocks • Shorter, direct routes

4. Street Connectivity

580/km2 58/km2 5.8/km2

(Prerequisite: 75 intersections/km2)

5. Road Network & Sidewalk Characteristics

• Determines traffic calming and speed, sidewalks and buffers, cycle-friendly design, lighting, and street furniture.

• All influence the safety, comfort, convenience, and enjoyment of active transportation or recreational activity.

• Key to provide for all users, not just cars.• If you build it, they will come – more lanes, more

parking, etc. invites more cars.

5. Road Network & Sidewalk Characteristics

• Incomplete Streets

• Built for the car• Single use(r)

Complete Streets

• Built for people• A true public space• Prerequisite in tool

6. Parking

• Parking minimums are a key factor in limiting densities, as they increase land requirements per unit, which also...

• Increases development costs• Encourages peripheral development• Decreases housing affordability• Contributes to urban heat sink problem• Increases demand on storm water infrastructure• Degrades the pedestrian environment

6. Parking

• We recommend eliminating the minimums.• Replace with maximums or only supply parking

where revenue covers costs.• Encourage car-sharing, car-free housing, public

transportation, and other health-friendly initiatives.• Other options include: unbundled parking in all

multifamily dwellings, shared parking, market rate parking zones, and other programs.

7. Aesthetics & Human Scale

Determines the scale/size and design of the built environment.

Controlling for aesthetics reduced the walkability difference of a low vs high SES neighbourhood to insignificant.

Building to a human scale is essential for pedestrian comfort, safety, and enjoyment.

Urban trees are vital contributors to city aesthetics, the environment, and the economy.

7. Aesthetics & Human Scale

Large setbacks: Increase distances Degrade pedestrian world Allow parking lots in setback

7. Aesthetics & Human Scale

Shorter setbacks (required): On human scale, increased densities, shorter tips People places, window shopping, surveillance/safety, Street enclosure, social cohesion & interaction

Consultation & Assessment Process

Dan Leeming of the Planning Partnership Meetings with key stakeholders

– Planning staff at Peel region– Planning staff from municipalities (Mississauga, Brampton,

Caledon)– private planning firms

Gap analysis of municipal & regional by-laws and planning standards;

Review of relevant provincial legislation & regulations + modifications of tool for conformity

GIS validation & comparison to existing areas

Consultation & Assessment Process

Key Outcomes from Consultation & Assessment:• Jurisdiction of measures

• By-law vs developer vs public department• Most measures controlled by by-laws that do not

correspond with the targets.• Some measures calculated differently than in existing

processes.• Opposition from current mandates & directives (e.g.,

transportation safety/efficiency vs. walkability)• Suitability for infill vs. Greenfield

Moving Forward

Peel Public Health to seek continuity between tool-recommended standards and:

Official Plan(s) Municipal by-laws Transportation & other public standards Provincial legislation & regulations

Governments at all levels can lead by example and by normal channels

They are major property developers in many areas Private sector will follow?

Modification of tool for infill development – initial priority on greenfield new- build

The End.

2.a. Proximity to a Variety of Services and Employment

Prerequisites: > 70% of residents within 800m of 5 public

services. > 70% of residents within 800m of 7 retail

services. Centre of community within 800m of the

same number of full-time jobs as 50% of the number of total dwelling units.

Centre of community within 800m of the same number of dwelling units as 50% of the number of full-time jobs.

4. Street Connectivity

Low connectivity

Longer, indirect routes

5.a. Complete Streets

Complete streets are those designed for all users, not just cars.

Separate travel lanes reduce conflicts between users and greatly increase convenience for walking and cycling.

Lower speed limits greatly increase safety and comfort for pedestrians and cyclists.

Lower volumes offer more pedestrian-oriented spaces with increased opportunity for play and socializing in the street.

5.a. Complete Streets

00-15km/h – Lanes: 1-2. Lane width: ≤ 3.2m*. Sidewalks: 0-2. Bikes Lanes: 0-2.

16-30km/h – Lanes: 1-2. Lane width: ≤ 3.2m*. Sidewalks: 1-2. Bikes Lanes: 0-2.

31-40km/h – Lanes: 1-2. Lane width: ≤ 3.2m. Sidewalks: 2. Bikes Lanes: 1-2.

41-50km/h – Lanes: 2-4. Lane width: ≤ 3.2m. Sidewalks: 2. Bikes Lanes: 2.

All new local roads ≤ 40km/h All new non-local roads ≤ 50km/h * Single lane roads may be ≤ 5m should it accommodate two-

way traffic (e.g., woonerf or other low volume, low speed road).

7.a. Building Setbacks

Prerequisites: Detached residential ≤ 7.6m Attached & multifamily ≤ 4.6m Commercial & light industrial ≤ 3m ≥ 70% commercial/mixed-use flush to

sidewalk Main entrances cannot face parking

7.a. Building Setbacks Commercial: Activity nodes Human scale Street enclosure

7.a. Building Setbacks Commercial: Strip malls Failed mixed use Drive-ups & -throughs