Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutINS-15-097 - School Zone Traffic and Parking Issues Staff Rport ��c tl R Infrastructure Services Department wmkitchene►:ca REPORT TO: Community and Infrastructure Services Committee DATE OF MEETING: December 7, 2015 SUBMITTED BY: Justin Readman, Director of Transportation Services (519-741-2200 ext. 7038) PREPARED BY: Ronald Schirm, Supervisor of Crossing Guards (519-741-2200 ext. 7232) WARD(S) INVOLVED: ALL DATE OF REPORT: November 20, 2015 REPORT NO.: INS-15-097 SUBJECT: SCHOOL ZONE TRAFFIC AND PARKING ISSUES RECOMMENDATIONS: That the City continue to support the Active and Safe Routes to School Committee in coordinating School Travel Planning regionally; and, That School Travel Planning be initiated at the local level at participating schools within the City; and further, That the Director of Transportation Services report back on the ability to allocate 0.4 FTEs toward the implementation and management of School Travel Planning on or before the 2017 budget process. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: At the Community and Infrastructure Committee Meeting on January 19, 2015 Council directed staff to investigate the issue of traffic in the vicinity of schools and the impact to the local neighbourhood, identifying and engaging partners, with a report back to Council with recommended actions. Staff identified and surveyed 13 neighbouring Municipalities and met with the Active and Safe Routes to School Committee to identify issues and solutions. The results of the survey indicate that the City of Kitchener leads in a number of areas with respect to managing school related traffic. A solution that is not currently being done directly by the City of Kitchener is School Travel Planning. School Travel Planning is being instituted via pilot projects or trials throughout the Province and has shown to be an effective tool in dealing with a number of issues surrounding traffic and parking in the vicinity of schools by systematically addressing issues and concerns of all stakeholders. ***This information is available in accessible formats upon request. *** Please call 519-741-2345 or TTY 1-866-969-9994 for assistance. 5 - 1 School Travel Planning is a comprehensive process designed to increase local ownership of Active & Safe Routes to School by engaging stakeholders, including school boards, municipal transportation planners and engineers, public health, police, parents, students and school staff. School Travel Planning undertakes research to assess the barriers to active school travel and uses this knowledge to develop and implement specific action plans for each school. The involvement of local stakeholders is an important step to ensuring the sustainability of active school travel activities. BACKGROUND: School related traffic and parking issues have escalated over the past several years and contact with the City by local residents on this issue increasing. With this in mind, Council approved the following recommendations In January 2015: WHEREAS the lack of available on-site parking at schools results in adverse parking conditions and places a strain on neighborhoods due to traffic volume during student arrival and dismissal times; and, WHEREAS increased traffic volume in school zones has resulted in complaints from area residents regarding blocked driveways and unsafe street congestion; and, WHEREAS area residents request By-law Enforcement staff to attend these locations to issue tickets, which does not necessarily address the underlying issues; and, WHEREAS the orderly movement of vehicular and pedestrian traffic in school zones involves not only the City of Kitchener, but also the Region of Waterloo and local area school boards; THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that Transportation Services staff undertake a review of similar strategies utilized by other municipalities to improve safety, pedestrian and traffic movement in school zones; BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that staff be directed to engage the Waterloo Region District School Board and Waterloo Catholic District School Board, the Region of Waterloo, Waterloo Regional Police and any other relevant stakeholders to develop possible solutions to improve and promote pedestrian safety and reduce neighbourhood traffic congestion in school zones; and, BE IT FINALLY RESOLVED that copies of this motion be circulated to the Regional Municipality of Waterloo, Waterloo Regional Police and the local area school boards. Every day throughout the region approximately 81,000 students make their way to and from school. It is estimated that between 20% and 25% of all a.m. peak period traffic is school related. This creates a significant impact in terms of pedestrian traffic, vehicular traffic and parking on the road network and in particular the streets immediately near schools. Many factors have led to an increase in traffic volumes of all modes to and 5 - 2 from schools including school size, safety perceptions and resulting decisions by parents and school policies. The Waterloo Catholic District School Board has 21,000 students region-wide, of which 9,600 are bused. The Waterloo Region District School Board has 60,000 students of which 18,000 are bused. Busing criteria is established by each School Board and locally, both the Waterloo Region District School Board and the Waterloo Catholic District School Board fall within the provincial mean for busing criteria. Funding is provided by the Province to each School Board based in part on the historical average for each School Board as well as the Provincial mean for busing criteria. The size of elementary schools has steadily risen over the past 25 years. In 1990 the average school size was approximately 300 students per school. Today most elementary schools have student populations in excess of 600 students with some schools nearing 900 students. Schools routinely restrict access to their onsite parking facilities due to safety concerns and demand far exceeding capacity. Further exacerbating the issue is the policy by both School Boards for parents/guardians of junior kindergarten and senior kindergarten students to be delivered directly to the classroom by the parent/caregiver. At present students travel to and from school in essentially three ways. Students are bused, travel via active transportation (walking and cycling), or are driven. Statistics compiled by Region of Waterloo Public Health during the School Travel Plan (STP) pilot project, which involved four elementary schools regionally, including one Kitchener school, are the most up to date statistics available and are a good indicator of travel modes for urban and suburban elementary schools. Canadian School Travel Plan Project Results for 4 Pilot Schools within Waterloo Region 2014-2015 Mode of travel Morning trip to school Afternoon trip from school Walking 39% 41% Bused 21% 22% Driven 37% 32% Carpool 3% 3% Did not know* 0% 2% *Surveys were conducted while students were in school and a certain percentage was unsure as to their mode of travel at the end of the school day. When comparing these statistics to national surveys, locally the percentage that is bused is very similar, whereas more students walk locally (39 to 41% than the national average, which is 33%). Historically, travel to and from school has been a shared responsibility between the Municipalities, School Boards, School Transportation Services of Waterloo Region, individual schools and parents/caregivers. Reducing vehicle trips to and from schools is 5 - 3 the desired outcome amongst almost all stakeholders. While each stakeholder has a role to play, the lack of overall ownership of responsibilities can present challenges. The Active and Safe Routes to School Strategic Communication Plan for Waterloo Region states: • Active school travel is a shared issue with no one partner being fully responsible. • There is a shared "ownership" among many partners due to the complexity of the issue (i.e., education, health, transportation) • No clear leader or spokesperson. Some partners have difficulty seeing their role as a result. • Some partners step-up more than others, often as a result of competing priorities. • There is a need to make the "value" clear to each partner as it relates to their mandate(s). • There is agreement among partners that the ideal would be to have a School Travel Planning (STP) facilitator but funding and responsibility for such a position can be a challenge. The local Municipalities role in school transportation has been one of providing and maintaining infrastructure around schools. Pedestrian facilities, trails, sidewalks, crossing guards, crosswalks and school crossings are integral for safe and comfortable trips to and from school. In addition, stopping and parking regulations and by-law enforcement fall under Municipal jurisdiction. The City of Kitchener has many policies and initiatives that support this role. Traffic Calming, Sidewalk Infill Policy, Cycling Master Plan and the Multi-use Pathways Master Plan all prioritize schools and school routes. In the planning process great attention is given in site plan review of new school construction or existing school changes that require site plan approval to access to the school by all modes of transportation. At this time Waterloo Region is at the forefront nationally in terms of collaboration and programming trying to reduce vehicular traffic to and from schools. Much of this work has been coordinated through the Active and Safe Routes to School Committee, whose membership includes staff representatives from the three local Municipalities, both School Boards, the Student Transportation Services of Waterloo Region, Region of Waterloo Public Health and Ministry of Transportation. Accomplishments over the past 12 years include the adoption of the Active Transportation Charter by the Waterloo Region District School Board and the Waterloo Catholic District School Board, participation in two national School Travel Planning Pilot projects, Walk to School Days, Walking School Bus training development and most recently school wayfinding signage project in the City of Waterloo. As part of the research for this report, peer Municipalities in Ontario were asked specific questions regarding school related traffic and parking issues. Cambridge and Waterloo were included and did participate. Both these Municipalities have very similar programs, by-laws, planning processes, infrastructure and partnerships to the City of Kitchener. 5 - 4 Other participating Municipalities cited issues and actions similar to the local experience in dealing with these issues. Peel Region and the Town of Aurora have made school travel planning processes a key function in dealing with this issue through the dedication of staff resources. The City of Cambridge has recently approved support for the School Travel Planning process as well. The requests will be managed by the Transportation Demand Management Coordinator in this case. REPORT: School Travel Planning is a comprehensive process designed to increase local ownership of Active & Safe Routes to School by engaging stakeholders that include school boards, municipal transportation planners and engineers, public health, police, parents, students and school staff. School Travel Planning undertakes research to assess the barriers to active school travel and uses this knowledge to develop and implement action plans. The involvement of local stakeholders is an important step to ensuring the sustainability of active school travel activities. Benefits include increased physical activity, reduced traffic congestion, reduced wear and tear on roadways, improved air quality, enhanced neighbourhood safety and a greater sense of community. School Travel Planning can effectively reduce vehicular travel to and from schools. For example, Metrolinx estimates that, between April 2009 and December 2011, thirty elementary schools in Hamilton, Brampton, and Mississauga participating in a Stepping It Up School Travel Planning Pilot Project collectively achieved: • an overall average decrease in school car trips of 7% in the morning period and 3% in the afternoon period • the prevention of 884 kg of air pollutants, 22 tonnes of greenhouse gas emissions and 101,635 vehicle kilometres travelled annually Furthermore, a recently published evaluation of school travel plans in 103 schools found that 17 per cent of parents reported driving their children to/from school less often as a result of the school travel planning intervention. Of those parents who reported driving less, the large majority (83%) had switched to active transportation, thus highlighting the potential of school travel planning interventions to increase active transportation in parents and their children'. School Travel Planning is a flexible approach that links transportation demand management principles with Active and Safe Routes to School tools and resources. The approach brings together school community stakeholders, including school administrators, parents, public health, police/bylaw services, transportation engineering, planning, the school boards' Safe Routes to School Facilitator and other interested i Mammen G,Stone MR,Buliung R,Faulkner G.School travel planning in Canada:identifying child,family,and school characteristics associated with school travel mode shift from driving to active school travel.J Transp Health.2014;1:288-294. 5 - 5 parties to work through a five-phase process. One or more School Travel Planning facilitators lead the stakeholders through a process that includes: • Identification of School Travel Planning and committee set-up • Baseline data collection • Development of an action plan that addresses barriers to active travel to and from school • Implementation of the action plan • Evaluation and follow-up data collection In 2014/15 Transportation Services, in partnership with Region of Waterloo Public Health and the Waterloo Region District School Board, was involved in a School Travel Planning (STP) project funded by a Healthy Community Partnerships Grant. The partnership was an extension of the Active and Safe Routes to School Committee. St. John Paul School on Pebblecreek Drive was one of the four schools in Waterloo Region to undergo an accelerated STP exercise facilitated by Sustainable Waterloo Region. Further funding from the Automotive Recyclers of Canada in 2015 will allow Sustainable Waterloo Region to continue to work with these schools and pilot test their TravelWise @School program aimed at implementing school travel action plans. Their goal is to see a 5% average reduction in driving across all four schools in one year. Ultimately, reducing school-based auto trips can significantly reduce local congestion. It lessens the impact on the local community in terms of traffic and parking. Generally, more students are able to walk to school than currently do, based on distance to school and available infrastructure. Communities are safer when more pedestrians are present. Further, isolated and fragmented approaches to dealing with school related traffic issues have been met with limited success. A holistic and comprehensive approach, engaging all stakeholders, will enable greater success in dealing with this complex issue. It is recommended that capacity for School Travel Planning in the City be greatly enhanced and utilized as a methodology in dealing with all school related traffic issues. This will allow for greater engagement by all stakeholders. While the Active and Safe Routes to School Committee is available to oversee the program regionally, the City can apply these principles locally at participating schools. In order to accomplish this staff resources are required. Region of Waterloo Public Health would provide direct support to the program by assisting with data collection and would provide ethics review with the Public and Catholic School Boards, which would allow the City to utilize the data collected and share it with the participating schools. The Region of Waterloo has recently approved its Strategic Plan for 2015-2018. The focus areas, strategic objectives and actions under Sustainable Transportation include the following- 5 - 6 2.3 — Build infrastructure for, and increase participation in, active forms of transportation (cycling and walking). 2.3.2 - Collaborate with community partners to facilitate actions to encourage active and safe routes to school Public Health, specifically the Healthy Living Division, has been identified as the lead for encouraging these actions and presently is the Division responsible for the Active and Safe Routes to School Committee as well as leading the School Travel Planning Pilot Project as well as many other related programs. The specific departmental actions as a result of the Strategic Plan are yet to be determined, but an ongoing partnership with the local Municipalities is anticipated. The Waterloo Region District School Board and the Waterloo Catholic District School Board would offer support by providing school-specific information, by providing advice and guidance with respect to each school, and by facilitating communications between schools and City staff. Developing and implementing school travel planning projects at individual schools can be resource intensive in terms of staff. Region of Waterloo Public Health, which housed the School Travel Plan Pilot Project at four schools, had planned for a 20 week project using 0.5 FTE equivalent staff. The projects were not completed in this time frame and more than 30 weeks are estimated to be necessary. The estimated time frame necessary for an effective School Travel Planning project at one school site is reflected in the accompanying flow chart, developed by www.safe routestoschoo1.ca School Travel Planning process Up to 4 MONTHS Set-Up Baseline Data Collection 12 MONTHS " Action Plan Development � .. .. .... .. . 1,01 Action Plan . .. ....., Implementation Evaluation 18+MONTHS (follow-up data collection) 5 - 7 There are 52 Elementary Schools, six Senior Public Schools and eight Secondary Schools in the City. While School Travel Planning would benefit any school it is felt the priority should be to work with Elementary Schools first. It is anticipated that five schools would be able to be accommodated annually should 0.4 FTEs be dedicated to this role. This would also allow for continuous follow up and improvement with existing partner schools. It is estimated that it would take approximately 10 years to complete school travel plans for all the elementary schools within the City. ALIGNMENT WITH CITY OF KITCHENER STRATEGIC PLAN: Strategic Priority: Safe and Thriving Neighbouhoods Strategy 3.6: Provide opportunities and support for citizens to lead the way in creating active and vibrant public places that promote people's health, happiness and well0being by capitalizing on local community assets such as community centres, pools, arenas, libraries, parks trails and other public spaces. FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS: Staff will report back with recommended options to accommodate the 0.4 FTE staff resource before or as part of the 2017 budget process. COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT: CONSULT: Staff engaged stakeholders through meetings with the Active and Safe Routes to School Committee. Staff also circulated a questionnaire to peer Municipalities throughout the Province. School Travel Planning, when executed, should involve extensive public involvement and ongoing communication with relevant stakeholders. INFORM — This report has been posted to the City's website with the agenda in advance of the council / committee meeting. ACKNOWLEDGED BY: Hans Gross, Acting Deputy CAO Infrastructure Services Department 5 - 8 Appendix "A" Results of Survey conducted in July 2015 of peer Municipalities Part 1.0 Administration Yes No 1.1 Do you have dedicated staff to deal with school related traffic and pedestrian issues 9 4 1.3 Is there a Student Safety Patrol Program? 5 7 Part 2.0 Enforcement 2.1 Does the municipality restrict stopping or parking near or at the school during bell times? 9 4 2.2 Is there a set fine specifically for school related parking/stopping infractions? 3 9 2.4 Are there dedicated by-law personnel to enforce school parking restrictions? 6 7 2.5 If no to 2.4,does the municipality actively enforce no stopping or parking areas at 9 schools? Part 3.0 Infrastructure 3.1 Does your municipality prioritize sidewalk and cycling infrastructure around school sites? 7 6 3.2 Are community trails included as part of school routes? 8 4 3.3 Are community trails and pathways cleared by the municipality/school board? 9 3.5 Is there a minimum standard for snow clearing? 6 1 3.6 Has the Municipality proactively installed on street facilities such as a lay-by? 5 8 3.7 If yes to 3.6, are these facilities effective? 2 2 Part 4.0 Design 4.1 In school site design is student pick up/drop off accommodated on site? 12 4.2 If yes to 4.1, Is it used appropriately? 8 4 4.3 If yes to 4.1, Does supply meet demand? 3 8 4.4 If yes to 4.1, Does it enhance safety in accessing the school? 9 2 4.5 When schools are expanded/updated does the municipality comment on/require TDM 11 1 initiatives or on site kiss and ride? 4.6 If yes to 4.5, are initiatives supervised? 7 3 4.7 If yes to 4.5, are the initiatives effective? 5 3 Part 5.0 Partnerships 5.1 Is there a joint committee between municipalities, school boards, public health and other 8 4 partners? 5.4 Is there a School Travel Planning Program in your area? 6 5 5.5 If yes to 5.4,Are their dedicated staffing resources for School Travel Planning(STP)? 4 2 Part 6.0 School Board Responsibilities/Activities 6.4 Do schools routinely restrict access to parking lots at bell times? 5 7 5 - 9