UBC Theses and Dissertations

UBC Theses Logo

UBC Theses and Dissertations

Employment relocation, residential preference, and transportation mode choice: the case of the Justice… Jones, Stuart 1996

Your browser doesn't seem to have a PDF viewer, please download the PDF to view this item.

Item Metadata

Download

Media
831-ubc_1997-0247.pdf [ 8.37MB ]
Metadata
JSON: 831-1.0087700.json
JSON-LD: 831-1.0087700-ld.json
RDF/XML (Pretty): 831-1.0087700-rdf.xml
RDF/JSON: 831-1.0087700-rdf.json
Turtle: 831-1.0087700-turtle.txt
N-Triples: 831-1.0087700-rdf-ntriples.txt
Original Record: 831-1.0087700-source.json
Full Text
831-1.0087700-fulltext.txt
Citation
831-1.0087700.ris

Full Text

EMPLOYMENT RELOCATION, RESIDENTIAL PREFERENCE, AND TRANSPORTATION MODE CHOICE: THE CASE OF THE JUSTICE INSTITUTE OF BC by STUART JONES B. Arts, Trinity Western University, 1988 A THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF ARTS PLANNING in THE FACULTY OF GRADUATE STUDIES (School of Community and Regional Planning) We accept this thesis as conforming to the required standard THE UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA February 1997 ©Stuart Jones, 1996 In p resen t ing this thesis in partial fu l f i lment of the requ i remen ts f o r an advanced degree at the Universi ty of British C o l u m b i a , I agree that t h e Library shall make it f reely available f o r re ference and s tudy. I fu r ther agree that permiss ion f o r ex tens ive c o p y i n g of this thesis f o r scholar ly pu rposes may be g ran ted by the head o f m y d e p a r t m e n t or by his o r her representat ives. It is u n d e r s t o o d that c o p y i n g o r pub l i ca t i on o f this thesis fo r f inancial gain shall n o t be a l l o w e d w i t h o u t m y w r i t t e n permiss ion . DE-6 (2/88) 11 Abstract Abstract Employment Relocation, Residential Preference, and Transportation Mode Choice: The Case of the Justice Institute of B .C. Over the last 100 years technological improvements in urban travel in terms of reliability and speed, has meant increased mobility for residents. This was accelerated with the advent of the automobile. It allowed many to move to the suburbs that were typified by less expensive lower density housing, and commute longer distances to their place of work. Today, in urban areas, cars are the main means of urban transport. The problem arises in major urban areas across North American when everyone tries to travel at the same time (usually during to trip to and from work). Urban areas are faced with problems of congestion (during rush hour) along with the lack of attractive transit alternatives. One aspect of this problem is examined in terms commuting habits. The purpose of this exercise is to examine the commuting habits of Justice Institute employees whose place of work moves from the West Side of Vancouver to New Westminister. In the postmove period employees made a number of decisions regarding their modal-type and residential location. These decisions may have a significant impact on their activities and travel patterns in the city. The goal is to collect data that would indicate the place of residence of employees before and after the Justice Institute move. It should also include employee modal-type in the pre and postmove periods of the move. Such information is important in the understanding the changes' employees make regarding their residential location and modal-type and the reasons for these changes. As well, employee characteristics such as income can influence these decisions. Such decisions are based on employee's preferences, likes Ul and dislikes regarding their neighbourhood and modal-type. Within this framework, it is the goal of this analysis to understand how employees make trade-offs between where they live and the time they spend commuting to and from work. The correlation parameter may describe the tendency for some commuters to locate themselves close to their employment. The analysis of the survey results will help planners understand more about the urban transport problem. Within this framework, planners can learn why people choose to travel by car instead of transit. This may be related to choice of neighbourhood. It may be that employees choose neighbourhoods that they like to live in regardless of their place of work. Thus, to understand more about the transport problem planners need to know what kinds of neighbourhoods attract people. If the quality of neighbourhoods is an important factor regarding employees' choice of residential location, any transport plan must include land-use initiatives that attempt to create neighbourhoods that attract people. The idea is to bridge the two; otherwise conflicting land-use policies could easily undermine any transport plan. Within this framework, policy must be geared to bring home and places of work closer together. This means creating vibrant neighbourhoods that contain a variety of land-use that could create more employment opportunities closer to home. Neighbourhoods should not only create just residential uses alone. That would mean people would have less distance to travel. This would also mean creating pedestrian and transit friendly neighbourhoods. Less emphasis would be given to the car and more to alternative methods of transport. Such policies can go along way in reducing the dependence on the car. iv Table of Contents Table of Contents Page Numbers Abstract " List of Figures vii List of Tables viii Acknowledgement »x I. Background for Study 1 A. Introduction 1 B. Issues Relevant to the Study 2 C. Institutional Structure 6 D. Objective 9 E. Thesis Methodology 10 F. Selection of Study 11 G. Selection of Technology 11 H. Definitions 12 I. Scope and Limitations 14 J. Organization 15 n. Geographical Expansion and Urban Transport 17 A. Introduction 17 B. European Experience 17 C. Suburbs and Garden Cities 19 D. The Canadian Experience 23 E. Universal Car Ownership 26 F. The Decline of Public Transport 30 G. Summary 33 HI. Methodology 36 A. Introduction 36 B. Related Studies 37 C. The Justice Institute 37 D. Experimental Design 38 E. Summary 43 V Table of Contents Page Numbers IV. Analysis of Survey Results 45 A. Introduction 45 B. Neighbourhood Characteristics 45 C. Renters and Owners 47 D. Where Employees Want to Live 48 E. Influence of Commute 49 F. General Commuting Characteristics 50 G. Commute Satisfaction 52 H. Employee Characteristics 54 I. Employee Commuting Characteristics 54 J. Residential Relocation 58 K. Summary 59 V. Policy Initiatives 61 A. Justice Institute Case Study 61 B. Transportation Demand Management 64 C. Spatial Distribution 67 D. Land Use and Urban Transport 69 E. Telecommuting 74 F. The GVRD Experience 75 G. Summary 77 VTJ. Summary and Conclusions 79 A. Historical Development 79 B. Survey Results 80 C. Policy Initiatives 82 D. Suggestion for Further Research 84 Bibliography 86 Appendix A 92 1. Cover Letter for Justice Institute Employee Transportation Survey 93 2. 1995 Justice Institute Employee Transportation Survey 94 vi Table of Contents Page Numbers Appendix B 97 1. Comments to Section A Question 4 of the Jl Transportation Survey 98 2. Comments to Section B Question 3 of the Jl Transportation Survey 101 3. Comments to Section B Question 4 of the Jl Transportation Survey 104 4. Comments to Section B Question 5 of the Jl Transportation Survey 107 5. Comments to Section B Question 7 of the Jl Transportation Survey 110 Appendix C 113 1. Neighbourhood, Commute and Employee Results of the Survey 114 Appendix D 118 1. Statistical Analysis of Survey Results for Chapters 4 and 5 119 vu List of Figures List Of Figures Page Numbers Figure 1.1 Average Price - Single Detached Vancouver CMA 5 Figure 1.2 Total Cross Commute Trips 1985-1992 5 Figure 2.1 Radial Cities 19 Figure 2.2 Ebenezer Howard's Garden City Concept 20 Figure 2.3 Vancouver Street Car System 25 Figure 2.4 Canadian Urban Transit and Automobile Use 30 Figure 2.5 Recent Travel Patterns 31 Figure 3.1 Survey Results 41 Figure 4.1 What Employees Particularly Like About Their Neighbourhood in Terms of How They Rate It 46 Figure 4.2 Housing Type 48 Figure 4.3 Where Employees Want to Live 49 Figure 4.4 Reasons for Using the Car in the Pre and Postmove Periods 51 Figure 4.5 Reasons for Using Transit of Employees Who Have the Ability to Use a Car 51 Figure 4.6 Reasons for Using Transit Involving Employees Who Cannot Use a Car ... 52 Figure 4.7 Alternate Methods of Commuting 52 Figure 4.8 Commute Satisfaction 52 Figure 4.9 Change in Commute in the Postmove Period 53 Figure 4.10 Reasons for Upper Management Staff Using the Car 55 Figure 4.11 Reasons Instructors and Coordinators Use the Car 56 Figure 4.12 Reasons Instructors and Coordinators Use Transit 56 Figure 4.13 Reasons Administrative Support Staff Use Transit 57 Figure 4.14 Reasons Administrative Support Staff Use the Car 58 Figure 4.15 Residential Relocation 59 Figure 5.1 Modal-Type and Change in Commute 63 Figure 5.2 Efficient Transportation Must be Developed Alongside Compatible Land Uses 65 Figure 5.3 Electronic Surveillance 66 Figure 5.4 Spatial Distribution of Trip Origins for Justice Institute Employees 68 Figure 5.5 BC Tel Head Office Relocation 70 Figure 5.6 Mixed Uses Serve the Needs of Pedestrian and Transit Users 71 Figure 5.7 Before and After Neighbourhoods That Result in the Woonerf 73 Figure 5.8 Good Transit Service is the Way to Keep the Region Moving 76 viii List of Tables List o f Tables Page Numbers Table 1.1 House Prices in the Lower Mainland 4 Table 3.1 Household Characteristics and Attitudes 43 Table 3.2 Person Trip Characteristics 43 Table 4.1 Dimensions of Neighbourhood Differentiation 47 ix Acknowledgement This thesis would not have materialized had it not been for the co-operation and kindness of the Justice Institute. I must thank Pam White (Manager, Human resources) for her suggestions and efforts making the data collection happen. I must also thank all the staff who took part in the transportation survey. I got a sense that there generally was a lot of enthusiasm about the survey. I extend my deep gratitude to Dr. Henry Hightower of UBC's School of Community and Regional Planning who first saw some value in my topic that it was worth pursuing, and for his guidance along the way. I am most grateful to my UBC advisor, Dr. Tom Hutton (UBC's Centre For Human Settlements) who has exercised admirable effort in his role throughout the process and frequently guiding me through the difficult task of completing the work. 1 Chapter 1 Background for Study Introduction Urban transport is a part of the daily lives of most residents, providing the mobility demanded by our society and its economy. It is easy to understand that there is such a general interest in urban transportation. Residents spend a great deal of their resources that includes time and money, on urban or metropolitan transportation. What do these expenses buy? It buys mobility, which is the product of the transportation industry. Within this framework, technology is constantly at work, creating faster and more efficient means of movement; and, being human, we make use of these new means to move even more and farther. Because we can cover 10 miles faster and more easily by car than we can cover 1 mile on foot, we do so. Cities spread out further and further, and we travel for work, shopping, recreation, education, or other social activities that previously would have been considered completely out of reach. What has happened instead is not the hoped-for saving of time, but in the use of more space and in wider opportunities for contact, because that is what we want most. The evolution of urban transport systems has influenced the way cities have grown. Highways and bridges that were built have had a major impact on the urban landscape. This development dictates the routes people take between their place of work and their residential location. Where people live and work within the region determines much of their daily travel needs. 2 Issues Relevant to the Study The implications of the use of the private automobile in the Greater Vancouver Regional District will be significant. This is based on the theme of expected population growth, often repeated throughout studies of the region. One such study, ' The Livable Region Strategy: Proposals' (1993) focused upon environmental values as a framework for future urban development. The report identified a number of trends and municipal development policies indicate that half of Greater Vancouver's growth over the next 30 years will be concentrated in the Fraser Valley.1 A distinct theme emerges when community plans are viewed together - Greater Vancouver's growth over the next 30 years would be concentrated in a corridor that ... would stretch from Vancouver to Chilliwack (a distance of about 105 kilometers).2 While the total population for the region will grow 1.7 times, the number of people 45 and older will increase 2.4 times by 2021 and will account for almost one-half the population.3 The population over 45 has the highest average spending on the ownership and use of automobiles and for ground-oriented housing (single family, townhouse and duplex dwellings).4 People 45 to 65 years of age have the highest propensity to live in ground-oriented units.5 Single-detached housing units, as a proportion of total housing units, are decreasing in number as other forms of ground-oriented accommodation (row houses, town houses, and duplexes) increase in number. Those 65 and over have a higher propensity to live in apartments.6 Planners will also need to identify a changing population mix as the region ages. The labour force will increase significantly even as the population ages, with projections suggesting that the regional labour force will increase by 83 percent between 1991 and 3 2021.7 As well, the percentage of women in the work force will increase from 50 percent today.8 Average household size will decrease - subsequently small households will increase. Finally, 30 percent of Greater Vancouver's residents are currently born outside Canada, creating a more diverse population.9 These changes are reflected in how the regions' housing, services and communities are changing. As a result, attention will need to be paid to how that increasingly diverse population uses the region and moves through it. As well, these changes suggest that a generic approach to reducing dependency upon automobile use will not properly promote alternative to private auto use across the breadth of population mix that exists in the region.10 To accommodate these changes, the current strategic planning process focuses on where the next one million residents will live and how their transportation needs will be served. Within this framework, there are a number of strategic considerations that planners must deal with: Location within the region of population growth, with explicit consideration of the Fraser Valley, the existing urban core, and the suburban areas of South Fraser and the Northeast. How compact should evolving communities be? This applies both to regional concentrations and local centres. What should the hierarchy of urban centres be? Should there be a preference for a bi-polar or a multi-polar region? Finally, where should public investment in public transportation go, both geographically and technologically?11 'Back to the Future: Re-designing Our Landscapes With Form, Place, and Density', (1993) talks about creating a better tomorrow. It looks at a broad number of integrated urban issues ranging from growth management and density to real estate economics and architecture. The report assists in documenting some of the trends that are 4 shaping metropolitan areas. The critical trends include excessive travel within metropolitan areas, no consensus on how to finance infrastructure fairly, poor mix of housing options for a diverse society, and unwillingness to meet regional responsibilities.12 Unless the use of the automobile is modified, the region is faced with an increasing housing market, mounting traffic congestion, and the stresses of the daily journey to work in a situation of increasing job-residence separation. The implications of uneven geographic development of the office sector contribute to a situation of increasing job-residence separation. Table 1.1 House Prices in the Lower Mainland Single Detached November 1995 August 1996 Area Median Average Median Average Burnaby $544,500 $638,952 $595,000 $609,218 Coquitlam $435,000 $461,880 $350,000 $431,215 Delta $408,950 $395,425 $334,950 $352,117 Langley DM $299,000 $327,330 $299,000 $293,258 Maple Ridge $285,000 $284,120 $272,000 $297,382 New Westminister $345,000 $348,150 North Van City $498,000 $524,000 North Van DM $474,000 $484,667 $649,000 $637,000 Pitt Meadows $370,000 $368,780 $239,900 $250,760 Port Coquitlam $290,500 $329,471 $275,000 $316,644 Port Moody $425,000 $433,091 $418,000 $414,450 Richmond $478,800 $515,231 $593,000 $610,642 Surrey $326,900 $387,692 $320,000 $358,480 Vancouver City $708,000 $863,169 $838,000 $997,406 West Vancouver $854,500 $102,917 $887,500 $1,034,400 White Rock $500,450 $528,600 Vancouver CMA Total $425,000 $542,753 $369,000 $497,600 Source: CMHC New Housing Report - Vancouver CMA Fraser Valley August 1996 In the past, Ley (1985) indicated that the inflationary effects of concentrated investment in Vancouver's CBD were experienced not only in the commercial core but also in the inner-city neighbourhoods, as developers capitalized on the residential preferences of new downtown office workers. The inner-city housing market has been transformed, with up filtering to condominium apartments and townhouses.13 House prices, in general declining outward from the downtown core (table 1.1), continue to trend upwards in 1996 (figure 1.1).14 Figure 1.1 Average Price - Single Detached Vancouver CMA 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996F Source: CMHC Housing Forecast - Vancouver In the search for affordable housing, families were forced into various forms of adjustment, including dependence on two wage earners, acceptance of poorer-quality units, and increasingly long journey to work.15 Traffic conditions deteriorated Figure 1.2 Total Cross Commutes Trips 1986-1992 64.7% from the pressures of increasing number of commuters converging on downtown. Transportation planners sought to ease conditions with the construction of 21 km Skytrain based on one radial approach to the downtown from Surrey via Burnaby and New Westminster. Heavy reliance of such a large single use system along with other expressways and major arterials does not serve the increasing number of cross-suburban commute trips or cross-commuting trips (figure 1.2). The actual 1985-1995 increase in the number of trips ending in Vancouver was over 70,000, an average annual increase of 10,000 new trips in the usual weekday rush hours.16 The increase in suburban areas, however, was much greater (over 200,000 trip,'or 30,000 additional trips made each year).17 100% 80% 60% 40% 20% 0% 5M% Suburb to Suburb i M f t i Vancouver to Suburb Vancouver to Vancouver Soure: GVRD Strategic Planning Depart. Bulletin August 1994 6 Essentially, the example of growth in the Greater Vancouver Region and the use and its impact of the private automobile is important to this study as a framework for defining the characteristics of travel patterns throughout the region. This example is common to most post-industrial cities where growth management policies relating to urban transport practices rely on the understanding of the factors that affect growth. How much attention is paid to these factors within the boundaries of any decision making process regarding office relocation from an urban transport point of view? Within this framework, it is important to outline the institutional structure of the Justice Institute and the players involved in its' relocation from the west side of Vancouver to New Westminister. Institutional Structure The Ministry of Advanced Education and Job Training has primary responsibility for the Justice Institute as a whole. This includes the funding of infrastructure costs (e.g. Central administration, facilities and capital) and core program support costs (i.e. Educational Services Division, which is responsible for extension programs, media and library services, and various non Academy-specific programs). The five Academies (Corrections, Emergency Health Services, Fire, Police, Provincial Emergency Program) are funded by their client ministries; i.e., Solicitor General; Health; Municipal Affairs, Recreation and Culture; Attorney General. A senior-level representative from each client ministry sits on a Policy Advisory Committee, which provides a liaison among the various client ministries. 7 Apart from its client ministries, the Justice Institute is free to pursue training contracts with various public and private agencies at the federal, provincial and local levels, as well as relationships with other colleges and institutes. In addition, it may offer justice and public safety-related programs on a cost recovery basis, in the manner of unfunded extension programs. A variety of training formats are used, ranging from simulations, lectures, workshops and seminars to distance education by means of print packages, tutors, travelling training units, television (Knowledge Network) broadcasts and videotapes. Course duration ranges from less than one day to several months full-time, as well as several years of part-time study in the case of some certification programs. The Justice Institute has a full-time staff of approximately 125, including administrative, instructional, seconded and support staff. In additions a large number of part-time and volunteer persons assist in delivering training programs at the community level around the province. The Justice Institute confronted the prospect of a move when the disadvantages of a cramped operation became intolerable. The organization grew out of strong roots, and has survived several decades of both good and bad times. It has faced uncertainty in its future. For example, the Ministry of Education withdrew funding in 1984 during a period of intense fiscal restraint. At that time, the Ministry of Attorney General assumed responsibility for the Justice Institute and its funding. In spite of the cutbacks, uncertainties, endless studies and reports of the years immediately preceding, the Institute has survived. The organization continues to increase productivity and efficiency in working toward the achievement of the its' mission and goals. 8 The relocation of the JI has meant that its future is fairly certain. The stakeholders that were involved would include the provincial ministries responsible for the JI and civic levels of government accomplished the move. Essentially, a more central location in the Lower Mainland was desired. The site chosen was in a central location on McBride Boulevard and Eighth Avenue in New Westminster. Among the factors that determined this selection were its availability and size. Economic factors were important. Although construction costs were not markedly different, land costs were less than downtown. The new site allowed for a lower floor space ratio and extensive parking space. The tax differentials were regarded as inconsequential. Indeed, there were substantial immediate costs to relocation that involved transport and furnishing costs. Moreover, besides disrupting employee's journey-to-work habits, the relocation would take them to a site devoid of the amenities of the west side. To over come these obstacles, the institute placed considerable emphasis on imaginative building design, with a striking facial coliseum design similar to that of Vancouver's new downtown library and attractive interior features and services. At the civic level of government, the City of Vancouver and the City of New Westminister had vested interest into the institute's move. The City of Vancouver would give consideration into the future of the old site at Jericho in the west side of Vancouver. The City of New Westminister would negotiate the development of the new site with representatives of the JI. The Institute would be a boost for the city's image as a center for institutions serving not only the Lower Mainland, but also the whole of the Province. At the neighbourhood level, the City of New Westminister also saw the move as an opportunity for redevelopment of not only the site but to the surround properties as well. 9 New zoning in the area will have a significant impact on new development that involves higher densities for mixed uses around the JI. Objective It is the objective of this thesis to examine the issue of cross-commuting trips related to the effects of office relocation on the employees of the Justice Institute. The affects on the work force will be analyzed regarding the relocation that took place in 1994. Discussion in this nature will include several related variables. These include neighbourhood characteristics - how employees feel about their residential location and the reasons why; where they would like to live and why; and how much this decision would be influenced by their commute before and after the relocation. Analysis will also include employee's transport behavior (activities and travel patterns) before and after the relocation and the reasons behind these choices. It is also important to examine employment history along with status to look for similarities and differences in neighbourhood and commuting characteristics among income groups. Finally, we want to know which employees, if any move their residence to be closer to their place of work. The above analysis describes the options available to employees before and after the JI relocation. The options that an individual has are determined by the material supply of the transport infrastructure. These are the constraints and options of the individual and his household, and the social values, norms and opinions relevant to transport behavior. Essentially, the question is - how do employees make the trade-offs between where they live and the time they spend commuting to and from work? Where relevant, these results will be compared to a parallel survey of Ley's B.C. Tel and B.C. Hydro survey (1985), to 10 test the proposition, which has been a primary objective of regional planning policy, that the suburban decentralization of head offices enhances employee well-being. The Jl relocation may exhibit similar postmove characteristics among employees surveyed. Thesis Methodology Is there a relationship between the joint distribution of the home and workplace? The first models of the trip to work were utilized as components of urban travel models. They made the simplifying assumption that homes and workplace were independently and uniformly distributed. Commuters selected their workplace without reference to the location of their homes. That is, no correlation exists between home and work, although in all likelihood, a correlation could exist between these places. The examination about how employees make trade-offs between where they live and the time they spend commuting to and from work involves, firstly, the selection of an example. This leads to the definition of the study area, and then an analysis the study area in relation to the technology, based upon appropriate considerations. The goal is to collect data that would indicate the place of residence of employees and their method of travel before and after the Jl move. We have revealed that several variables are used to establish a relationship between home and the place of work. Such variables are related to neighbourhood, commuting and employee characteristics. To determine these, a questionnaire was to be assigned to each employee. Statistical relationships between variables will be examined. Thus, we will look at change in workplace that characterizes the dispersion of the destination of commute trips before and 11 after the move. The correlation parameter may describe the tendency for some commuters to locate themselves close to their employment. Selection of Study The Justice Institute is chosen for this study to illustrate the relationship between the home and the workplace. The move from Vancouver to New Westminster will have a significant impact on employees commuting methods and patterns. For the purposes of this thesis the study area will involve the whole of the GVRD area because employees at the Justice Institute would travel from various suburbs including Vancouver and possibly beyond the boundaries of the GVRD. Thus, appropriate geographic area to be studied may be quite large because of the possibility that some employees may commute from areas outside the GVRD. Selection of Technology For the purpose of this thesis several forms of urban transport were looked at in terms of how they are used within the urban context. Several characteristics can be derived from these modes of travel. Auto driver trips are those made by automobile. They account for the majority of passenger trips especially during rush hour. Trips made by transit account for significantly less during peak travel times. Other trips include other modal-types that include walking and biking. 12 Definitions A number of definitions are relevant to this study. To begin, employees who rate their neighbourhood between 1 to 10 as a place to live are divided between 1 to 6 (<6) and 7 to 10 (>7). Those who rate between 7 and 10 see their neighbourhood as a better place to live than those who rate between 1 and 6. We also refer to their place of residence as their 'residential location'. In the Lower Mainland, residents live in a variety of housing types. According to the survey questionnaire, housing types include either 'owners' or 'renters'. Among these, employees choose from a 'house', 'apartment' or 'townhouse'. 'Co-op' housing is also included as a housing type. We also define the influence commute has on employee's decision of where they would like to live in the Lower Mainland to include 'completely', 'a great deal' 'somewhat', 'not very much' and 'none'. Subsequently, to gauge the degree of influence, respondents are grouped either in those who are at least 'a great deal' influenced (>GD), or those who are 'somewhat' influenced or less (<SS). Along with influence, employee commute times are divided between those who are less than 30 minutes (<30 min), and those who are longer than 30 minutes (>30 min.). This value is an expression of the overall medium value of commute time expressed by employees. Thus, employees who have commute times that are longer than 30 minutes are conceivably longer than average than those who indicate shorter commute times of 30 minutes or less. The level of commute satisfaction is defined according to the degree of happiness. Several options are available to choose from that include extremely happy, generally very happy, generally satisfied, somewhat satisfied, not happy at al' and does not matter. 13 Responses are then grouped into 4 categories that measure the degree of happiness. These are defined as those who are at least 'generally very happy or more', 'generally satisfied', 'somewhat satisfied', and those who are 'not happy at all'. Some employees indicate that they are experiencing a change in their commute after the Jl relocation. They include shorter commutes, longer commutes, commutes that have not changed or are either shorter or longer. These changes are also referred to in the 'postmove period' or the time after the office relocation. The 'premove' period is defined as the time before the office relocation. Finally, employees exhibit a number of characteristics according to their employment history. Within this framework, their are a number of definitions that include years employed at the Justice Institute. They been divided between those that have been employed more than five years (>5), or less than 5 years (<5). Employees also fall under several employment types that include administrative support, instructors/coordinators, managers, directors, program directors, and other. From these categories, employees are grouped into 3 employment types. The first group includes those employees who are classified as administrative support (as), the second includes instructors and coordinators (id) and the last consists of managers, program directors, directors and those employees who are classified as 'other' that include maintenance and janitorial jobs. The Jl move has less affect on these employees along with other staff in this group. These types of positions along with other managers, program directors and directors are classified as upper management (um). Essentially, these positions can be found in most places of employment. Finally, responses of previous positions held at the Justice Institute have 14 been divided between those that have moved around at the same level or have moved up to upper management positions. Scope and Limitations As implied earlier, it is the purpose of this thesis to discuss the change in workplace that characterizes the dispersion of the destination of commute trips before and after the JI relocation. As in other cities the Greater Vancouver Area is a sprawling region, and within it, communities are developing with the kind of land-use that perpetuate the transportation problems that are here today. It is not the purpose of this thesis to solve our urban transport problems but instead, to gain a better understanding of the forces that shapes our urban environments. The findings in this thesis with regard to urban travel and its impact on the urban fabric are not reported to be either definitive or completely comprehensive. Comprehensive conclusion on urban transport requires the examination of all likely routes, technologies, and impacted neighbourhoods. Due to practical constraints, this thesis is limited to the examination of the potential impact of one case study. The goal is to provide an information framework, based to the extent possible, on observable data, rather than conjecture. This information framework should only be seen as a prelude to a public participation process designed to broaden information and offset value biases. It should also be readily adaptable to other studies, and a detailed study of one case of displaced employees may provide more information than a superficial study of several such cases. 15 Organization This thesis is comprised of six chapters: Chapter one has dealt with the background for study, objective, thesis methodology, selection of study, selection of technology, definitions and the scope and limitations of the thesis. Chapter Two canvasses relevant literature to identify potential impacts, their nature and their significance by examining the historical as well as contemporary perspectives that relate to urban travel models as these relate to the geographical expansion of the urban environment. Chapter Three applies to sampling methods and data collection techniques. This chapter also looks at sample size related to the employees at the Justice Institute. Chapter Four reveals the results of the survey and draws on some significant conclusions pertaining to neighbourhood and the examination of the demand and characteristics associated with the various modes of urban transport. These will be looked at in terms of employment history and employee status along with an analysis of employees who may have moved their residence to closer to their place of work. Chapter Five looks to some policy suggestions in light of urban land-use and the characteristics of urban transport. Chapter Six concludes the thesis with a summary of survey results, review of policy initiatives and suggestions for further research. 16 Endnotes 1 Greater Vancouver Regional District. "Livable Region Strategy: Proposals." (Burnaby, B.C.: August 1993), p. 17. 2 Ibid., p. 17. 3 Greater Vancouver Regional District & Canadian Urban Institute. "Cities Without Cars, A Visioning Process To Reduce Auto Dependency." (Burnaby, B.C.: May 1994), p. 9. 4 Ibid., p. 9. 5 Ibid., p. 9. 6 Ibid., p. 9. 7 Ibid., p. 9. 8 Ibid., p. 9. 9 United Way of the Lower Mainland And Associates. "Implications of Social Trends For Growth Management & Transportation Planning in the Lower Mainland." (Vancouver, B.C.: January 1993), p. 6. 1 0 Greater Vancouver Regional District & Canadian Urban Institute. "Cities Without Cars, A Visioning Process To Reduce Auto Dependency." (Burnaby, B.C.: May 1994), p. 6. 1 1 United Way of the Lower Mainland And Associates. "Implications of Social Trends For Growth Management & Transportation Planning in the Lower Mainland." (Vancouver, B.C.: January 1993), p. 23. 1 2 Greater Vancouver Regional District & Canadian Urban Institute. "Cities Without Cars, A Visioning Process To Reduce Auto Dependency." (Burnaby, B.C.: May 1994), p. 14. 1 3 David Ley, "Downtown Or The Suburbs? A Comparative Study Of Two Vancouver Head Offices," The Canadian Geographer. 29 (1985), 31. 1 4 Canada Mortgage And Housing Corporation. Vancouver Housing Forecast (Spring 1996), p. 3. I S . David Ley, "Downtown Or The Suburbs? A Comparative Study Of Two Vancouver Head Offices," The Canadian Geographer. 29 (1985), 31. 1 6 Greater Vancouver Regional District. "Travel Survey Shows Increases In Suburban Travel, Auto Use." Strategic Planning Department Bulletin. (August 1994), p. 6. 1 7 Ibid., p. 6. 17 Chapter 2 Geographical Expansion and Urban Transport Introduction The reshaping of urban areas involves the geographical expansion of cities. We can argue that these forces are those rooted in changing modes of transportation. It has influenced the ability for individuals to move. Alongside this notion, it is important to trace the changes in theories of development. Discussion will focus on European experiences in the historical sense followed by analysis of Canadian experiences. Essentially, our task will be to trace the evolution of urban transport along side of the theories of development from a historical to a contemporary context. European Experience The roots of contemporary urban travel are related to urban geographical expansion that occurred first in Europe. Development in the expanding towns and cities of the Industrial Revolution was carried out in very different circumstances from those of the mid-eighteenth century. The concentration of jobs in the large steam-powered factories, combined with the effects of rural poverty, had encouraged large numbers of migrate to the city. The majority of building took place around factories where the virtual absence of building regulations produced a very low standard of housing. Donald Osen, writing in The Victorian City - Images and Reality (Routledge and Kegan Paul, 1973), describes the attitude of both the very poor and the better-off artisan, and says of both: 'Their chief requirement as to housing was that it be cheap and that it be densely enough 18 built so that everyone could live within walking distance of his work.1 During this time, although the building of housing estates for the middle classes increased, it represented only a small part of the total volume of building. Manchester was one of the earliest centres to experience growth of the urban population due to the presence of the cotton industry that was the first to be mechanized. In 1774 its population was 24,000 but within twenty-seven years it had almost trebled to 70,000.2 In the next half-century the urban population rose dramatically as steam-powered factories became universal, creating over crowding conditions. Until the middle of the nineteenth century most of Britain's urban population lived within walking distance of both their work and the town centre. Even London with its two million inhabitants and expanding middle-class suburbs was still contained within a three-mile radius.3 From 1850 onwards towns and cities began to expand in geographical area on the same sort of scale that they had expanded in numbers of people at the beginning of the century. This expansion was first made possible by railways. The transport corridors in and out of the cities were, in effect, unto themselves linear cities. In London's case ten of these linear cities radiated from the centre like spokes of a wheel. Each 'spoke' had the centre of the metropolis at one end, the country at the other end, with a series of small centres in between.4 These suburban centres often sprang up around the railway station. A contemporary map of London illustrates the undeveloped countryside in between some of the radial corridors. In similar fashion, the plan for Washington DC after World War II was a similar system of radial corridors separated by green space stretching towards the centre (figure 2.1). 19 Figure 2.1 Radial Cities London 1914 Washington Plan 1950 Source: Harley Sherlock, Cities Are Good For Us (London England: Paladin, 1991), p. 66. Suburbs and Garden Cities The geographical expansion of cities also brought about poor living conditions along side the factories. Urban reformers were deplored at the concentration at such overcrowding and substandard housing. Many called for the decentralization of urban centres. Reformers such as Henry George began such though in the mid-1800s. Other reformists included William Morris who had founded the Arts and Crafts Movement, published his Utopian News from Nowhere in 1892.5 It was socially radical and called, in effect, for the abolition of cities and the industrialization that went with them. It was a plea for a return to the countryside and to a rural life of social equality but shorn of mechanization. Although it was not until 1898 when Ebenezer Howard published his Garden Cities of Tomorrow that serious thought was given to the form of the city of the future.6 20 Figure 2.2 Ebenezer H o w a r d ' s Garden C i t y Concept Ebenezer Howard combined idealism with practicality. His plan called for transit-friendly patterns of land-use. This involved the dispersal of population and jobs from overcrowded cities to a series of planned garden cities located beyond a green belt surrounding a parent city. Howard imagined that the central city of his cluster would have a population of about 60,000 and that the population of each satellite city would be 32,000.7 Housing in the garden cities would be built to a net residential density of eighty people per acre, but it would be separated from the shopping and administrative centre by generous public gardens.8 Similarly it would be separated by gardens from the industrial belt which would be on the periphery. Both the central city and the satellite cities would each have their own orbital railway serving the industrial estates on the periphery and linked to an inter-municipal railway, while radial and orbital transport within each city would be by electric tram (figure 2.2). Thus, the transport system for each city of the cluster echoed the system for the cluster as a whole. Source: Peter Hall, "Ebenezer Howard, The Man You Never Knew" . Town And Country Planning, 2 February 1983), p. 42. 2 1 Others had plans that were similar in nature. The two most influential figures of these in the decade immediately after World War I were the geographer (and mentor of Lewis Mumford) Patrick Geddes, and the architect of Letchworth, Raymond Unwin, Geddes. Geddes' Cities in Evolution, which was published in 1915, was concerned with the tendency for large industrial towns to coalesce into huge, continuous urban sprawls.9 Unwin translated this concern into practical terms in reports to the Greater London Regional Planning Committee in 1929 and 1933.10 He pressed the need for a green belt around London to contain the built-up area. He argued that if further development in the city region were needed it had to be in the form of satellite towns beyond the green belt. His recommendations for London resulted eventually in the 1938 Green Belt London and Home Counties act, but his reports did not bear fruit until after World War II.11 World War II provided another boost to the reformers. Much of the buildings were destroyed and so reconstruction after the war was necessary. What resulted was the County of London Plan, by Foreshaw and Abercrombie, published in 1943, which was followed in 1944 by Abercrombie's Greater London Plan. Abercrombie saw the need and the opportunity to provide a strategic plan for Greater London, which at the time was governed by 143 local authorities, all working on plans independently of each other.12 It called for a reduction of densities in the inner area, a stable suburban ring, a green belt beyond, and ten satellite towns beyond the green belt. The success of the plan resulted in a total of almost thirty new and expanded towns that had been designated by the mid-1960s.13 Although the inner-city areas were losing population, expansion just inside and just outside the green belts of the large cities was getting out of control, and the long-22 distance commuting that resulted was straining the transport system of virtually every town. Ebenezer Howard had proposed something different. Places of work on the periphery and administrative and cultural activities at the centre, with housing and public gardens in between. The Garden City concept, although intended to be one of a cluster of its own kind, was limited to 30,000 people, and both the centre and places of work were intended to be within easy walking or cycling distance of the residential area.14 Contrary to these ideas, commercial developments that developed on the periphery of large cities became popular in the 1960s and 1970s. The apparent advantage of commercial developments in the outer suburbs was that they would not only relieve pressure on the centre but would also enable public transport to be used in both directions during the rush hour - a sort of reverse commuting.15 The disadvantage was that in an radial city, with public transport geared to carrying people to and from the centre, a suburban development could be served only by the single radial transport corridor on which it was located. On the other hand the established commercial areas at the centre of the city could be served from all points of the compass. Developments on the periphery therefore made very little use of the railways' spare capacity for reverse commuting, and they were usually too small or too scattered even to justify new bus services. The result was a switch from public to private transport and the spreading of congestion from the centre to the outer suburbs. 23 The Canadian Experience Much of the theory of Canadian planning had ideas and techniques imported from everywhere, although the majority of it was inspired by the British experience. For example, Ebenezer Howard's Letchworth experience was well known, although the main influence came from Thomas Adams who came to Canada in 1914. As adviser to the Canadian Commission on Conservation, his planning approach influenced many Canadian communities that sought his advice. The Commission on Conservation came about because of the need to address the rapid and unexpected urban growth Canada was experiencing at the turn of the twentieth century. Although most people still lived in the countryside, the large towns started to grow into cities. Between the census of 1881 and the census of 1921, the urban population of Canada increased in absolute terms from 1.1 million to 4.3 million, and in proportional terms from one-quarter to one-half the total population.16 The demand for Canadian raw materials from Europe meant economic expansion, population growth, and physical development for Canadian urban areas. Part of this development included urban transport systems that would begin to improve the mobility of people who lived in the city. Urban reformers involved themselves with the issue of public and private ownership of urban transit lines. Their argument was that private ownership of transit lines must be brought into step with the self-interest of businessmen. For example, in 1902, in his classic survey of city government, S. Morley Wickett dealt with the 'corporation question'.17 This involved utility regulation and ownership. Street railways constituted part of the physical plant of the city and the basis for continued urban expansion. Generally, these had been developed by private capital. Even though most 24 utility companies performed with reasonable efficiency, there seemed an inherent conflict between civic requirements and business profits. It was this assumption that gave rise to the long controversy over municipal ownership. In several Canadian cities, local governments had ideas of urban expansionism. These interests where often not met by private enterprise that wanted to steer clear of the financial risks. The example in Toronto typifies this problem. The issue of property development was central. In 1890, the Toronto Street Railway Company privately ran Toronto's electric streetcars. The company was cautious in their expansion of new lines into suburbia Toronto.18 Their argument was that suburban tracts were plentiful and it took years for them to fill to their capacity; the precise direction of substantial urban growth was difficult to predict. Unfortunately this restraint inconvenienced those few who had settled in newly developed areas. This also annoyed influential property developers because they wanted to secure service for their new developments. City leaders, too, encouraged construction in the annexed areas and hence broaden the city tax base.19 Thus, there was the move by reformers for local government to take control of such services. Eventually, in 1912 the City took control of the private franchise and began the expansion into outer laying areas.20 In British Columbia, the British Columbia Railway Company exhibited expansionist zeal not found in Toronto and other Canadian cities. Unlike the cautious T.S.R., the B.C.E.R. had expanded from Vancouver into South Vancouver, Burnaby, Point Grey, and New Westminster by 1912.21 It risked poor short-term returns on suburban lines in favour of planing for long-term profits. The B.C.E.R. was London-25 based, with access to London finance and possessing diverse interests - electric power and streetcars.22 The Canadian Pacific Railway also encouraged this expansion. For example, electric street railways were first laid in 1889 and by 1891 Vancouver had a street railway system of thirteen miles.23 The CPR encouraged the extension by providing the street Railway Company with a number of free lots in the Fairview, Mount Pleasant area.24 It was no coincidence that the first large sale of CPR lands south of False Creek occurred in 1890, just prior to the completion of the Fairview Belt Line and the anticipated rush of population to that district.25 In the 1900-14 period numerous additional lines were laid in the downtown area, and tracks were pushed east, south and west bringing service to Hastings, Collingwood, South Vancouver, Figure 2.3 Vancouver Street C a r System, 1891. SCALE IN MILES T " Marpole, Kerrisdale, Kitsilano and West Point Grey (see figure 2.3).26 By 1914 the 103-mile system of the B.C. Electric Railway Company served virtually the entire Source: N. MacDonald. "The Canadian Pacific Railway.' city 27 26 This expansion of inter-urban railway lines also increases the range of urban settlement and activity. The CPR constructed the Lulu Island line in 1902, connecting the city with the fishing centre of Steveston.28 By 1914 three separate lines connected Vancouver with New Westminster and that city in turn was linked with the farming centres at Abbotsford and Chilliwack.29 The net result of all this construction was that Vancouver became the focal point of a diverse, regional transportation network. For all practical purposes anyone living within an eight-mile radius of downtown could get there in 35 minutes, while a rush order from Chilliwack, 40 miles away, could be delivered within a few hours.30 The districts that received tramway service in the great surge of construction carried out between 1900 and 1914 were not as thinly settled as Fairview and Mount Pleasant had been in the early 1890s.31 Yet these rail facilities preceded any significant population growth. It was the expectation of a rapid rise in real estate values that influenced speculative development. Universal Car Ownership By the Second World War the electric trolley train was fast disappearing in Vancouver and in other cities. By 1925 the automobile began to dominate in shaping geographical increments to cities, although housing densities stayed low. Those living in the more peripheral parts had lost frequency and density of transit service. The Great Depression of the 1930s starved most trolley and inter-urban railway companies beyond survival. The trains fell into rapid decline and many lines were abandoned during the 1920s and 30s. B.C. Electric made the decision to switch from streetcars to buses and had 27 the system entirely converted by the mid-1950s.32 Many workers were forced to accept automobile commuting to maintain their employment. It was an easy step from partial dependence on self-provision of assisted mobility to full personal responsibility for most aspects of the family's mobility. Once the latter stage was reached, the transportation response to the financial collapse of the electric trains had been set. Thus, the transit system that needed density was unable to survive in an area dominated by low-density postwar growth. The advent of the automobile was supposed to promise a solution to the problem of urban congestion. It offered urban dwellers a new mobility, freeing them from the centripetal streetcar lines and allowing them to travel more quickly from the urban core to the suburban fringe. This new mode of transportation seemed to promise a more open, expansive city with greater mobility and individual autonomy. With this enhanced mobility, more residents could move to the suburbs. For profit-hungry speculators and idealistic planners, decentralization was a much-desired goal. As long as people relied solely on fixed rail transportation population would cluster along the rail routes and business crowd together at the junction of transit lines. In the minds of many, fixed rail lines predestined urban dwellers to congested living in poorer conditions.33 The new mobility offered by motor vehicles, however, broke the bond of dependence on the fixed rail lines and opened new opportunities for further restructuring of the urban areas. Without adequate highways, however, the automobile might well have proved a slower and more irritating means of travel than the public transit lines. By the late 1940s and early 1950s it was evident that limited-access expressways were needed to facilitate 28 the flow of automobiles, unsnarl traffic jams, and ensure a safe journey to the suburbs. Los Angeles pioneered the construction of urban expressways, opening the Arroyo Seco freeway shortly before the outbreak of World War II.34 After the war the California metropolis resumed its ambitious super-highway program, and other cities followed its example. In Canada, there was less of a response to this development. The federal government has limited its interest in roads to subsidies to the Trans-Canada Highway.35 Nevertheless, the construction of highway systems in and around major urban centres in Canada provided the next phase of mobility that was to escalate the geographical expansion of Canadian cities. In Vancouver, a technical committee made up of the Provincial Minister of Public Works, the City of Vancouver, the Corporation of the City of New Westminster, and the Corporation of the District of Burnaby submitted a report in 1959 called Freeways With Rapid Transit - A Study On Highway Planning36 The committee's job was to study and report on highway access into and within the Fraser Valley Region. It was found that transportation deficiencies were such that constructing more freeways could only solve them efficiently and practically. The committee based its recommendation on the conclusion that no form of transit can be devised which will be a realistic substitute for a freeway system. To meet the demand of increased number of automobiles on the road, additional freeways would be needed inside the downtown area, and on the Burrard peninsula spreading out from the downtown. This would be important to future highway studies and to subsequent recommendations and decisions that would stimulate growth in the downtown area and connect downtown Vancouver with neighbouring municipalities. 29 The demand for freeways continued with the construction of Highway 99 in the early 1960s that connects from the Canada/U.S. border to Vancouver. This has spawned massive suburban development in Richmond that possesses valuable fertile farmland. Speculative development has created higher densities even though common sense would indicate that the land is unsuited for such development. Similar experiences have happened in every Canadian City in which the idea of cheap farmland is ideal for development. To help this process, financial institutions have poured billions into the suburbs. Politically motivated programs such as CMHC's home loan programs as well as OHC helped Canadians mortgage their first home in the suburbs. Then, it was the belief in Canadian public policy that everyone ought to own a suburban home. Those who could not make it on their own were to be helped by the institutions of state. Years of depression and war had discouraged residential construction and consequently private builders soon responded to the demand. Canada embarked on the greatest residential construction boom in its history. In the first decade, 1946-1956, nearly a million housing units were built; in the second decade, 1956-1966, about a million and a half; and in the third decade, 1966-1976 more than 2 million.37 The majority of these new homes were single-family, owner-occupied suburban houses with their own yards, rather than mid-town apartments. Canadians desired a house and yard that they could call their own along suburbia's fringe, and this was what the developers offered. 30 The Decline of Public Transport Figure 2.4 U r b a n C a r and Trans i t Use F r o m 1950 To 1992 Source: Canadian Passenger Transportation. 1995. National Environmental Indicator Series. SOE Bulletin No. 95-3 Spring 1995. Ottawa, Ontario, Canada. There has have been no greater side effect of universal car ownership than the decline of public transport in urban areas (figure 2.4). In Canada, urban transit use (as measured by passenger-kilometres) has almost doubled since 1950 but still represents less than 5% of motorized travel in urban areas.38 Ridership has actually decreased during this period but this has been offset by longer transit trips to serve lower density suburban neighbourhoods. On the other hand, urban automobile use has grown dramatically accounting for a significant proportion of the national trend. Transit is often seen to be heavily subsidized. The automobile mode is also subsidized, however, representing approximately 66% of the total subsidization of passenger transportation by Canadian society.39 This includes all costs, such as road construction and maintenance, health, and environmental costs; it does not include costs covered by direct charges to individual users, such as the cost of buying an automobile or the cost of a bus ticket. 31 These results illustrate the growing trend towards the use of the car in the GVRD. Figure 2.5 illustrates changes in key transportation characteristics in the morning peak period. Essentially, transit has lost ground. Transit's region-wide share of the travel declined by 1.3 percentage point (from 11.2% to 9.9% of the total number of peak period trips); for the portion of travel ending in downtown Vancouver, where transit is traditionally strongest, transit's share dropped proportionately more, by 2.2 percentage points (from 35.3% to 31.2%)40 Automobile dependence increased. The share of all trips represented by automobile drivers increased by 2.3 percentage points (from 54.3% to 56.6%), while the share of trips represented by automobile passengers fell by 0.2 points Figure 2.5 Recent Travel Patterns Changes in Key Transportation Characteristics in the morning peak period in Greater Vancouver 1986-1992 i i i i l i -30%-20%-10% 0 +10% +20%+30%+40% Population I Commuting autos I Trips by cat drivers I I Trips by transit I Total trips I Trips per person Suburb-suburb share I I I 2 Suburb-Vancouver share -I I I 3 Auto driver share I I Transit mode share -30%-20%-10% 0 +10% +20%+30%+40% Relative Percentage Difference 1. Change in the share of total trips which begin in one suburb and end in another. 2. Change in share of total trips which end in Vancouver City. 3. Change in the share of total trips which are undertaken by car drivers. 4. Change in the share of total trips which are undertaken by transit passengers. Source: Transport 2021,9. to 16.7%.41 That means that the average number of people in a car went down. The number of automobiles registered with the Insurance Corporation of B.C. for commuting to work grew by 32% - or one-and-a-half 32 times the rate growth of the population.42 As well, suburb-to-suburb travel dominated further. Trips with suburban destinations gained 4 percentage points to 64.4% of total trips in the region.43 Trips with suburban origins to the City of Vancouver declined by 2.9 points, to 12.0% of the total trips in the region.44 Finally, people traveled further and slower. The average trip distance to work increased 12% to 14.0 km.45 The average trip speed declined by 7% to 34.7 km/h, and the average trip time increased by 20% to 24 46 minutes. Subsequently, the percentage of subsidies BC Transit receives is higher than those received by private automobiles. $360 million in 1991 subsidized motorized transport (all modes of transport provided by BC Transit). This represents a subsidy of 37% given that total transit costs were $976 Million.47 Alternatively, private motorized vehicles (including motorcycles) were subsidized by about $2.7 billion in the Lower Mainland in 1991.48 As the full costs of auto transport are about $11.7 billion, the subsidy for cars is about 23%.49 This exhibit shows that if the costs of private motorized vehicles were fully internalized by the user, the saving in municipal taxes would be $110 per resident per year and the saving in generally costs to society would be $867 per resident per year.50 In fact, all of these payers would likely save even more, because if users paid the full costs of their personal vehicle use and were aware of these costs, their use would most certainly decline. In recent decades, public transit has been supported by government to serve mainly the so-called transit captives - people without the means or ability to drive cars. One of the initiatives of the City of Vancouver's 1990 'Clouds of Change' report, which set out to reduce pollution and provide incentives for alternative forms of transportation, the development of alternative fuels and more energy efficient design, was for a carbon-33 dioxide tax on transportation fuels. This recommendation was rejected by city council in Vancouver on the grounds that the tax would be disproportionately punitive; in the words of city manager Ken Dobell, 'auto-captive groups will be forced to bear the tax.51 Kluchner in 'Paving Over Paradise' refers to such statements by indicating that we now have both transit captives and auto captives leaving us as design captives in the type of city that we have created.52 Summary The complexity of the problem is related to the past. In Europe the escape to the suburbs was made possible by the railways from 1860s onwards. It was seen as the answer to the slum areas of the inner city. In the early 1900s, this was also the case in Canada. The railways served those who wanted to separate themselves from their employment by living outside inner city areas. The majority of these commuters lived in neighbourhoods that were designed around the rail station. This method of travel was efficient as long as land-use was catered to by the transport system. Unfortunately, the introduction of the car and new roads to serve them promoted suburbs further out that where soon leap-frogged by the next suburb. In the GVRD, uncontrolled land use was identified as the culprit but, rather than tackling the source, the planners recommended providing more highways and bridges to serve cars and better regulation of roadside development. Today, although most of the growth in the region is expected to occur in the suburbs on both side of the Fraser River, nearly half the jobs in the Lower Mainland will be created in Central areas such as Vancouver, Burnaby and Richmond, encouraging a great increase in commuter traffic. 34 The issues are difficult because residents, especially those who live in single family dwellings in Vancouver, resist higher densities because they feel that such development would threaten their current quality of life. As well, transit and road improvements are difficult to steer through Vancouver towards its downtown because these same residents resist the passage of commuters, whether using rapid transit or car, through their neighbourhoods. Initiatives towards improved public transit, including express buses and SkyTrain system, will have a positive impact on those people who choose to live near the centres of cities or in the new town centres and can use them to commute to their work. Unfortunately, these systems will continue to be undermined by sprawling residential development. Endnotes 1 Harley Sherlock, Cities Are Good For Us (London England: Paladin, 1991), p. 72. 2 Ibid., p. 72. 3 Ibid., p. 74. 4 Ibid., p. 66 5 Ibid., p. 84. 6 Peter Hall, "Ebenezer Howard, The Man You Never Knew". Town And Country Planning. 2 (February 1983), p. 42. 7 Ibid., p. 43. 8 Ibid. 1 Harley Sherlock, Cities Are Good For Us (London England: Paladin, 1991), p. 87. °Ibid. 1 Ibid. 2 Harley Sherlock, Cities Are Good For Us (London England: Paladin, 1991), p. 104. 3 Ibid., p. 104. 4 Ibid., p. 108 5 Ibid. 6 Paul Rutherford, "Tomorrow's Metropolis: The Urban Reform Movement In Canada 1880-1920,".in The Canadian City, ed. Artibise And Stelter (1977), p. 368. 1 7 Ibid., p. 372. John C. Weaver, "Tormorrow's Metropolis Revisited: A Critical Assessment of Urban Reform in Canada 1890-1920". in The Canadian City, ed. Artibise and Stelter (1977), p. 400. 1 9 Ibid., p. 399. 2 0 Ibid., p. 400. 35 2 1 Ibid, p. 401. 2 2 Ibid., 2 3 Norbert McDonald, '"C.P.R. Town': The City-Building Process in Vancouver, 1860-1914," in Shaping the Urban Landscape, ed. A.F.J. Artibise and G.A. Stelter (1982), p. 392. 2 4 Ibid., p. 392. 2 5 Ibid. 2 6 Ibid., p. 400. 2 7 Ibid. 2 8 Ibid. 2 9 Ibid. 3 0 Ibid. 3 1 Ibid. 3 2 Thomas Kluckner. Paving Paradise. (Vancouver, B.C.: Whitecap Books 1991), p. 167. 3 3 Jon C. Teaford, The Twentieth-Century American City. (London: The Johns Hopkins University Press, 1986), p. 67. 3 4 Ibid., p. 99. 3 5 Hans Blumfeld, "Urban Freeways," Metropolis and Beyond. Chapt. 38 (1979), p. 312. 3 6 V. Setty. Pendakur, Cities Citizens & Freeways, ed. W. Barrington. (Vancouver, B.C.: U.B.C. School of Community and Regional Planning, 1972), p. 18. 3 7 Humphrey Carver, "Building the Suburbs: A Planner's reflections," in City Magazine. (September 1978), p. 43. 3 8 Government Of Canada, "Canadian Passenger Transportation." 1995. National Environmental Indicator Series," SOE Bulletin No. 95-3 (Spring 1995. Ottawa, Ontario, Canada) 3 9 Ibid., SOE Bulletin No. 95-3. 4 0 Greater Vancouver Regional District, Planning Dept. Transport 2021. A Long-Range Transportation Plan For Greater Vancouver. (Burnaby, B.C.: GVRD And The Province Of British Columbia, 1993), p. 9. 4 1 Ibid. 4 2 Ibid. 4 3 Ibid. 4 4 Ibid. 4 5 Ibid. 4 6 Ibid. 4 7 Greater Vancouver Regional District. "The Cost Of Transporting People In the British Columbia Lower Mainland." Transport 2021. (1993), p. 30. 4 8 Ibid. 4 9 Ibid. 5 0 Ibid. 5 1 Thomas Kluckner. Paving Paradise. (Vancouver, B.C.: Whitecap Books 1991), p. 174. 5 2 Ibid. 36 Chapter 3 Methodology Introduction Discussion in chapter 2 focused on the geographical expansion of cities and its relationship to urban transport. We traced this development of urban transport and its influence on the urban fabric. We discovered that new methods of transport brought with it increased mobility. With this mobility also came the dispersion of communities and neighbourhoods as cities spread out from their original centres. Contemporary discussion has revealed that the city has become a complex structure that houses places of employment and residential locations. The forces that influence this structure relate to the urban transport network. Within this network, there are a number of travel options available to people wanting to travel between their home and work place. The options that an individual has are determined by the material supply of the transport infrastructure. These are the constraints and options of the individual and his household, and the social values, norms and opinions relevant to transport behavior. The Justice Institute case study will help us understand more about these options and, thus, the relationship between urban transport and its effect on the urban fabric. Such discussion is the focus in chapter 4. The goal is to reveal some important insights that depict the relationship between residential location and urban transport as it relates to a change in the work place. The focus of this chapter is to define and examine the methodology behind the study. 37 Related Studies A change in head office location will no doubt have a significant impact on employee commute habits. David Ley's 'Downtown or the Suburbs? A Comparative Study of Two Vancouver Head Offices' gives insight into the effects of such a move of two large utility and communications corporations, the British Columbia Telephone Company (or BC Tel) and British Columbia Hydro (BC Hydro). Several questions where examined that entailed how employees differ in their perceptions of working in a downtown versus a suburban head office? To what extent does job location affect the length of the journey to work and housing affordability? What other factors lie behind the staff assessment of head office location? Do staff share a common viewpoint, or are there significant differences by age, sex, or job status? These as well as other questions directed the design of the survey questionnaire administered to a sample of the workforce at BC Tel and BC Hydro. The Justice Institute The scope of Ley's study is significantly larger than this one, although both draw from similar experiences. This study contains a similar set of questions that are directed at Justice Institute employees (Jl). The relocation of the Jl is similar in nature to Ley's examples, although in this study, more emphasis will be placed on the activities and travel patterns of the school's employees. The Jl moved their head office operations from Point Grey Vancouver to New Westminster. This will affect the majority of employees who must make a decision regarding his or her method of commuting to and from work. These decisions will have a significant impact on their activities and travel patterns in the city. 38 Thus, the basic goal is to find out how employees make the trade-offs between where they live and the time they spend commuting to and from work. Is there a relationship between the joint distribution of the home and workplace? People's place of work may influence where they would like to live. Essentially, our task will be to look at the change in workplace that characterizes the dispersion of the destination of commute trips before and after the move. The correlation parameter may describe the tendency for some commuters to locate themselves close to their employment. As part of this case study, the goal is to collect data that establish a relationship between home and work. How do we collect data that would accurately represent this relationship? To achieve the best possible results we need to define our sample base. Employees who respond are part of the random sample that represents the population of Lower Mainland in terms of people's commuting habits. Experimental Design In this evaluation, it is important to have an experimental design that specifies the type of information to be collected, identifies the techniques to be used, and outlines where and when such data are to be collected. What methods are to be used in obtaining the survey results? It was necessary to achieve two basic goals in design and implementation of the survey. First, a sampling procedure is to be selected. Second, identifying key issues and processing the results. Our sampling procedure will include simple random sampling. It is a procedure for selecting units out of a population such that each population unit has an equal chance of being drawn. For our research, the employees at the Justice Institute are defined as our 39 population. Subsequently, each employee would be defined as a population unit. Each is assigned numbers from 1 to N. The employees that correspond to these random numbers become the randomly drawn sample. Many steps were also taken to ensure that as little bias as possible entered into the implementation of this transportation user survey. Within this framework, a number of difficulties arose in our analysis. The first was related to the disparity in the amount of part-time employees versus full-time employees. This will have an impact on trips made and mode of travel depending on the time of day. We chose to eliminate part-time employees and instead concentrated on full-time employees. This decision is based primarily on the fact that few part-time employees exist. These employees would have little impact of the results. Second, there are also several possible data collection techniques or sampling methods. An employee survey can be conducted by personal interview. As well, drop off and pick up or drop off and mail back on a self-administered form can do distribution questionnaires. Dropping off questionnaires could be handled by leaving them on the windshields of parked cars or management could distribute these among employees. In our study, a questionnaire was distributed. It was necessary that the study required the close co-operation with management and unions to develop an effective strategy for approaching the employees and for providing incentives for them to participate in the survey. It was important to obtain management's co-operation since the method of data collection will result in negotiation of such procedures. There are benefits and disbenefits pertaining to both methods of data collection. The easiest method for an employee survey is the pick-up or mail-back questionnaire 40 approach. For our study the employee survey was picked up. The drop-off and pick-up method produced the opportunity to clear up any misunderstandings. This would not be possible using the drop-off and mail-back method. The drop-off and pick-up method are also advantageous because the employee was more likely to complete the survey having the knowledge that the researcher would be returning to pick it up. This would be more effective than the researcher relying on the employee to mail the survey back. It was assumed that this approach will likely result in the greatest number of returns than in the mail type interview. The most favourable alternative would be to request the Justice Institute to distribute and collect the questionnaires for either all or a sample of the employees. This approach will likely result in the greatest number of returns than in the mail type interviews. Another method that can be used for an employee survey is direct personal interviews. For our research this would be the most extensive as numerous person, household, and trip characteristics can be obtained in this type of survey. The advantages here are the ability of the interviewer to explain questions, although a longer time per interview (compared to other techniques), and higher response rates because of personal interaction make the interview a valuable technique in developing an extensive database. Attitudes and feelings can be learned from respondents about neighbourhood characteristics and commuting patterns. This could help present a clearer picture of the relationship between home and work. There are drawbacks to this method. This type of interview can be particularly time-consuming. As well, this could require additional cooperation from the employer that might be more difficult to obtain because of the time required during working hours. 41 An option is to interview the employee after working hours in their homes. It might be possible but highly unlikely to encourage employees to remain after work for a short period of time to participate in the survey. It would be important to design the survey such that it is not time consuming. For example, it could be done within five to ten minutes and is not difficult to complete. From a methodological perspective, the possibility of biased results because of certain interviewer actions and statements is also a cause of concern. Even with these limitations, the personal interview would be the best way of getting the most complete information for our research. In short, the drop off and pick up method was selected since it offered ease of implementation and an acceptable return rate. Management distributed the survey to all staff members with their pay stubs. The survey indicated to staff that the survey should be returned in two weeks. It was assumed that this was ample time in which staff would carefully read, decipher and fill out the questionnaire. It was then returned to management at which time it was picked up by myself. Figure 3.1 One hundred Survey Results and twenty surveys where handed out in which 74 surveys where completed and returned. It was assumed that staff who would not fill it 42 out for various reasons would not return a small percentage of the questionnaires. It was also assumed that a small number of staff might be away on vacation or on leave of absence due to sickness or maternity leave. Regardless, 62%, of the questionnaires were returned in which the majority of questions in each questionnaire were answered (figure 3.1). The employee user survey was met with a positive response. A few employees seemed unsure of what the survey involved in terms of the questions asked and therefore chose not to fill it out according to comments made by the JI's human resources officer who organized the distribution of the survey. Perhaps more effort could have been made to indicate the purpose of the survey and if possible simplify the questions or reduce the level of reading difficulty. Of course, some employees may have been too busy to take the time to fill out the questionnaire. The second goal in the design and implementation of the survey was identifying important issues and processing of results. The difficulty was sorting through issues that are relevant to our topic and which hold some important meaning in our discussion about urban transport issues. At the same time, it was important to keep the amount of information obtained from the survey, to a manageable level. To begin, data had to be managed in a reasonable manner that made sense to our discussion about urban transport and income. An attempt was made to design a survey that was extensive in capturing the most important issues in the analysis and discussion of employees. As shown in tables 3.1 and 3.2, our goal was to design a survey that contained information about numerous person, household, and trip characteristics. 43 Table 3.1 Household Characteristics and Attitudes General information - Job status - Changed positions - Years employed Address History - Present address - Time at present address Attitudes and characteristics - Employees attitudes towards their neighbourhood - Level of satisfaction of present address - Rate of home ownership - Where employees would like to live - Influence this decision would have on employee's commute Table 3.2 Person Trip Characteristics Driver characteristics - Drivers license - Number of cars available for commuting Travel characteristics - Determination of whether the car or transit is used either in the pre or postmove periods - The reasons for using either the car or transit - Level of employee of commuting satisfaction - Change in commute in the postmove period - Travel times in the pre and postmove periods Other characteristics - Whether walking or bicycling is part of the commute Summary The household and trip characteristics that are outlined above are found in Sections A, B and C of our survey. Section A focuses on employee's neighbourhood characteristics. Section B focuses on employee's commuting characteristics. Finally, the first half of Section C relates to employment history at the Justice Institute. The second 4 4 half concentrates on employees who may have moved their residence before or after the Jl move, and if they moved, the reasons why. 45 Chapter 4 Analysis of Survey Results Introduction Discussion has focused on the historical development of urban transport and land use. Analysis in this chapter will look more closely at these items relating to the preferences Justice Institute employees have regarding their neighbourhood and commuting methods. These items will be looked at in terms of their association with each other. The responses (appendix Cl) are based on the questionnaire survey illustrated in appendices A. Neighbourhood Characteristics The choices regarding 'residential location' are enormously complex because they include both spatial and non-spatial aspects of the neighbourhood. It is important to include both types of considerations in explanations of behavior. For example, residential location is clearly a spatial choice, but it is influenced by non-spatial factors such as the income and size of the household making the choice. People are also influenced not only by relatively major and easily measured factors such as housing costs, but also by difficult-to-quantify and, highly personal factors such as the appearance of a neighbourhood, the style of architecture and whether one is likely to be able to make friends with people who already live there. These are but a few of the factors that affect persons making the choice of'residential location'. In an attempt to understand more about people's personal preferences regarding their neighbourhood, employees are asked what they particularly like about their 46 neighbourhood? The results were cross-tabulated with how employees 'rate their present neighbourhood as a place to live', on a scale from 1 to 10. The responses are divided into two categories that include those who rate their neighbourhood at 7 or more (>7) (that account for 85% of the total response), or at 6 or less (<6~). We want to know whether employees who rate their neighbourhood higher hold different opinions about their neighbourhood than those who rate their neighbourhood less. Figure 4.1 What Employees Particularly Like About Their Neighbourhood in Terms of How They Rate It Homes > 2500 sqft Homes < 2500 sqft Lots < 50'x 120 Lots > 50'x 120 Newer Homes Older Homes Architecture Community Centre Personal History Community Park Natural Landscape Safe And Quiet Friendly People Property And Homes 20 30 40 Number of Employees The responses are varied, although employees indicate that some characteristics are more important than others (figure 4.1). The largest number of responses are found among those who value property and homes that are generally well kept, a safe and quiet neighbourhood environment, people are generally friendly, an abundance of natural landscape, and a local community park. The association between these factors and rated neighbourhood are not as strong as it would appear (/? = 0.115)*; significant percentages of employees who rate their neighbourhood higher than 7 or less than 6 are evident among weighted responses. Essentially, employees who are less satisfied with their neighbourhood value many of the same characteristics as those who rate their neighbourhood higher. 47 . . Table 4.1 To reinforce this notion D j m e n s i o n s of Neighbourhood Differentiation (n = 116) table 4.1 illustrates both environments according to David Ley's analysis of working class black district of North Philadelphia. Residences were asked to differentiate their neighbourhood from other black areas nearby. Their responses were grouped into Evaluative 42 Housing quality 18 Physical condition 9 Physical environment 39 Descriptive land use 8 Traffic density 4 Gang activity/delinquency 21 Quietness 16 Violence 15 Social environment 69 Bad habits 6 Privacy 6 Income 5 Source: Lev, David. A Social Geography of the City. (University Of British Columbia: Harper & Row, 1983), p. 145. three major categories: evaluative, physical, and social. The evaluative category contained such general comments as 'It's nicer here' or 'It's worse there'.1 Ley indicates that it is likely that social factors were usually implied by such an answer.2 This includes neighbourhood meanings that were commonly defined by typical social behavior that occurred there.3 Subsequently, teenage gang activity was the indicator most widely used in differentiating one neighbourhood from another.4 Our survey produced results that would indicate a similar kind of response. Employees placed a great deal of importance according to the typical social behavior that occurred there. 'A safe and quiet environment' and 'people who are generally friendly received weighted responses regardless of how the neighbourhood was rated. Renters and Owners To learn more about how employees rate their neighbourhood, we examine whether they own or rent their dwelling. Figure 4.2 illustrates the percentages of 48 responses according to Figure 4.2 Housing Type housing type. The majority 11 % Rented House owns their dwelling whether it is a house, townhouse or condominium. This group may also rate their neighbourhood higher than those who rent. There is a 12% Rented Apartment strong association between renters and owners and how they rate their neighbourhood \p = 0.017) *; employees who owned their dwelling rated their neighbourhood higher than the mean average of 7. As well, those who rate their neighbourhood higher have lived in their neighbourhood longer than those who have rated their neighbourhood less (p - 0.0269)*. Thus, chances are employees who have lived in their neighbourhood longer are owners and are more likely to view their neighbourhood as a favourable place to live. Where Employees Want to Live To identify more precisely the factors underlying employee residential location, respondents were asked where within the Lower Mainland they would like to live (appendix Bl). According to figure 4.3, whether employees live in the west side of Vancouver or elsewhere, the majority wanted to remain in their current neighbourhood. Those who live in the west side of Vancouver close to the old JI location, account for the largest portion. The remaining portion wanted to move their residence. The majority in 49 this group wanted to relocate to a central location in the lower mainland. Significantly fewer wanted to relocate to a neighbourhood that was not central to the Lower Mainland. Such areas include Langley, White Rock, Richmond, Delta, Abbotsford, the North Shore and Chilliwack. Figure 4.3 Where Employees Want to Live 24% Move to the Central Lower Mainland -29% Remain in Neighbourhood Outside the West Side 14% Move to an Area Not Central to the Lower Mainland The Influence of Commute Subsequently, there are several linked variables that can be used to characterize those who want to remain in their neighbourhood. In this manner, respondents were asked 'how much would their decision to remain in their neighbourhood be influenced by their commute to and from work'. The responses varied between employees who were 'somewhat' or less influenced and those who were 'a great deal' or more influenced. Respondents were also asked to indicate their commute times to and from work. The responses varied here as well between those whose commute times that were 30 minutes or less and 30 minutes or more. The cross-tabulation between where employees would like to live versus influence and time sharpen up the distinctive characteristics associated with those who want to remain in their neighbourhood, particularly those who live in the west end. 50 Employees who want to remain in their neighbourhood are at least 'somewhat' or less influenced by their commute and have commute travel times that are greater than 30 minutes (p - 0.047) *. Essentially, those who live in the west end are less influenced by their commute than those would like to move to a neighbourhood that is central to the Lower Mainland. Further analysis reveals that employees who are less influenced by their commute rate their neighbourhood higher than those who are more influenced (p = 0.0388) *. Thus, employees who want to remain in their neighbourhood, particularly in the west side of Vancouver, rate their neighbourhood higher and are less influenced by their commute. General Commuting Characteristics To identify more precisely the factors underlying employee perception of residential location, place of work and factors that directly affect commute employees were asked about their commuting characteristics in the pre and postmove periods. Although the cross tabulations in this section were not statistically significant, the results reveal why 73% of employees choose to travel by car more often during their commute in the pre and postmove periods. Figure 4.4 reveals the cross tabulation between employees who had the ability to use a car or those who have a drivers license and more than one vehicle available to them (appendix B2). The weighted responses in the pre and postmove periods provide a way of expressing the advantage of the car - often termed for its convenience - over most forms of public transport. Important factors affecting the decision to use the car included: use of the car for personal and Jl business, emergencies, comfort, and independence. Within 51 Figure 4.4 Reasons for Using the Car in the Pre and Postmove Periods Bus Fare Costs Day Care Bus Stops Too Far Personal Safety Carpool Bus Frequency JI Business Too Many Transfers Irregular W o r k Hours Independence Emergencies Comfort Personal Business 20 40 60 Number of Employees this framework, employee choose not to use transit because of irregular work hours, bus routes are not direct enough -there are too many transfers. Employees indicated a number of reasons for using transit in the pre and postmove periods. Regardless of whether they had the ability to use a car (figure 4.5), or those who cannot use a car (figure 4.6), both charts are comparatively similar (appendix B3). The convenience of finding a bus stop close to home and work site and a bus schedule that matched the work schedule are reasons why employees used transit. Thus, the convenience of efficient transit involves improving the allocation of time overall. This apples to either the pre or postmove periods. Matching Bus and Work Schedule Employees who had the B u s s t o p c l o s e t 0 W o r k A n d H o m e ability to use the car also thought about cheaper commuting costs Figure 4.5 Reasons for Using transit of Employees Who Have the Ability to Use a Car Company Vehicle Ride Home in Case of Emergency High Occupant Vehicle Lanes Child Care Drive Car to Bus Stop Parking Cheaper Than Driving Car Alone Insurance Costs 2 4 Number of Employees 52 F i g u r e 4.6 Reasons for Using Transit Involving Employees Who Cannot Use a Car Child Care Company Vehicle Drive Car to Bus Stop High Occupant Vehicle Lanes Parking Insurance Costs Ride Home in Case of Emergency Cheaper Than Driving Car Alone Matching Bus And Work Schedule Bus Stop Close to Work and Home ¥-5 10 Number of Employees alternative methods of transport during their commute (appendix B4). Only a small percentage of employees either walk or travel by bike during the commute. Essentially, the vast majority neither walks nor bikes. associated with transit in the pre and postmove periods. More specifically, many indicated that it was cheaper than driving the car alone, cost of parking and because of higher insurance costs associated with the car. Subsequently, figure 4.7 illustrates employees who use F i g u r e 4.7 Alternative Methods of Commuting 4% Walk 7% Bike 1 % Walk and Bike Commute Satisfaction F i g u r e 4.8 Employees are given a Commute Satisfaction number of choices regarding their commute satisfaction. Figure 4.8 breaks the responses down into three major groups. Regardless of modal-type, the majority of 53 employees are at least 'generally very happy' with their. A major component of commute satisfaction is time. There was a strong association between satisfaction and the time spent commuting each day (p = 0.0141)*; employees who were very satisfied had a daily round trip of 30 minutes or less, compared with a mean of 50 minutes for employees who expressed dissatisfaction. Figure 4.9 Change in Commute in the Postmove Period T n i s relationship was repeated for other linked variables that included change in commute (appendix B5). Those that indicate longer commutes are the least satisfied (p = 0.0068) *, while those experiencing shorter commutes are the most satisfied. Those that indicate that their commute has remained the same are also generally very happy. Essentially, the majority of employees have experienced shorter commutes in the postmove period (figure 4.9). Subsequently, there is a strong association between satisfaction and address of employees [p = 0.0128) *. The majority of employees, who obviously live near their workplace, expressed the greatest satisfaction with its location. Coquitlam, Port Coquitlam, Port Moody and Surrey residents were most content with their location of work and residents in west side of Vancouver and East Richmond were the least content. The last variable associated with commute satisfaction is modal-type. Employees who travel by car in the pre and postmove periods and do not use an alternative method 5 4 of transport (such as walking or biking), where the most satisfied (p = 0.0063)*. Other employees who were the least satisfied includes an employee who has discontinued to use transit in the postmove period. Generally, the majority of employees who travel by transit in the postmove period are somewhat satisfied or less. Significantly fewer in this category are very happy with their commute. Employee Characteristics The question of employee attitudes toward the Jl relocation also meant asking about employment characteristics. Respondents were asked to identify years employed and employee types as well listing, if any, previous positions held at the Jl and the length of time in these positions. The cross-tabulation between these variables showed significant differences among employee types. The majority of instructors and coordinators who have been employed less than five years were the least mobile in terms of changing positions while employed at the Jl (p = 0.0167) *. Upper management staff were the most mobile, a significant number having either moved around at the same management level or have been promoted from previous positions held at the Jl. Regardless of years employed at the Jl, a significant number of administrative support staff held previous positions that were in administrative support. Employee Commuting Characteristics Employment characteristics are important indicators along with indicators of the quality of service provided by automobiles and buses that affect the choice employees make regarding their modal-trip type. In the previous section the level of convenience 55 indicated the amount of commute satisfaction. In this analysis, cross-tabulations showed significant differences among employee types. Although the results are not statistically significant, the weight of responses provides a way of expressing employee choice of The smallest number of staff who hold positions in upper management account for the highest percentage (100%) of those who travel only by car during their commute. The reasons are varied, although the weighted responses found in figure 4.10 coincide with those found in figure 4.4. Upper management staff uses the car for Jl and personal business, emergencies. This group also indicates that independence and comfort is a major factor related to using the car. Subsequently, upper management staff do not use transit because of irregular hours of work, buses do not run frequently enough and bus routes are not direct enough -there are too many transfers. All instructors and coordinators indicated that they have the ability to use a car. Of these, 68% travel only by car during their commute. Like their upper management colleges the reasons include comfort, convenience and flexibility (figure 4.11). modal-type according to their employee status. Figure 4.10 Reasons for Upper Management Staff Use the Car Bus Fare Costs Personal Safety Day Care Bus Stops Too Far Carpool Independence Bus Frequency Emergencies Too Many Transfers Personal Business Comfort Jl Business Irregular Work Hours 5 10 15 Number of Employees 56 Figure 4.11 Reasons Instructors and Coordinators Use the Car Bus Fare Costs Day Care Personal Safety Bus Stops Too Far Carpool Bus Frequency Too Many Transfers Independence Comfort Emergencies Personal Business Jl Business Irregular Work Hours 10 20 30 Number of Employees responses were recorded in the postmove period. The reason is the loss in transit riders. This notion is related to the loss of advantages related to transit in the postmove period. Fewer instructors and coordinators use transit in the postmove period because it is no longer cheaper than driving the car alone, it is not possible to find a bus stop closer Subsequently, only 20% indicated that they walk or bike as well as use the car. Twelve percent use transit in either the pre or postmove period. Fewer instructors and coordinators use transit or alternative methods of commuting such as walking or biking. Eight percent have discontinued to use transit in the postmove period while only 4% have begun to use transit after the Jl move. Figure 4.12 illustrates that no Figure 4.12 Reasons Instructors and Coordinators Use Transit Child Care Company Vehicle Ride Home in Case of Emergency High Occupant Vehicle Lanes Drive Car to Bus Stop Matching Bus and Work Schedule Parking Insurance Costs Bus Stop Close to Work and Home Cheaper Than Driving Car Alone 1 2 3 Number of Employeees 57 to the home and work site, and there is no longer the hassle of or cost of a parking spot. Alternatively according to figure 4.12, instructors and coordinators continue to benefit from the use of a company car to conduct JI business during work hours in the postmove period. Unlike other employee groups, 22% of administrative staff do not have the ability to use a car during their commute because they either do not have a driver's license or have access to a vehicle. They rely on transit during their commute. Six percent of this portion uses alternative methods of transport such as walking or biking. As well, 6% indicated that they use both transit and the car during their commute. The reasons for Unlike other employees, administrative staff members benefit from a bus stop close to their home and work site and a bus schedule that matched their work schedule. Some in this group also indicated that they benefited from additional high occupant vehicle lanes to get to work faster. Finally, saving in commuting costs was important to this group. Using transit is cheaper than driving their car alone. Employees indicated that they saved on car insurance and parking. using transit are varied according to figure 4.13. Figure 4.13 Reasons Administrative Support Staff Use Transit Child Care Company Vehicle Drive Car to Bus Stop High Occupant Vehicle Lanes Ride Home in Case of Emergency Parking Cheaper Than Driving Car Alone Insurance Costs M atching Bus and Work Schedule Bus StopCloseto Work and Home •+= 0 5 1 0 Number of Employees 58 Alternatively, 69% use only the car during their commute for a variety of reasons. Only 3% who travel by car use an alternative method of transport such as walking or biking. Figure 4.14 illustrates the weighted responses indicating the reasons these employees use the car. They involve many of those reinforced by upper management staff and instructors and coordinators, although fewer administrative support staff indicated that they use car to conduct Jl business. Residential Relocation The final issue examined in the survey was the possibility of employees moving their residence to be closer to their place of work. The majority did not relocate (figure 4.15). A major component of this possibility was number of years spent at a current residence. There was a strong association between employees who may have moved their residence and years lived in neighbourhood {p = 0.00027) *, those who have moved lived in their neighbourhood less than 4 years while those who have not moved have lived in their neighbourhood much longer than 4 years. The influence of commute may also influence employee's decision to remain or move their residence. To identify more precisely the factors underlying this decision, 59 Figure 4.15 Residential Relocation 9% Relocated Residence to be Closer to Work . 59% Did Not Relocate Residence in Pre and Postmove Periods 32% Relocation of Residence Was Unrelated to Place of Work influence of commute is cross-tabulated with employees who may have moved their residence. The association is strong (p = 0.00813)*; employees who did not move their residence are less influenced by their commute. Thus, some employees in the postmove period are less influenced by their commute based on their decision to remain in their neighbourhood. According to employment status, some employees may be more influenced than others may. In this manner only employees in administrative support moved their residence to be closer to their place of work. Summary The majority of JI employees travel by car. The reasons for doing so are related to convenience and comfort. Upper management staff as well as the majority of instructors and coordinators uses the car because they require the flexibility of time that their employee-type demands. Administrative staff members are less influenced by these demands, and instead stress the factors that are related to commute costs and personal safety. There are also several lower income employees who compensate for increased commuting distance by moving their residence closer to their place of work. This group 60 is more influenced by their commute. They have also lived fewer years in their current neighbourhood and are often renters who rate their neighbourhood less. Alternatively, employees who have lived longer in their neighbourhood have not moved their residence. The majority owns their dwelling [p = 0.033)*, and rate their neighbourhood higher [p = 0.00004) *. According to earlier analysis, these employees are also less influenced by their commute. To reinforce this notion, the average commute time is greater than the 30 minutes. Employees who moved to be closer to their place of work benefit with shorter commute times in the postmove period. Their level of commute satisfaction is generally higher than those whose residential move was unrelated to the Justice Institute relocation regardless of commute time. As well, those who did not move their residence expressed higher levels of commute satisfaction among employees who had commute times less than 30 minutes [p = 0.038) *. Alternatively, those experiencing longer commute times in this group are less satisfied. * A description of statistical analysis is outlined in appendices Dl for each probability (p), that describes a cross-tabulation of variables given in this chapter Endnotes 1 David Ley, A Social Geography of the City. OJiuVersity of British Columbia: Harper & Row, 1983), p. 144. 2 Ibid. 3 Ibid. 4 Ibid. 61 Chapter 5 Policy Initiatives Justice Institute Case Study Is it possible to create a more sustainable transportation system in the Greater Vancouver Region? Today, the same transportation related issues remain that the transportation studies of 1959 and the Vancouver Transportation Study created. In the past transportation planning sought to maximize capacity, travel speed and mobility. This has created an urban environment dominated by auto transport. Departure times are infinitely variable for those who use the car. It is continuously available, and although subject to variation in travel times like any other mode, it allows for a change of plan during the course of the trip. These change of plans are usually in the light of changes in travel conditions as well as any information which suggests that an alternative trip may be worthwhile (e.g. weather conditions as experienced during the drive). Hence, although subject to uncertainty, the car allows, more than any other, behavior that minimizes its impact and consequently reduces the force of constraints set by deadlines, etc. Thus, an important advantage of the car is not that it saves time on given journeys, but that it allows a more effective planning of the overall use of time. Employees who stressed that they use the car because of overall comfort, irregular work hours, for use in case of an emergency, and to conduct personal and Jl business, expressed this advantage. Employees expressed a desire for independence because they do not like to depend on others. 62 Similarly, frequency of service in a public transport mode confers benefits, not by reducing journey times as such but by improving the allocation of time overall, through the increased flexibility and possibilities of adjustment it allows. Employees enjoyed a bus stop close to home, a bus schedule that matched the work schedule, additional high occupant vehicle lanes to get to work faster, a guaranteed ride home in case of an emergency, and savings in commute costs associated with the car. This is the prime reason for employees using transit in the pre and postmove periods. Alternatively, the lack of transit service was the main reason JI employees either discontinued to use transit in the postmove period or never used transit. Regardless of employment type, employees complained that there were no bus stops close to the house, there were too many transfers -bus routes were not direct enough, and the high cost of bus fare. These problems make it difficult for some lower income employees who are captive users because either they do not have a driver's license, or do not have access to a vehicle during their commute. Discussion in chapter 4 focused on the fact that these staff members are far more the prisoners of distance, especially those who rely on transit during their commute. Those who use transit do so because it is not only convenient but cost effective. Thus, spatial immobility is related to economic status and the ability to make transportation expenditures, which, it is argued, discriminates against lower-paid workers. Unlike other employment types, cost was an important to administrative staff. Whether they travel by car or transit these employees were more concerned about their insurance and parking than other employee type staff. 63 Alternatively, the spatial immobility of several lower income staff is overcome by their ability to move closer to their place of work. They benefit with shorter daily commutes and as a result, are more satisfied. Employees who did not move or moved to a neighbourhood unrelated to their place of work overcame their spatial immobility by utilizing a modal-type that enables them to travel conveniently with the flexibility to conduct alternative trips before, during or after their commute to and from work. In this manner, the majority of employees use the car, which serves as a means to accomplish these tasks. Part of this phenomenon involves the loss of close-to-home job opportunities due to cross-commuting. While an improved road network or free-way system may give some people (those with access to a car) a greater area over which they can range when looking for a job, an efficient road network also encourages a gross inefficiency in the form of cross-commuting. Figure 5.1 While the Jl is centrally Modal-Type and Change in Commute located within the Lower precarbus/postcar Vancouver to New Westminster Mainland, its move from west prebus/postbuscar precar/postcarbus prebus/postcar has only accomplished to serve Prebus/Postbus U p S h o r t e r au tO trips for the Precar/postcar BSC SIX 10 15 20 25 30 Number of Employees majority of employees who travel by car according to figure 5.1 (Appendix Dl). This has increased the level of satisfaction in the postmove period according to short commute times and residential location that are close by. Unfortunately, the move has forced more people into their cars because the new 64 location has put it out of reach of any major transit facilities. Alternatively, transit users are less satisfied because the current work location is more difficult to serve with conventional core-oriented transit services. Currently, there are no major transit facilities close to the JI except for Skytrain that is situated several miles down McBride Boulevard. For these reasons some employees have discontinued to use transit in the postmove period. When motorists transfer from public to private transport, they not only cause a revenue drop that effects the standard of service that can be provided, they clog up the roads that impose time delays on the public transport user. What can be done to create a more sustainable urban transportation system that seeks to maximize efficiency in overall resource utilization? Within this framework, the discussion to follow looks at some policy suggestions in light of urban land-use and the characteristics of urban transport problem. Transportation Demand Management Where people live and work within the region determines much of their daily travel needs. Applying transportation demand management can reduce the need for the car during commute times. To accomplish this task, local and provincial governments need to adjust the level of transport service. Service level means speed, convenience, frequency of service, comfort and other qualities of a journey, other than price. Selectively accepting congestion to change travel patterns is another policy lever. Allowing congestion to deteriorate for the single-occupant vehicles is a practical method of promoting transit and carpools. 65 Figure 5.2 Efficient Transportation Must Be Developed To enhance this Alongside Compatible Land Uses policy, assign priority for increased roadway capacities first to high occupancy vehicles, goods movement and then single occupant automobiles. Enhance and/or retrofit local streets and infrastructure to favour transit, bicycle and pedestrian uses (figure 5.2). These ideas should be implemented in areas identified for above-trend population and employment growth. An efficient road system should also include bike and pedestrian facilities that are consistent with regional transportation planning serving all parts of the GVRD. Essentially, the regional government would have responsibility regarding specific standards for sidewalks, walkways and bikeways. This body along with local governments would entail identifying key gaps in the walkway network; amend local zoning and subdivision codes to require sidewalks and bikeways for new development; and adopt design standards that are consistent with other standards in the region for the layout and design of bikeways and walkways. An efficient road network would also include for planned park-and-ride lots, transit stations, HOV lanes. These should also be apart of local comprehensive plans or OCPs that involves changing by-laws and regulations.1 Cooperation between the regional planning board and local planners as well as local residents is important in establishing a framework that could prevent local comprehensive plans from interfering with 66 development of the public transportation system.. Part of this process includes educating local authorities and residential about the regional transit system, specific facilities and its future plans that may impact their community. Other forms of regulation that can enhance transit usage that come in the form of price controls. Several examples could be applied in the Lower Mainland. Encourage medium-sized and large employers to help cut vehicle trips to their work sites through flex hours, increase and broaden parking charges, raise fuel prices through taxes, and introduce bridge tolls. According to the GVRD's Transport 2021 document, such a package would decrease rush hour vehicle trips by 10% and increase transit ridership some 25% compared with current trends for the year 2021 2 There are other more drastic ways of achieving these goals through that include a complete ban on private cars from large urban areas. It was ultimately forced on Florence because no other way could be found of avoiding congestion and after much debate the ban on cars is now seen as a blessing.3 Other methods of road pricing also involve electronic surveillance. Electronic loops are laid in the road bed and connected to roadside computers (figure 5.3).4 In Singapore, an Electronic Road Pricing system is Figure 5 . 3 Electronic Surveillance ELECTRONIC UNDER ROAD SURFACE ROADSIDE EQUIPMENT LINKED TO COMPUTER ROADSIDE**1^ EQUIPMENT 67 being developed to replace a visual monitoring program. The tamper proof, reliable and enforceable system tracks and bills vehicles by attaching an electronic registration plate and billing owners for using streets, with rates rising at certain times in congested areas.5 It has argued that any form of road pricing is unfair to less well off drivers, but in fact it is no different from charging for a parking space or a bus ticket. Concessions could be made (in the case of the disabled) in the same way as they are on public transport. Thus, it is possible that realistic alternatives can be provided. Spatial Distribution The Justice Institute study has illustrated that commuters are traveling longer distances in an increasingly diffuse travel pattern. In chapter 1 discussion revealed that in recent years, travel among suburban communities has grown much faster than commuting to and from downtown Vancouver. Within this framework, many Jl employees live close to the old Justice Institute site in the west side of Vancouver. Employees who want to remain in the west side of Vancouver enjoy many of the factors that are associated with the area. The map in figure 5.4 illustrates the location as area A. It accounts for the largest trip-origin group. Comments in appendix B l indicate that respondents who rated their neighbourhood high, want to remain in the area because of the social and cultural amenities of the neighbourhood. Similar feelings were also expressed in White Rock, Richmond, the North Shore area and Burnaby. Ley offers further explanation through the idea of French phenomenology and existentialism. How employees see their neighbourhood is related to the perception of space. Ley quotes Matore', (1966) who indicates that, "We not only apprehend space, 68 Lions B a y • Figure 5.4 Spatial Distr ibut ion o f Tr ip Or ig ins for Just ice Inst i tute Employees 1 West Vancouver [.'/•pWUlff. V . I Port M o o d y Port Coquitlam Golden Eire Provincial Park V Q ) I l u r m b V frac JUSTICE I N S T I T U T E , VoiKOKVCT / BumibyLike , 0, Coquitlam I New westininste Ric lmiond Surrey © Clovcrdalc _ Langley Mount Lehman Matsqui Aldergrove O International Boundary U S A Note: Employees were asked using the first four characters of their postal code to identify their neighbourhood of residence to geographically illustrate trip origins and destination. The size of the circles along with a number next to each letter on the map illustrates aggregations of trip origins. Within this framework, each contains the number of employees who possess individual or similar neighbourhood, commuting and employee characteristics. In this manner, they are categorized from A to W. Appendices B l to B5 as well C l are arranged according to these categories. therefore, through our senses and especially through the sense of sight; we live in it, we project into it our personality. Space is not only perceived, it is experienced."6 Employees who lived in the west side of Vancouver expressed such ideas. They want to remain in their neighbourhood because the cultural atmosphere that they experience has had a positive influence on them. It has become part of their lives, part of their personalities. Comments in appendix Bl reinforce this notion. For example, one comment states: "Kitsilano, Kits Point or the West End. These areas not only known for 69 their highly priced real estate but also combine urban culture with natural landscape and are great for walking and other outdoors...". Such comments indicate that employees value the cultural as well as natural environment in their neighbourhood. What implications can these findings have regarding the implementation and design of urban transport policy? Employees at the Justice Institute reveal that their neighbourhood is a key factor in their thinking regarding their residential location. They want to live in neighbourhoods that they enjoy regardless of where it is in relation to their place of work. Thus, chances are using public transportation is inconvenient. Many of the employees surveyed live in the suburbs where driving is generally quicker, more flexible, and if not cheaper, cheap enough. Businesses and homes are kept away from one another. Neighbourhoods, and businesses are designed for easy access by car, often at the expense of pedestrians and transit users. As drivers, we pay only indirectly for an excellent road system (and, in fact, most drivers receive a direct subsidy from employers and businesses in the form of free parking), while we pay a fare to use transit services. Thus, no transportation policy would be complete without the use of land-use policies that would attempt to reduce the travel demand of residents. Land Use and Urban Transport A number of studies have revealed various opportunities to accomplish this task. In a publication entitled Implications of Social Trends for Growth Management & Transportation Planning In The Lower Mainland, stresses the importance of the relationship between transit systems and urban form and density. These systems can either enhance or undermine such land use planning goals as integrated land uses, compact 70 development, and pedestrian friendly environments.7 In the GVRD's case, heavy reliance of large single use transportation , such as expressways, major arterials, and rail systems can disrupt and divide communities. Alternatively, highly focused public transit that is integrated into the urban fabric can strongly support the development of compact 'Urban Villages', not unlike MetroTown and the proposed Surrey City Centre. To make urban transport that are alternatives to the car realistic options, communities need transit-friendly patterns of land use. At the regional level, this means identifying urban activity centres and making those centre the focus for investment and development but do Source: Ley, David. "Downtown Or The Suburbs? A Comparative Study Of Two Vancouver Head Offices." not neglect smaller The Canadian Geographer. 29.1 (1985) p.35. community cores. Such centres would attract residents wanting to live closer to place of work. Ley's BC Tel and BC Hydro study illustrates this notion. After the BC Tel relocation, a regrouping of employees occurred around the Burnaby head office (figure 5.5). In a marked reorientation of residential choice, there was a net increase of some 670 71 staff (almost a quarter of the entire head office work-force) in Burnaby and adjacent suburbs between 1976 and 1981; in the latter year 20 pre cent of staff lived in the five postal districts bordering on head office. The sight is serviced by SkyTrain and is close to MetroTown. The area offers a variety of amenities BC Tel. employees enjoy. It remains to be seen whether considerably more Jl employees move closer to their place of work. The BC Tel head office location has several advantages that the Jl location does not have. For example, the BC Tel site is serviced by SkyTrain and is close to MetroTown. Comparatively, the Jl site is several miles from the nearest SkyTrain station and is serviced by an older much smaller strip mall comparatively smaller in size. Unfortunately, the sight itself is even further from any significant shopping or commercial district in New Westminister. Activity centres are natural markets for public transportation because they bring together a wide variety of activities, allowing people to work, shop, and take care of daily business without a car. At the neighbourhood level, specific areas need to be identified where higher density, mixed land uses can be promoted - preferably along existing transit routes.8 Figure 5.6 illustrates such a design. Figure 5.6 M i x e d Uses Serve the Needs of Pedestr ian and Trans i t Users 72 This involves the encouraging development densities that will support existing and planned levels of transit service, and the redevelopment and in-fill of underdeveloped land in the urban growth area.9 Creating a pedestrian and transit-friendly environment requires planning and designing land-uses on a pedestrian scale. This essentially means putting housing and shopping and workplaces close enough together so that people can conveniently walk or travel by transit between them. Covered walkways, lighting, trees and benches are needed to make walking both safe and inviting.10 Parking areas should be located to the side, rear, or beneath buildings, minimal front setbacks, and main building entrances should face transit routes and sidewalks (rather than parking areas).11 These land use policies requiring such pedestrian-friendly design not only support transit, but help create attractive, vibrant neighbourhoods. Employees at the Justice Institute noted several neighbourhoods they lived in that contained similar characteristics in which they would like to remain. Similar strategies have been successfully employed in Europe. Instead of building new and better roads, new policy initiatives have made intelligent use of existing roads. Cars have been forced out of the central streets and public transport has been improved. In the Netherlands, enforcement has been designed into the street in such a way that it is physically impossible to exceed the speed limit or, as in the case of the woonerf, to exceed walking pace.12 The woonerf (roughly translated as 'residential yard' or 'living street') was originally designed only for access roads. Woonerfs give people the choice on what mode of transport they wish to use.13 The rules of conduct for woonerfs are from the Dutch Ministry of Transport and Road Safety Directorate 1988 as follows:14 73 1. You may walk anywhere on a road within a woonerf and children may play anywhere. 2. Cars must be driven at walking pace, as must bicycles. 3. Within a woonerf, traffic from the right always has priority and this applies to bicycles as well. 4. Anyone who drives a car within a woonerf must not impede pedestrians. But pedestrians and children at play should not obstruct or unnecessarily impede cars. 5. Parking is permitted only where indicated. Figure 5.7 illustrates the idea of a woonerf. By 1985 the Dutch had established 4,000 woonerven covering 7,400 streets.15 Attention is now being turned to areas that are not necessarily residential, such as sections of road adjacent to schools or hospitals, or passing though shopping centres of villages or small towns.16 There are snags related to the accommodation of residents' cars but it is a serious attempt to lower car dependency through a better balance between cars, public transport, walking, and bicycling. Figure 5.7 The Before and After Neighbourhood That Results in the Woonerf Before After 74 Telecommuting Some of the ideas related above involve the notion of telecommuting. Such an incentive would involve integrating work into residential environments. According to a UBC Centre For Human Settlements study, this is a growing trend in Canada. This is due to the rising number of information-based and service-related jobs, more contract work and part-time employment, improvements in computers and telecommunications, the effects of corporate restructuring and the desire of workers to balance family and work. These factors have become increasingly important as the desire to commute for many people is becoming an unpleasant experience. The idea requires new housing design solutions. Home workers want housing designs, which would allow them to combine work and family activities better under the same roof. Working from the home generates renovation activity. Many residents have already completed physical changes to their homes. The problem arises with municipal regulation governing local areas is too restrictive. These regulations do not recognize that most work is non-toxic, non-hazardous and rarely has a major impact on the neighbourhood. What is needed is planning and design considerations tailored to these specific needs. Clearly, developers of new housing and renovators of existing housing need to consider incorporating home work spaces in their development activities. Providing the infrastructure to support low intensity home occupations, neighbourhood tele-work centres and support services could revitalize former single-use residential areas and create new forms of community. 75 Innovative forms of housing such as co-housing, which can potentially provide housing, work spaces and shared social amenities in a residential setting, ought to be considered. Thus, freedom from the reliance on automobile, although unfortunately, most still use their car on a regular basis since there are few amenities in their neighbourhood. This includes visiting client, pick-up and delivery of supplies and delivering of completed work. The biggest hurdle is the zoning regulations and requirements. Many people still fear the intrusion of paid work into residential neighbourhoods. There is little evidence that small-scale service-type economic activities have an adverse impact on residential areas. Home-based workers generally are not concerned about planning restrictions in their communities because they regard their work activities as having a minimal impact. Tele-work, rarely generates noise or air pollution. The biggest threat is business related traffic (most have few visitors). Zoning and other regulations for home occupations are clearly warranted, although neighbourhood alternatives to working at home should also be explored in zoning ordinances. The neighbourhood work centre could be linked with the elementary school as an organizing principle for neighbourhood planning. Key services such as child care centres, copy shops with capabilities for desktop publishing, FAX, courier services and cafes could be incorporated into these centres, as well as recreational opportunities. The GVRD Experience The need for efficient public transport is all too clear; but that need will never be met so long as our strategic land-use planning is unrelated to what public transport can do, 76 and so long as we allow bus routes to be blocked by other traffic, much of which is unnecessary. The GVRD is encouraging such planning brought forth in its transport 2021 Project. In 1993 the GVRD released the document Transportation Demand Management Measure and Their Potential For Application In Greater Vancouver. It sought to advocate higher densities along major transit systems such as Skytrain. Such policy encourages clustered development to favour transit, pedestrians, and bicycles. This would lead to less sprawl and all that it entails (figure 5.8). Although Figure 5.8 Good Transit Service is the Way to Keep the Region Moving initiatives towards improved public transit that include the SkyTrain system and express buses will have a positive impact on those people who live near the centres of cities or in the new town centres and can use them to commute to their work, they will continue to be sabotaged by sprawling residential development. Until governments address this land-use issue they will continue to fight a losing battle. With its limited regional authority, the GVRD's push to more sustainable methods of urban transport will be largely left up to individual municipalities and cities to fight over growth in an uncontrolled fashion. 77 What is needed is a regional board with control over transport of the region. At the same time the greatest contribution people can make to building a city that is not automobile dependent is to foster the health of the city at the micro level. Our discussion in this chapter has lead us to the fact that to bring the type of transit and pedestrian-friendly development to neighbourhoods requires planning at the neighbourhood level (promenade loops, pedestrian priority to public transport stops, cycle parking spaces etc.). Essentially, individual communities can play an important role in this decision making process. Summary These policy initiatives are valuable tools that can help create more sustainable urban environments. The balance between competing modes can be achieved that serve vibrant pedestrian and transit friendly neighbourhoods. Such development will go a long way to reduce the dependence on the automobile especially those who choose to travel by car during their commute because it is more convenient than public transit. As well, those who rely on public transit will enjoy the efficiency that public transport could provide. Thus, in the event of office relocation such as with the Justice Institute, the move would have less of an impact on these employees. Essentially, all would benefit from the increased use of public transport. Endnotes 1 Greater Vancouver Regional District & Canadian Urban Institute. "Cities Without Cars, A Visioning Process to Reduce Auto Dependency." (Burnaby, B.C.: GVRD & Canadian Urban Institute, May 1994) p 23 2 Greater Vancouver Regional District. "A Long-Range Transportation Plan For Greater Vancouver - Transport 2021." (Burnaby, B.C.: GVRD September 1993), p. v. 78 3 Brian Richards, Transport In Cities. (London: Architecture And Technology Press, 1990), p. 76. 4 Ibid., p. 68. 5 V. Setty Pendakur, "Congestion Management and Air Quality: Lessons From Bangkok and Mexico City". Asian Journal of Environmental Management. 1:2 (November 1993), p. 60. 6 Ibid., p. 145. 7 United Way of the Lower Mainland and Associates. "Implications of Social Trends for Growth Management & Transportation Planning in the Lower Mainland. (Vancouver, B.C.. United Way of the Lower Mainland and Associates, January 1993), p. 21. 8 The Snohomish County Transportation Authority. "A Guide To Land Use And Public Transportation Volume II: Applying the Concepts." (Snohomish County, Washington.: 1993), pp. 8-23. 9 Ibid. 1 0 BC Transit. "Transit & Land Use Planning" (Victoria, B.C.: BC Transit, 1994), p. 10. 1 1 Ibid., p. 27. 1 2 Harley Sherlock, Cities Are Good For Us. (London England: Paladin, 1991), p. 210. 1 3 Ibid. 1 4 Ibid. 1 5 Ibid., p. 211. 1 6 Ibid. 79 Chapter 6 Summary and Conclusions Historical Development The industrial revolution heightened the magnetism of cities, which continued to attract people to them until the latter half of the twentieth century; but it also led to the poverty and overcrowding that marked the beginnings of urban expansionism. Towards the end of the nineteenth and the beginning of the twentieth century, the workforce began to live further from its work, but the place of work remained at the focus of the typical radial transport system which was geared entirely to getting people in and out of the town centre. Reformists such as Ebenezer Howard proposed places of work on the periphery and administrative and cultural activities at he centre, with housing and public gardens in between. This concept along with Patrick Geddes, Raymond Unwin and their green belt plans along with Abercrombie's Greater London Plan were influential in establishing London's green belts. The ideal that commercial development on the periphery of large cities became popular in the 1960s and 1970s. The advantage was that such development would relieve pressure on the centre and enable public transport to be used in both directions during rush hour. Alternatively, the disadvantage was that in a radial city, with public transport focused on the centre, only the single radial transport corridor could serve a suburban development. Thus, developments on the periphery therefore made very little use of the railways' spare capacity for reverse commuting, and they were usually too small or too 80 scattered even to justify new bus services. The results were a switch from public to private transport and the spreading of congestion from the centre to the outer suburbs. Survey Results The survey results reinforce contemporary urban transport trends. Results indicate that the majority of JI employees are faced with similar obstacles described above. Vancouver's transport system is focused toward the commercial core. It does little to serve the growing trend of the cross-commuting trips in between communities. Thus, in the postmove period, fewer use transit because the level of service provided is inadequate to serve the needs of JI employees. While the JI move has shortened the majority of commute trips among employees, the new location has put it out of reach of any existing transit facilities. In the postmove period, the vast majority uses the car. Those who are captive transit users are frustrated by the lack of transit facilities close to work and the irregular bus service that follows. Thus, we can conclude that convenience and flexibility proved to be most important in the postmove period regarding employee's choice of modal-type. The decision of modal-type is also related to employee characteristics and their place of residence. The majority of JI employees currently enjoy many of the factors that are associated with their present residence. Neighbourhoods that were safe and had a quiet environment, people that are friendly, an abundance of natural landscape and other recreational facilities for themselves and their children, as well as and well-kept homes and landscaped areas, were important to employees. Essentially, employees stressed the need for a neighbourhood that provides places to socialize, for children to play and is secure 8 1 and quiet from the outside would or as much of it as possible. Employees want to remain in this kind of neighbourhood regardless of longer commutes in the postmove period. Consequently, this kind of neighbourhood is rated higher where the employees who live in them are less influenced by their commute based on their decision to remain in their present location. This is particularly true for employees who live on the west side of Vancouver close to the old Jl site. Subsequently, the majority of higher income staff wants to remain in their neighbourhood or move their residence for reasons other than to be closer to their place of work. They tend to live in higher priced neighbourhoods in the west side of Vancouver, the North Shore area, Richmond and White Rock. Having lived in these neighbourhoods a number of years they own their dwelling. In this manner, fewer of these employees indicated the desire to move, even when experiencing longer commutes in the postmove period. Similarly, there are also lower income employees who expressed the desire to remain in their neighbourhood, although unlike other employee types, a smaller percentage moved to New Westminster, Coquitlam, Port Coquitlam, and North Survey to be closer to their place of work in. The majority in this group are renters who rate these areas below average, although alternatively, they are experiencing commuting benefits buy being closer to their place of work. In this manner, all are experiencing shorter commutes in the postmove period. Their satisfaction is generally higher than those who have remained in their neighbourhood near the old Jl sight. Thus, some lower income employees over came their barrier to travel by moving closer to their place of work. Alternatively, others who did not move overcame this barrier by adapting to or continuing to use car. 8 2 Policy Initiatives The Justice Institute example illustrates the lack of transit facilities and consequently the frustration employees face on their daily commute. Alternatively, the majority use the car because it offers employees the convenience, comfort and privacy they want while carrying out their daily tasks. They are generally satisfied with this arrangement, even for those who are experiencing longer commutes in the postmove period. These results reinforce the notion that most commuters are auto captives. They are unable to use other modal-types because they must cope with longer distances between home and the work place. As well, their lives are such that they often combine their commute with other trip purposes on the way to work and on the way home. Subsequently, public policy needs to address these issues. They are complex because they not only involve the personal habits of workers to and from work, but as well, the growing trend of cross-commuting. Like JI employees, a growing number of commuters are converging on areas other than Vancouver's downtown core. With these factors in mind, the trend is for further automobile dependency and increased costs to provide transit service to outlying areas. The resulting lack of growth in transit service availability then reinforces declining transit use. Public transport and land-use planning should be taken seriously, so that all activities can be reached without the need for cars. Transportation Demand Management techniques accompanied with effect land-use policy can reduce, even eliminate car traffic from most places. Within this framework, the key variable in transit systems is the balance 83 between regionally oriented, primarily commuter, transit, and locally oriented transit. Such a system can serve both cross-commuters and those who travel to the city centre. If cities are to be reinvigorated they must retain their concentration of people and diversity of activities, without which the whole point of urban living is lost. Major commercial areas must be at the centre of gravity of the public transport. They must be close to a frequent train or bus service. An important feature in this strategy is that our city streets must be treated first and foremost as places. Consideration should be given over to the pedestrian. People who live in the area should always have priority over the person passing through. The discussion above relates to the idea of quality neighbourhoods. Within this framework, policy should be directed at creating higher density neighbourhoods with better designs that include friendly transit and pedestrian facilities. They should also provide for a variety of cultural and economic activities. The idea is to encourage people to live in neighbourhoods that are closer to their place of work, whether it be in the same neighbourhood within walking distance or conveniently assessable by bus or rail. Thus, any policy that attempts to deal with the urban transport problem should also coincide with a land-use plan that connects where people live and where they work. The goal is that the activity to be reached is within walking distance. Commuter trips are necessary and that many of them, being too long for walking or cycling, need to be made with the car or bus. Often the car is used. This dependency on the automobile leads to a 'vicious cycle' effect, starting with more demand for roadways, and expectations for low-density housing development. These in turn leads to further automobile dependency and increased costs to provide transit service to outlying areas. 84 The resulting lack of growth in transit service availability then reinforces declining transit use. These results are related to the dispersion of communities in and around places of work. Suggestion for Further Research As we indicated in chapter 1, the information provided by this study should be readily adaptable to other studies, and a detailed study of one case of displaced employees may provide more information than a superficial study of several such cases. Further research might include questions dealing with employee attitudes toward head office location. Employees should be asked where they would like to see a new office located. Given other employee characteristics such as age and sex, responses would differ do to the socio-economic backgrounds of employees. More thought could also be given to the factors concerning the institutional structure of the Justice Institute in chapter 1. How might this influence its relocation? More specifically, what went on during the strategic planning process, if any, that initiated the move? Who were the players involved that might include several levels of government and their ministries? What role did each play? At the neighbourhood level, what influence would local planning have? What are the issues surrounding land-use decisions? Attitudes toward building design could also be examined in terms of a work environment. To what extent is the design of the built environment differentially perceived among employees? This could include architectural design and the quality of working environment that would incorporate such features as an exercise area, a well-appointed 85 cafeteria, substantial plantings and open space, views from most floors, and some in-building services. Finally, JI employees could be asked several of the same questions that deal with changes in journey-to-work 10 years from now to see if staff resistance to relocating their residential location continues. Will employees favour their current neighbourhoods, and if not what are the reasons? Thus, the information gathered can help policy makers understand and design the tools to combat our urban transport problems. 86 Bibliography Bibliography BA Consulting Group Ltd. "Justice Institute Of B.C. Relocation To New Westminster, B.C. Traffic & Parking Review." Vancouver, B.C.: BA Consulting Group Ltd. November 1992. Barbe, Jean-Philippe, and Kenneth Button. Transport Policy and the Environment. London. Earthscan Publications Ltd., 1990. Barjonet, Pierre Emanuel, et al. "The Automobile. Uses And Users." Travel Behavior Research. Ed. The International Association For Travel Behavior. Brookfield Vermont: Avebury, 1989. Blumenfeld, Hans. "Planning for the City in Motion." Metropolis and Beyond." Chapter 35, 1979. Blumenfeld, Hans. "Myths and Realities of the Urban Transit Problem." Metropolis and Beyond" Chapter37, 1979. Blumfeld, Hans. "Urban Freeways." Metropolis and Beyond. Chapter 38, 1979. British Columbia Transit. Transit & Land Use Planning. Victoria, B.C.: 1994. Button, Kenneth. Transport, the Environment and Economic Policy. Brookfield Vermont: Edward Elgar, 1993. Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation. Hew Housing Report: Vancouver CMA August 1994. Vancouver, B.C.: 1994. Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation. Hew Housing Report: Vancouver CMA August 1996. Vancouver, B.C.: 1996. Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation and University of British Columbia Centre For Human Settlements. Planning for Telework and Home-Based Employment: A Canadian Survey on Integrating Work Into Residential Environments. Vancouver, B.C.. 1996. Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation. Vancouver Housing Forecast Spring 1996. Vancouver, B.C.: 1996. Carver, Humphrey. "Building the Suburbs: A Planner's reflections," City Magazine. September 1978. 87 Bibliography Chang, Gang-Len and Hani S. Mahmassani. "The Dynamics Of Commuting Decision Behavior In Urban Transportation Networks." Travel Behavior Research. Ed. The Interantional Association For Travel Behavior. Brookfield Vermont: Avebury, 1989. Engwicht, David. Reclaiming Our Cities And Towns. Better Living With Less Traffic. Philadelphia: New Society Publishers, 1993. Freund, JohnE., Modern Elementary Statistics. Toronto: Prentice-Hall, 1984. Gehl, Jan. Life Between Buildings - Using Public Space. Amsterdam: Elsevier Science Publishers, 1987. Glaister, Stephen., David Starkie, and David Thompson. "The Assessment. Economic Policy For Transport." Oxford Review of Economic Policy. 6.2 (Summer 1990). Goldberg, Michael A. And John Mercer. The Myth Of The North American City. Vancouver, B.C.: University of British Columbia Press, 1986. Golledge, Reginald G. & Robert J. Stimson. Analytical Behavioural Geography. New York: CroomHelm, 1987. Greater Vancouver Regional District, Livable Region Strategy. Burnaby. B.C.: August 1993. Greater Vancouver Regional District, Major Centres in Greater Vancouver: Current Status and Policy. Burnaby. B.C.: February 1993. Greater Vancouver Regional District, Managing Greater Vancouver's Growth. Burnaby, B.C.: August 1993. Greater Vancouver Regional District, Greater Vancouver Key Facts: A Statistical Profile of Greater Vancouver. Canada. Burnaby, B.C.: 1994. Greater Vancouver Regional District, 1991 Census of Population and Housing - Notes and Footnotes. Burnaby, B.C.: 1994. Greater Vancouver Regional District, Regional Transportation Implications of Neighbourhood - Level Planning Initiatives. Burnaby, B.C.: August 1993. Greater Vancouver Regional District and The Province Of British Columbia, Transport 2021. A Long-Range Transportation Plan For Greater Vancouver. Burnaby, B.C.. 1993. 88 Bibliography-Greater Vancouver Regional District & Canadian Urban Institute. Cities Without Cars. A Visioning Process to Reduce Auto Dependency. Burnaby, B.C.: May 1994. Greater Vancouver Regional District. Towards More Complete Communities For A Livable Region. Burnaby, B.C.: December 1994. Greater Vancouver Regional District. Strategic Planning Department Bulletin. Burnaby, B.C.:, August 1994. Greater Vancouver Regional District. Transportation Implications Of Regional Growth Options. Burnaby, B.C.: 1993. Greater Vancouver Regional District. Inter-Municipal Travel Patterns. Burnaby, B.C.: April 1994. Greater Vancouver Regional District. "The Cost of Transporting People in the British Columbia Lower Mainland - Transport 2021." Burnaby, B.C.: 1993. Hall, Peter, "Ebenezer Howard, The Man You Never Knew". Town And Country Planning. 2 (February 1983). Hanson, Susan, ed. The Geography of Urban Transportation. New York: The Builford Press, 1986. Harrison, A. J.. The Economics Of Transport Appraisal. Toronto: John Wiley And Sons, 1974. Hivert, Laurent, et al. "The Analysis Of Present And Future Mobility: New Challenges, New Paradigms." Travel Behavior Research. Ed. The International Association For Travel Behavior. Brookfield Vermont: Avebury, 1989. Hudson, Barclay. "Comparison of Current Planning Theories. Counterparts and Contradictions" Journal of the American Planning Association. (October 1979), pp. 387-398. Hutton, Thomas A. "City Profile: Vancouver". Centre For Human Settlements, School of Community and Regional Planning U B C , January 1994. Kluckner, Michael. Paving Paradise. Vancouver, B.C.: Whitecap Books, 1991. Ley, David. A Social Geography Of The City. University Of British Columbia: Harper & Row, 1983. 89 Bibliography Ley, David. "Downtown Or The Suburbs? A Comparative Study Of Two Vancouver Head Offices." The Canadian Geographer. 29.1 (1985). Lynch, Kevin. Good City Form. Cambridge: MIT Press, 1992. McDonald, Norbert. '"C.P.R. Town': The City-Building Process in Vancouver, 1860-1914," Shaping the Urban Landscape. Eds. GA. Stelter and A.F.J. Artibise, 1982. Norusis, Marija J. The SPSS Guide To Data Analysis. Chicago: SPSS Inc., 1987. Orski, C. Kenneth. "Can Management of Transportation Demand Help Solve Our Growing Traffic Congestion and Air Pollution Problems?" Transportation Quarterly 44.4 (Oct. 1990), pp. 483-498. Page, G. William, and Carl V. Patton. Quick Answers To Quantitative Problems. Toronto: Academic Press Inc., 1991. PBQ&D Inc. Engineers. Vancouver Transportation Study. San Francisco, Cal.: 1967. Real Estate Research Corporation. The Costs of Sprawl. Washington D C : U.S. Gov't Printing Office, 1974. Replogle, Michael. Sustainability: A Vital Concept For Transportation Planing and Development. Prepared for Presentation to the Conference on the Development and Planning of Urban Transport in Developing Countries (CODATUV). Sao Paulo, Brazil: 1990. Richards, Brian. Transport In Cities. London: Architecture And Technology Press, 1990. Roseland, Mark. "Is Planning Theory Relevant to Sustainable Development?" School of Community and Regional Planning Discussion Paper, 1989. Rutherford, Paul. "Tomorrow's Metropolis: The Urban Reform Movement In Canada 1880-1920". The Canadian City. Eds. Artibise And Stelter, 1977. Replogle, Michael. Sustainability: A Vital Concept For Transportation Planning And Development. Washington, DC: Institute for Transportation and Development Policy, 1990. Sherlock, Harley. Cities Are Good For Us. London England: Paladin, 1991. 90 Bibliography Seelig, Michael Y., and Alan F. J. Artibise. From Desolation To Hope - The Pacific Fraser Region In 2010. U B C . School of Community and Regional Planning, 1991. Sewell, John. "Old and New City," City Magazine. (September 1984). Teaford, Jon C. The Twentieth-Century American City. London: The Johns Hopkins University Press, 1986. The Snohomish County Transportation Authority. "A Guide To Land Use And Public Transportation Volume II: Applying the Concepts." Snohomish County, Washington.: 1993, pp. 8-14. The Urban Development Institute. Back To The Future: Redesigning Our Landscapes With Form, Place And Density. Vancouver, 1993. Transport 2021. Transportation Demand Management Measures and Their Potential for Application in Greater Vancouver. Burnaby, B.C.: 1993. Transport 2021. Transportation Implications of Regional Growth Options. Burnaby, B.C.: 1993. Vancouver City Planning Commission. Toward The Next One Million. Vancouver, B.C.: 1989. V. Pendakur, Setty. Cities Citizens & Freeways. Ed. W. Barrington. Vancouver, B.C.. U B C . School of Community and Regional Planning, 1972. V. Pendakur, Setty. "Congestion Management and Air Quality: Lessons From Bangkok and Mexico City." Asian Journal of Environmental Management. 1.2 (Nov. 1993), 53-65. United Way of the Lower Mainland and Associates. "Implications of Social Trends for Growth Management & Transportation Planning in the Lower Mainland." Vancouver, B.C.; 1993. Weaver, John C , "Tomorrow's Metropolis Revisited: A Critical Assessment of Urban Reform in Canada 1890-1920". The Canadian City Eds Artibise and Stelter, 1977. Wright, Charles L. Fast Wheels Slow Traffic - Urban Transport Choices. Philadelphia: Temple University Press, 1992. 91 Bibliography-Wright, Charles. "Urban Transport, Health and Synergy." Transportation Quarterly. 45.3 (July 1991): pp. 455-467. 1995 National Environmental Indicator Series SOE Bulletin No. 95-3. "Canadian Passenger Transportation." Ottawa, Ontario:, Spring 1995. Appendix A 1 Cover Letter for Justice Institute Employee Transportation Survey 2. 1995 Justice Institute Employee Transportation Survey 94 Appendix A2: 1995 Justice Institute Employee Transportation Survey J U S T I C E I N S T I T U T E O F B C E M P L O Y E E T R A N S P O R T A T I O N S U R V E Y Jl JUSTICE INSTITUTE OFRG 95 Section A Neighbourhood Characteristics 1. What do you particularly like about your neighbourhood? (please check all that apply) Personal history (past experiences) A safe and quiet neighbourhood environment Older homes Newer homes Architectural style of homes Homes that are smaller than 33' x 75' (2500 sqft) Homes that are larger than 33' x 75' (2500 sqft) Lots that are smaller than 50' x 120 (6000 sqft) Lots that are larger than 50' x 120' (6000 sqft) Local community park Local community centre An abundance of natural landscape People are generally friendly. Property and homes are generally well kept. How would you rate your present neighbourhood as a place to live? poor 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 ...excellent 9 10 3. Is your residence owned or rented? Owned house Owned condominium Owned townhouse Rented house Rented townhouse Rented apartment Co-op housing 4. Within your financial means, if you could live anywhere within the Lower Mainland, where would you like to live? Why? 5. How much would this decision be influenced by your commute to and from work? completely a great deal somewhat not very much none 6. Approximately, on average how long does it take you to commute one way from home to work and from work to home (minutes). Section B Commuting Characteristics 1. Do you have a valid drivers license? Yes No 2. If you drive, how many vehicles are available to you? 3. If you travel by car (if not, go to the next question), do you: (please check all that apply) premove Postmove Need the car for Justice Institute business. Need the car for personal business. Need the car in case of emergency. Use the car because of its comfort. Use the car because you cannot arrange for a carpool. Use the car because you do not like to depend on others. Need the car because you have irregular work hours Need the car because there are no bus stops close to your house. Need the car because the buses do not run frequently enough. Need the car because there are too many transfers - bus routes are not direct enough. Use the car because you are concerned about your personal safety. Need the car because you feel that it costs too much for bus fare. Need to pick up your children from daycare. Other (please specify). 96 Section C Miscellaneous 4. If you travel by transit, do you: (please check all that apply) Premove Postmove Drive your car to the bus stop. Find it cheaper than driving your car alone. Find a bus stop close to your home and work site. Find the bus schedule that matched your work schedule. Use transit because of higher car insurance costs. • Use transit to save on the hassle or cost of and the finding of a parking spot. Use transit because there are additional high occupant vehicle lanes so you can get to work faster. Use transit because you are guaranteed a ride home in case of an emergency. Use transit because of the availability of a company vehicle to do company business during work hours. Use transit because there are child care facilities at or near work. Other (please specify). 5. List methods of transport you use other than the car and transit to get to and from work? 6. Currently, how happy are you with your method of commuting back and forth to work? extremely happy generally very happy generally satisfied somewhat satisfied not happy at all does not matter 7. Please briefly describe how relocation of the Justice Institute from the west side of Vancouver to New Westminster has changed your method of commuting between home and work. 1. Approximately, how many years have you been employed at the Justice Instihrte? 2. Please check one of the following that currently describes your employment. Administrative Support Instructor/Coordinator Manager Program Director Director Other 3. Could you list, if any, previous positions held at the Justice Institute and the length of time in these positions. 4. Over the course of your employment at the Justice Institute, have you changed residences? Yes No 5. If you answered yes, when did you move? 6. What were the reasons for this move? To be closer to work. Unrelated to my location of work. 7. Using only the first four characters* of your postal code please identify your neighbourhood of residence. 8. How long have you lived in your present neighbourhood?__ * As stated in the cover letter, using the first four characters lets the researchers identify your area while assuring your anonymity. Appendix B 1. Comments to Section A Question 4 of the JI Transportation Survey 2 Comments to Section B Question 3 of the JI Transportation Survey 3. Comments to Section B Question 4 of the JI Transportation Survey 4. Comments to Section B Question 5 of the JI Transportation Survey 5. Comments to Section B Question 7 of the JI Transportation Survey 98 Figure B l : Comments to Section A Question 4 of the JI Transportation Survey # 4. W i th in your f inancia l means , if you could l ive anywhere wi th in the Lower Ma in land , where wou ld you like to l ive? W h y ? Comment (s ) A - West Side Of Vancouver ( Including Down Town) 10 iKitsilano. Have already lived their 17 years. Children have grown up in area. 18 In the neighbourhood where I currently live only in a single family dwelling. Reasons are as answered in question • 19 Point Gray/Kitsilano because of old architecture, gardens, amenities, safety, friends. 21 West Vancouver. Less pollution. Natural green landscape. Quieter. 23 Vancouver west side (for obvious reasons!) 28 35 Kitsilano Point That's where I live now. It's nice. Where presently living. 38 West side where I presently live 39 West side Convenient to most things, airport, ferry, downtown, shopping, parks, etc 41 Where I am West End (west of Penman) Point Gray Area Kits Area False Creek 49 Downtown Vancouver, Kits, Close to ammenities, neighbourhoods, safe, enterainment, lifestyle, friends. 56 Westside I'm used to it 60 Kitsilano Neighbourhood feeling/access to community involvement 63 Where I am now (see #1 for reasons) 66 Kitsilano, Kits Point or the West End. These areas combine urban culture with natural landscape and are great Iwalkin and other outdoors . . • — 67 |B - North East Side Vancouver 50 North Vancouver 61 Where I am now, Love multiculural mix. Love working class & cultural stuff. |C - South Vancouver & Burnaby Exactly where I am living now 14 Present location 47 I am quite happ with my position 53 In South Vancouver near Oakridge or Shaughnessy area. I want a nice neighbourhood but not any farther trom work 55 Given my current income, the area where I live allows me to live within Vancouver c % < ^ ™ £ $ ™ ^ ' could afford to live in the area and not have to commute a great distance (.e cross any bridges into the Vancouver area), would consider . • ~ |D - North Burnaby 11 IWhere I am now, I like the neighbourhood 33 Willingdon Heights Burnaby Convenience, nice homes quiet, etc. 74 North Vancouver The view. |E - South Burnaby/New Westminster New West, seems to be central to the valley and the downtown core. Burnaby. Lots of green space close to Valley and Vancouver downtown. 26 Stay in New Westminster, Great small community. Excellent community spirit. 51 New Westminster because it is close to work. 52 Steveston because it's quiet, close to shops, has ocean scenic 59 New Westminster 72 73 Burnaby more of a centralized location ' Vancouver West-End Lived there for 35 years until Ma/95, Better variety of services more flexible hours of course this serves a much larger population. . -99 F - Coquitlam 1 Doquitlam/Port Moody Close to all amenities 20 i/Vest Point Grey, Kitsilano Sense of neighbourhood, convienient to all amenities. Air quality better than some areas of he city. Reasonably safe. . 34 Coquitlam Close to work, all ammenities near by parks, lakes 68 Coquitlam central, husbands family lives in area. G-Po rt Coquitlam 12 Vancouver/Kits 22 New Westminster Massey Heights and Queen's Park area. More central than current location, closer access to sky rain, N.W. Quay. . . 29 Port Coquitlam Small town atmosphere, low crime rate, easy access to freeways etc. 37 UBC I like the area, house and close to the ocean. H- Pitl t Meadows 17 | I - Maple Ridge 16 North or West Vancouver near the ocean. My wife & I like the peace and tranquility of the ocean. J-Mi ssion (Dewdney Trunk Road) 45 | Vancouver, it is where I grew up. K - Mission (East Side) 15 |West Vancouver I like it primarily for the reasons outlined above in 1. L - Chilliwack 2 | New Westminster Historical back-ground/close to work M - North Vancouver (Indian Arm Inlet) 40 |Same place. Quiet community and have been there for 22 years. Other areas are not attractive at this time. N - North Vancouver 25 North Vancouver, Excellent community atmosphere. Plenty of recreation opportunities, good schools, lots of nature. 32 North Shore Convenience Beauty Familiarity Atmosphere O - L ons Bay & Beyond 42 SquamishA/Vhistler/BrackendaleMountaineous Environoment Recreational Opportunities Smalltown Atmosphere 57 West Vancouver Kitsilano P-R chmond 13 Vancouver - near Jericho Hill. Nice quiet neighbourhood. 44 White Rock, or Langley 58 62 Kits, community feel, vibrant n'hood Southlands, pastoral feel, natural landscape Mackenzie Heights, oldern hood, small lots, safety. . Q-R ichmond (Boundary Road) 70 Where I am now R - North Delta/North Survey 3 North Delta. Wife works in Langley, children go to independent school in Surrey Central location with quiet neighbourhoods _ _ 31 North Delta Location Accessability 43 Within our financial means, we are living exactly where we want to live. Close to shopping, easy to access to skytrain & close to my work site 48 New Westminster, Surrey, North Delta, close to work close to family & friends 100 S - East Surrey 71 New Westminster because it will be close to where I now work T - North Delta/ South Surrey (72 Ave) 6 In the new West/Burnaby or Coquitlam area because it would be closer to work and also because I could dlbo eiu.er walk (if close enough), roller blade or bicycle to work (more exercise, less pollution' save $ on gas) 36 Right where I now live Reasons As per sec. A-1 54 I would like to live in Cloverdale or Langley. I would like to live in either one of these areas because there is a lot of green space. — ~" ' 64 Where we are now, North Delta (Sunshine Hills as indicated in Question 1) 65 False Creek or Kits area I enjoy the area beaches parks U-S( juth Delta 30 Where I Presently live Close to ocean (within 112 km) Close to beach Close to forest Cose to farmland LOW CRIME RATE . . — • v-s< juth Surrey/White Rock 5 Remain in present neighbourhood 7 Cambie and 33rd Close to wifes work. 27 White Rock Present location, access to beach, small city "feel", close to but not in city. W - L angley 24 South Langley Wide open spaces lots of large properties, quiet, not much traffic, more sucluded. 46 101 Figure B2: Comments to Section B Question 3 of the JI Transportation Survey 3. If you travel by car (if not, go to the next question), do you: # Comment(s) A - West Side Of Vancouver (Including Down Town) 10 18 19 I go on to another job and I would be too time consuming and inconvenient (I carry equipment with me) to make other arrangements 21 23 28 35 38 39 41 There 3 buses/skytrain I need to take to go to work now if I choose to. However, to go 13 km I would have to be at the bus stop at 5:45am to qet to work by 7:30, too early and too long to go a short distance!! 49 I have a second, part-time job in evenings in the city. I walk on many occasions, go directly from one job tothe next. I often do erands on the way home from work. 56 60 Bus runs at awkard times for work schedule ie work 8:00-4:30 bus gets me to work at 7;35 & have to wait to 4:55 to go home. Can go by car in 15 min. 63 66 67 B - North East Side Vancouver 50 61 C - South Vancouver & Burnaby 9 Minor hockey commitments 14 47 53 Half the time is involved if I take my car. 55 D - North Burnaby 11 33 74 102 |E - South Burnaby/New Westminster 26 51 52 Carpool 1 to 2 days per week with other colleagues when possible. 59 72 73 |F - Coquitlam 1 20 Public transit takes twice as long!! 34 68 lG - Port Coquitlam 12 22 29 37 It takes about 30min by car but would take about 2 hrs by transit. If there were a more direct way ot work at my irregular hours, I would take transitl . . commuting to/from Transit takes 2 hrs each way. Commuting by bus takes 1 and 1 3/4 hrs lH- Pitt Meadows 17 - Maple Ridge 16 |j - Mission (Dewdney Trunk Road) 45 |K - Mission (East Side) 15 I No buses that go to work location |L - Chilliwack , , i v e in Chilliwach, there is no reasonable bus transportation between MW and Chill that I am aware of that could accomodate different working hours M - North Vancouver (Indian Arm Inlet) 40 used to walk to work during the months it was light enough in the mornings when we were at Jericho. IN - North Vancouver 25 32 lO - Lions Bay & Beyond 42 57 103 P - R ichmond 13 • fhe move does not affect me as I am based in Maple Ridge 44 58 62 Q - R i chmond (Boundary Road) 70 R - N c rth Delta/North Survey 3 31 43 (see 9 and 10 Premove) Two biggest factor I would prefer to use public transport. 48 S-Ea st Surrey 71 | T - North Delta/ South Surrey (72 Ave) 6 36 54 64 65 U - S outh Delta 30 I I • ' ' ' V - South Surrey/White Rock 5 Need the car because it's too far to ride my bike 7 27 W - l .angley 24 46 104 Figure B3: Comments to Section B Question 4 of the JT Transportation Survey 4. If you t rave l by transit , do you : # Comment (s ) A - West Side Of Vancouver (Including Down Town) 10 18 19 21 23 28 35 38 39 41 49 56 60 63 I don't drive. 66 67 B - North East Side Vancouver 50 61 I use transit as back-up if car in for repairs. C - South Vancouver & Burnaby 9 14 47 53 55 D - North Burnaby 11 33 74 E - South Burnaby/New Westminster 4 8 26 51 52 59 72 73 Convenience 105 F - Coqui t lam 1 20 34 68 G - Port Coqui t lam 12 22 29 37 H- Pitt Meadows 17 1 - Maple Ridge 16 J - Miss ion (Dewdney Trunk Road) 45 K - Miss ion (East Side) 15 L - Chi l l iwack 2 M - North Vancouver (Indian A r m Inlet) 40 N - North Vancouver 25 32 After work activites were on my bus route home. Didn't like to deal with traffic O - L ions Bay & Beyond 42 57 P - R ichmond 13 44 58 62 Q - R ichmond (Boundary Road) 70 R - North Delta/North Survey 3 31 43 48 S - East Surrey 71 106 T - North Delta/ South Surrey (72 Ave) 6 36 54 64 65 U-Sc >uth Delta 30 | V - South Surrey/White Rock 5 7 27 W - L angley 24 46 107 Figure B4: Comments to Section B Question 5 of the Jl Transportation Survey 1 5. List me thods of t ransport you use other 1 han the car and transi t to get to and f r o m work? # Comment (s ) A - W i ssi Side Of Vancouver (Including Down Town) 10 18 19 21 23 28 35 38 39 41 49 56 60 None (a little guilty about not using transit) 63 66 67 B - N orth East Side Vancouver 50 61 c - s outh Vancouver & Burnaby 9 Bike on occasion 14 47 53 I sometimes take the bus but only if my husband needs the car for his work. Before I take the bus tho I try to carpool, at least on the way home but I don't like to make ; 55 D-N orth Burnaby 11 Occassionally Bicycle 33 74 E-S .outh Burnaby/New Westminster 4 Bike/Walk 8 Walk 26 Walking 51 52 59 72 Walk, lift with friends 73 108 F - Coquitlam 1 20 34 68 My skateboard/mountain bike and hopefully soon motorcycle G-Pc art Coquitlam 12 22 29 Bicycle 37 H- PH t Meadows 17 | 1 - Maple Ridge 16 | J - Mission (Dewdney Trunk Road) 45 A drive from a family member, when car is unavailable K - Mission (East Side) 15 L - Chilliwack 2 M - North Vancouver (Indian Arm Inlet) 40 N - North Vancouver 25 32 O-L. ions Bay & Beyond 42 57 P-R ichmond 13 44 Car only 58 62 Q-F lichmond (Boundary Road) 70 R-ry lorth Delta/North Survey 3 31 Bicycle 43 48 S - East Surrey 71 109 T - North Delta/ South Surrey (72 Ave) 6 36 54 64 65 1 used to walk, bike or take a bus to the old JI. Now I'm too far to do anything other than drive. U-S outh Delta 30 | V - South Surrey/White Rock 5 7 27 W-L .angley 24 46 110 Figure B5: Comments to Section B Question 7 of the J I Transportation Survey 7. P lease br ief ly descr ibe how relocat ion of the Just ice Institute f r o m the west s ide of Vancouver to N e w Wes tm ins te r has changed your method of c o m m u t i n g be tween h o m e and work . . . — # Comment (s ) A - W ( sst Side Of Vancouver ( Including Down Town) 10 Used to walk to work in 15 minutes, now travel 21/2 hours per day by transit 18 I used to walk to work in 12 minutes. Now I drive 35 to 40 minutes to work and 50 to 55 minutes home. The day I tried transit I spent 1.5 hours each way. 19 I used to be a 5 minute bicycle ride from work, now I am a 40 minute drive (4 days/week) and an 80 minute bus/skytrain ride. . -21 Has given me less free time in a day. I only lived 5 blocks away from the old location. 23 Was able to walk to work, now have to drive. 28 Not changed 35 Premove commute: 1.5 minute/ no traffic. Postmove: 30-40 min/ mod-heavy traffic. 38 I used to have a commute of 10 minutes, now I have 45 minutes. 39 Used to drive for 10 minutes per day now drive 1 hour and 10 minutes 41 Nothing has changed except I spend more time in my car. 49 Has added 45 minutes of driving in crowded/ rush hour circumstances 56 I lived just across the road from the old site, could walk in 5 minutes or ride bike. 60 Now I try to arrange my meetings and schedule so that I can carpool 1 or 2 days per week with a colleage in the same area. Has added on additional 1 1/2 hours to my work day. 63 Takes much longer, inconvenient. Get up earlier, leave earlier (not a morning person). Takes longer to get home. More air and noise on Hwy. . - — 66 The commute is stressful especially coming home, there is no direct route to the westside of Vancouver. 1 ravttic is terrible. It's no longer easy to drop into the office after hours to get some work done or put up something. 1 am considerina leaving the JI because of the commute . . 67 [TWO zone commuting instead of one zone. More money spent on transit or gas B - Nor th East Side Vancouver 50 Not much 61 1 was after the move. c - s ou th Vancouver & Burnaby 9 Has made it a much shorter commute 14 Same method less time, plus/ minus 40 minutes to 10 or less 47 It has not changed 53 I used to drop my husband off at his office in Kitsilano (and pick hime up). He now takes the bus both ways. 55 It has changed the amount of commuting time to and from work. However, it is now much more inconvenient to attend meetings downtown or arrange doctor, dentist and other appointments (services which are all located on the west side and which I would not like to change practitioners) D - N or th Burnaby 11 Shorter commute 33 Shorter distance less traffic 74 I l l E - South Burnaby/New Westminster 4 Gone from 40 to 45 minutes to 5 minutes what can I say. 8 Not at all, it just takes a lot less time 26 t's shorter. 51 I used to live in East Vancouver and it took me 1 hour to 1 1/2 hour to get to work (3 hours/day), now that I ve moved to New Westminster it takes me 112 hour to walk or 5 min by bus 52 1 used to live in Richmond but now 1 live in Burnaby, 1 did not want to commute during the rainy/snow season. Also, the time travelling has been reduced considerably. . ' — 59 Much shorter commute 72 73 1 use to bus it, now 1 walk. Bus it only on days of extreme weather or fateque. F-Cc quitlam 1 Since the Jl moved to New West, my total daily commute was cut down by 1.5 hr.. I still commute by car because I have to pick up my baby from daycare, if I did not have to could easily take my bike to work. 20 Changed my lifestyle completely by moving to Burnaby. Did not feel I could cope with a 2 hour commute. Would have loved the Jl enqaqinq in a premove study and the inception of a van pool. Too late now! 34 I moved closer to site. 68 No change besides travelling time. G-Pc art Coquitlam 12 Carpool 22 Has greatly reduced travel time, providing increase personal time. 29 Much closer to home and is subsequently more convenient. 37 Less time, old driving time equals 1 to 1 1/2 hours one way. New time is 1/2 hour each way. H- Pitt Meadows 17 | 1 - Maple Ridge 16 J - Mission (Dewdney Trunk Road) 45 Before the move I took the bus. It was long but quite easy. Now I take the car and my husband takes the bus because it takes 3 buses/skytrain to qo to work. I did move coser to work though. K - M ission (East Side) 15 Very little, as I am based at the Maple Ridge annex. L - Chilliwack 2 I have saved 20% on the distance travelled and 40% on the time M-r\ orth Vancouver (Indian Arm Inlet) 40 The distance is longer but the travel time appears shorter to the freeway. Previously I had to travel from the North Shore through downtown Vancouver . N-N orth Vancouver 25 No change. However, I was considering cycling to and from before the move. I no longer consider this a viable option. 32 I now drive rather than take the seabus and bus O - Lions Bay & Beyond 42 The method has remained the same, The manner in which I commute however has changed. Rather than going over the Lions Gate I now drive over the Second Narrows 57 Increased the commute by 15 km each way not as scenic a drive. 112 P - Richmond 13 have virtually lost the option of taking transit to/from work! 44 No change 58 The commute time remains the same. More freeway travel postmove. Distance to work increased postmove but freeway brings the travel time the same. Still have a bridge to cross, premove I had two bridges. Driving west to east across Richmond a person can grow a beard. _ 62 Time for travel is roughly the same but the trasit route has fewer stops Q-Ri chmond (Boundary Road) 70 [Shortened commute 50%. R - North Delta/North Survey 30 It has greatly reduced my traveling time. It has not changed anything else. 31 Reduced time spent by 1 1/2 to 2 hours. 43 See #3 48 My commute has been cut from 1 hour to 15 minutes. I still use the car but I am now able to use a route that is less busy than the old one. — — S-E£ ist Surrey 71 I can get up in the morning an hour later 6:00 AM instead of 5:00. I'm more relaxed when I get to work and when I return home. -T-Nc >rth Delta/ South Surrey (72 Ave) 6 Decrease in distance & time used to commute (also do not car pool since I moved to Delta from Abbotsford, due to personal reasons though and I work too easily for others to car pool with me) . . — 36 It has cut my travel time by half and mileage by two thirds 54 Relocation of the Ji from the west side of Vancouver to New Westminster has cut my drive in half 64 Shorter commute 65 It normally took me 1 hr & 15 min to get to work because of traffic so I save 2 hours of commuting per day. U-S outh Delta 30 | Distance is the same, however, there is now less stress and energy used. The drive is much more pleasantl V - South Surrey/White Rock 5 It has minimized travel time to and from work significantly 7 Car only drink 3/4 of a cup of coffie. 27 My commute time has been reduced to less than half. I never use the freeway or travel over 80km anymore. My gas consumptionis significantly reduced. . W - l .angley 24 Has not changed 46 Shorter 113 Appendix C Appendix C 1. Survey Results of Neighbourhood, Commute and Employee Characteristics 114 CU u « u CU "a, S 73 S « a s E S o u •a o o X ! i-s © •SI0 55 CM O +* "3 m cu 3 cu u a Yrs In Neigh. o CN i n O CN m c i O CO CO m CN m CO r -CM i n 0 i n CO CO 0 C i 0 CO m CO m CO Rea For Move § 5 u > E D o 2 * S | a t > c D O 15 U > c D s 1 u > I -g S 1 J) > c D O = 1 JJ > E D 0 § t S 5 u > c D O u > c D ? Is c 3 | 5 I * 0 ) > c ZD 1 i 5 " ft) i CO 1 < OJ o 0 ) CO 0 ft) C O u £ a t C O 2 0 OJ CO 1 2 0 "al m ft) * C O ai < S) « — 01 5 * o z tf) a t > a> > o z O Z tn ? 0 z Ul a ) > -m tf> 0 z O z 0 z 0 z 0 z m ? 0 Z 0 z 0 z in ? 0 z tf) 0 ) > -in a > > -C •o c T J C T J c T J c T J c 3 previous Position! S _ i < V) > O S 1 _ l < in •S 5 g 5 2 _ i < « "S ^ 3 2 _ i < C O g 5 1 _ J < v> 1 s i ! S _ j < <n r s z < z < z employee Status 0 ) l l E 3 E « T J < 8. * a > Q- O) I D g (0 .3 o ? a E 3 E « T J < i l E W T J < o I i i § 13. fl} CL O ) 3 g CO 2 a t ' 5 § : 1 . <D CL CD n . n i 5 a t a t Q O - OJ CL O ) 3 g ra 5 S I 1 g | E < 0 •D < a t s „ g a E 3 E w T J < T = O 3 c o J c 2 " 2 " 2 £8 t 0 . 2 c o •) . E £ * " H " 2 £ 8 h g 1 E <o T J < ai S | a. a t Q . cn 3 g CO a t s 1 11 E « T J < 2 « J c » 2 -£3 9 3 0 » S-E § • E « T J < 0 ) > 3 2 E 3 " E w T J < . 2 $ J c 5 " 2 n 2 -E3 11 £ 3 •11 £ 3 2 n j E S 'E 2 •S3 ai s i CL OJ CL cn D g CO ai £ Si 0 Q . OJ o _ cn z> g ro 3 C "> >-m CO m CD h - i n CO m CO CD CD i n CO CO 0 0 S i n 0 CO m - Si <u = s i i E E o u a ] cn c o _ J a > •s E E o O a > O ) c o _ i 3 E E o o 5 cn c o _ 1 E E o O a > C3J o _ l E E 3 0 ) D) C o _ l x: a t C O £ 1 -2 o 3 E E 0 O OJ O ) c • Si 3 E E <3 0J CJ) t z 0 _ J © 3 E E 0 O a j D ) c 0 _ l 0 ) 3 E E 0 U a t cn c O _ j 0 ) 3 E E 0 O u cn c 0 _ l i i E E <3 a > cn c 0 _ i i i i E 0 O ai CD c a 1 E E 3 U cn c 0 _) « E E 0 O a t cn c O _ i 0 ) 3 E E 0 O ai cn c 0 _ i 0 ) cn c ro j = O 0 Z 0) cn c ro . c U 0 z i i 3 E E 3 1 O C O 0 ) " 3 E E 0 0 1 0 C O 0 ) cn c ro J Z O 0 Z J Z S s 1 s 1 E E 0 0 1 O J Z C O Satisfaction 1 ^ 1 i5i 5 <° > -CL Q . — ^ < O Z > * T J 1 iS j i > - T J 1 ~ c - S < n t o o W < C > . Q . CL = ro < X " 5 z " D E £ OJ tf) a j c o C D « >. S: 0. 2 CO 0 ) X g t 0 « CO T J 1 & £ tf) E O < n C O U J -a 2 M a t . t f > C D « T J 2 a > w fl) CO 0 « ro T J I« £ m 1 ™ « w = ~$ e c a ) (A a ) (0 1 -s 1 '6 I* a . a . = ^ < 0 Z > - £ - = a . 2 c o OJ X s & C D « >• c t — CL 2 ro a t X £ £ • C D « =^  ix 2 c o a > X S & C D a > E ^ >. c t — CL 2 c o a t X ( D « > - T J a 5 OJ c o C D W 1 M OJ .tf) C D « >. c t ~ CL 2 < o a t X S £-E 8 1 o a > J Z ai z a ) z a > a t a > z £ z fl) j= ' 5 5 Z a t Z 0 ) j= a t Z a t jr tt) Z OJ £ z a t £ ai z JZ z £ a> z £ a > z £ a j Z ai £ 0) z a t £ a t Z C Q a t J Z a > z V £ OJ z ai J Z CJ Z a3 SI ' « z 2 E L in 3 C O CO U CD o i / ) 3 C O a ) O fO U c a O n ) O CO O r o O CO 0 CO 0 CO O 3 i n 3 C O i n 3 (0 0 tf) 3 3 CO O V) 3 C O ro O CO O ro O CO O ro O c a O 5 * o CM t o - - 0 - CM - O V) 2 S • u _l tf) tn •V) ? i n ? m $ tf) a t > -m ? m a > > -tf) tn a t > - 1 m a j > - 0 z tf) OJ > -1/) tf) V) OJ >• >~ U) ? t o 0 ) > tf) o - 01 * E M 3 C 5 in r -1 c 2 S I c o 0 0 tn % c s S V) i i 3 C i n i n 1 3 C i n m tf) c 0 u) i i 3 c i i 0 V) a j 3 c i n CO j 3 C O • ^ r </> CU 3 c m i n a j 3 c 0 CO | S i n c 8 m i i 3 c s i n m V) i c 0 CO tf) 1 c O CM tf) i i 3 C is i n c o V) i i 3 C 0 t o a ) c 0 tn 0 ) 3 c i n 1 3 c O CO V) i i 3 C s i n o l i o > E i/) a > 3 C IT) c ii o Jl 3 c s s 1 3 C in w) i i 3 C S i n m V) 0) " 3 c i n i i 3 c 0 u) i i 3 c m CM 1/) a t 3 c O V) i i 3 c m a t 3 c i n u) a j 3 c m « i i 3 c i n I c S 8 tf) 0 ) 3 C i n tf) i i 3 c i n u> 1 c is i n CO V) OJ " 3 c 0 i n i i 3 c 0 i n a t "3 CZ i n V) i i 3 C i n CM i n a j 3 c is i n Influence (0 0) Q "TO < D C D < " t o 1 E o 0 ) > s 5 s z m a t Q " c o a > O < CO OJ Q n V C D < > s •5 5 z 0) E 0 C O I T -> 3 z ra E 0 t o > s •S 5 z " t o j r OJ E 0 C O > 3 z ro ft) E <? 1 E 0 </) ro s ft) E a ? > y ^ s z ro J Z 1 E <8 ro s ft) E 0 ( 0 > s i i 0 ) CL E 0 O ro J = E 0 ( 0 ro OJ O ro 2 C D < CO c u O ro a ) C D < CO 0 ) O "CO a > C D < Would Like To Move i i -c I C T J i i S 1 ti fl. ft* & S < £ x : c ° > 13 a t ct C T 3 — C = U J n ** c w t a j a: ? C T J — c E U J n ^ c w C fl) a > > — C . E L U CO E £ C T J — C . E L U CO * -E £ a t > ct: S < c S > I « OJ Ct C T J — c . E L U (0 - f fc m OJ > C T ) — c . E L U CO * -c tf) fc OJ OJ > Ct S c . E H I ra + ^ £ a ) or s C T J — C . E U J ro C tf) fc 0 ) OJ > C T J — C . E L U CO c i n fc n t OJ > Ct ^ C T J — C . E L U CO c tf) E < » OJ - > Ct ? < £ si c . 3 | z a t Ct C T J — c S U J ra +J c w 0 ) • > ct ? n S s « I i 3 < | z a > ct < = x: c . S > I -a j Ct < £ si is. a t ct < £ J Z i i < u or < J = J Z c . 5 > 15 0 ) Ct ,2 3 a t c o 1 ^ 5 3 Housing Type 0 0 1 c = 5 3 O c c u T J ZJ 4 ) O c - E a t E ct § r -E 11 3 | o O "S 1 S. < T J £ a E » « < a t i n 3 0 1 T J a ) c a 0 ) _ w X J 3 0 ) 0 a t < n 3 0 X T J OJ c 3 a t u > 3 0 X T J 0J c a T J ( 5 11 < E | | 0 0 T J £ £ ? Ct a . < 0 c ' i n 3 0 1 CL O 8 a t m 3 0 X T J a j c 0 ) Ct a t 3 0 X T J cn c ' v i 3 0 X 0 . 9 0 O 0) i n 3 0 X T J a > c OJ Ct a t > 3 0 cn c ' i n 3 0 X CL 0 6 0 cn c z in 3 0 X a . § O > J 3 ( 0 c 3 a t i n 3 0 X T J O C a a j in 3 O X T J 0 ) c a E a i 0 0 a t t n 3 0 X T J OJ c O a ) T J W S 0 U 1 -sz 8 5 5 z 3 o u c o o O ) CO o CO 0 0 0 0 ) O ) CO CO CO CD CO c TJ CD 0 0 c4 a t > 3 CD 0 0 0 0 CD c o Code 5 w a t < a : CO > T r t CO > c c > CM cc < o > ck to > CO —3 CD > CO > CO z CO > X CO > 6 CD > L U CO > cc CD > CO > z CO > CO > -!» CD > n u € CO < CD > JJ m > 0 c CO > x: s CN in > ± > T 0 . i n > CM > T C O m > * o CO CN 0 0 CM i n CO CO CO O ) CO 5 CD i n 0 CO CO ( O CO < 0 c o O Z CQ S CO 0 vi 0 CD CO i n i n 115 Neigh. 1 s Oi 0.166 I D CO CN in I 0.333 I 0.416 <o 0.416 I i-» 0.416 0.083 I in CO in in in CD in CO Rea For Move To Be Closer To Work To Be Closer To Work To Be Closer To Work Unrelated To Work Unrelated To Work To Be Closer To Work To Be Closer To Work Unrelated To Work Unrelated To Work Unrelated To Work D K. » 5 °= After I After I Before Before I After I I After I I After I Before Before After <u J 0-No No Yes No No No Yes I Yes I l N ° l I Yes  I I Yes  I l N ° l I Yes I Yes l N ° l Yes] No I No l N ° l No I Yes Yes Krevious Positions V/N N/A Moved Around AtSL Moved Up To UM Employee Status Administrative Support Instructor/ Coordinator Instructor/ Coordinator Instaictor/ Coordinator Administrative Support Administrative Support Administrative Support Administrative Support Administrative Support Upper Manage/Other Upper Manage/Other Administrative Support Administrative Support Administrative Support Administrative Support Administrative Support Instructor/ Coordinator Instructor/ Coordinator Upper Manage/Other instructor/ Coordinator Upper Manage/Other Upper Manage/Other 3 >-CN I  S° I m CO CO m CN CN CO m CN CO CO CO in d CO in Change in Commute Shorter Commute Shorter Commute No Change Shorter Commute Shorter Commute Shorter Commute Shorter Commute Longer Commute Shorter Commute No Change Shorter Commute Shorter Commute Moved With JI Move Moved With JI Move No Change No Change Shorter Commute Shorter Commute Shorter Commute No Change Moved With JI Move Shorter Commute Satisfaction Extremely Happy Generally , Very Happy Generally Very Happy Extremely Happy Extremely Happy Extremely Happy Extremely Happy Extremely Happy Generally Satisfied Extremely Happy Generally Satisfied Generally Very Happy Somewhat Satisfied Extremety Happy Generally Very Happy Generally Satisfied Generally Very Happy Generally Very Happy , Extremely Happy Generally Satisfied Generally Satisfied Generally Very Happy Ali Metii. Of Trans Neither Bike Neither BikeAA/aik Neither Walk Walk Neither Neither Neither Walk Neither Neither Neither Neither Neither Bike Neither Neither Neither Neither o S 5; o £ 2 1. Car Car Car Car Car Car Bus Car Car Car Bus Car Car Car Car Bus Car Car Car i !  Car Car Car » > CN o CN CN <N o - - - o CN - - - o CN CN CN o - -(A B S • u _1 1 Yes Yes I Yes Yes Yes Yes No Yes Yes Yes I No  I Yes Yes Yes Yes No Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes | Work To Home 20 Minutes 15 Minutes 25 Minutes 5 Minutes 15 Minutes 6 Minutes 5 Minutes 20 Minutes 10 Minutes 8 Minutes 30 Minutes 10 Minutes 7 Minutes 10 Minutes 15 Minutes 20 Minutes 35 Minutes 15 Minutes 30 Minutes 15 Minutes 30 Minutes 15 Minutes 0 1 1 o > E 20 Minutes 15 Minutes 14 Minutes 5 Minutes 10 Minutes 6 Minutes 5 Minutes 15 Minutes 10 Minutes 8 Minutes 7 Minutes 7 Minutes 5 Minutes 15 Minutes 15 Minutes 25 Minutes 15 Minutes 30 Minutes 15 Minutes 25 Minutes 15 Minutes Influence Not Very Much Somewhat Not Very Much Somewhat Somewhat A Great Deal Completely A Great Deal A Great Deal None Completely Completely A Great Deal A Great Deal Somewhat Not Very Much Not Very Much 1  Not Very Much Somewhat S _ V ffi = & t A Great Deal A Great Deal Would Like To Move Remain In Alt Neigh. Move To Central LM Remain In Alt Neigh. Move To Central LM Move To Central LM Remain In Alt Neigh. Move To Central LM Move To Unrelat Area Move To Central LM Move To Central LM Remain In West End Move To Centra! LM Remain In West End Move To Central LM Move To Central LM Remain In West End Move To Central LM Move To Central LM I Remain In ! West End Kemain in Ait Neigh. Remain In Att Neigh. Move To Central LM Housing Type Owned House Owned House Rented Townhouse istminster Owned House Owned House Owned Condominium Rented Apartment Rented Apartment Owned Condominium Owned House Rented Apartment Owned House Rented Apartment Rented House Rented Apartment Owned Condominium Owned House Owned House Owned House uwnea Condominium Owned House Owned Townhouse D SZ a o> 3 at o h- £ w z h- CO r-- in CO CO CO m CO CO t Coquitlam CO r- CO CO CO 11 tti Burnab] V5B-1 V5B-3 V5B-1 th Burnab] V3M-3 j V5E-1 V3M-6 8th St & 4th Ave j V5E-3 I V3M-6 V3N-1 V3M uitlam CO > V3J-7 V3J-1 CO > t Coquitlam V3B-4 V3B-1 V3C-6 V3B-5 a m > V5W-2 T w in > |D - Nor CO CO «r |E - Sou CO CO CN in CN m G) in CN CO |F - Coq o CN 3 CO CO |G - Pon CN 8 r--co CO in in m 1 1 6 £ sz >- z CO in m CO 1 °'75 1 1 175  1 RI CO CO CO CO Rea For Move Unrelated To Work Unrelated To Work Unrelated To Work Unrelated To Work o It 0) > c D o S. " S * Before Before Before 1  Before Before § a 1 N ° 1 l N ° Yes l No l I No I I No I Yes 1 N ° 1 1 Yes  1 No 1 No 1 1 Yes  1 No | Yes 1 No 3 2 i i a> tn it £ N/A Moved Around AtSL N/A V/N Moved Up To UM N/A V/N N/A • c S _J n w s 5 g E Employee Status Administrative Support Instructor/Coord i nator Administrative Support Instructor/ Coordinator Instructor/ Coordinator Upper Manage/Other Instructor/ Coordinator Instructor/ Coordinator Instructor/ Coordinator Instructor/ Coordinator Administrative Support Administrative Support Upper Manage/Other MaminiSTjanve Support Upper Manage/Other 3 £ -> >-h- m ai in in in CO m CO CO CM m CM CO Change In Commute No Change No Change Longer Commute No Change Shorter Commute Longer Commute No Change Longer Commute No Change Longer Commute Longer Commute No Change Longer Commute No Change ! Shorter Commute Satisfaction Extremely Happy Extremely Happy Generally Very Happy Extremely Happy Somewhat Satisfied Generally Very Happy Somewhat Satisfied Somewhat Satisfied Generally Satisfied Generally Satisfied Generally Satisfied Generally Satisfied I Generally Satisfied Satisfied Extremely Happy Alt. Meth. Of Trans Nerther Neither Neither Neither Neither Neither Neither Neither Neither Neither Neither Neither Neither Neither Neither ° -8 i 13 a E X Car Car/Bus Car Car Car Car Car/Bus Car Car Car Car Car Bus Car it > CO CN - CM CO - - - - CM - CM o CM Licens Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes No Yes [ o - a * E M 30 Minutes 9 Minutes 45 Minutes 15 Minutes 70 Minutes 30 Minutes 25 Minutes 45 Minutes 75 Minutes 50 Minutes 30 Minutes 30 Minutes 35 Minutes 90 Minutes 15 Minutes o l l o > E 30 Minutes 9 Minutes 20 Minutes 15 Minutes 65 Minutes 30 Minutes 25 Minutes 30 Minutes 70 Minutes 45 Minutes 35 Minutes 30 Minutes 35 Minutes 60 Minutes 15 Minutes Influence Completely A Great Deal A Great Deal A Great Oeal Somewhat Not Very Much A Great Deal A Great Deal 1 : Somewhat A Great Deal Somewhat Somewhat Somewhat Would Like To Move Remain In Alt. Neigh. Remain In West End Remain In West End Move To Central LM Remain In Alt. Neigh. Move To Unrelat Area Move To Unrelat Area Move To Unrelat Area Remain In West End Remain In West End Move To Unrelat Area Kemain in West End Housing Type Owned Condominium Owned House k Road) Owned Townhouse Owned House Owned Condominium in Arm Inlet) Owned House Owned Condominium Owned Condominium Owned House Owned House Owned : Townhouse Co-op Housing Owned House Rented House TT CO a Owned House o SZ 8 f> 5 z o Iney Trun Side) t-- OO ver (India Oi o o eyond 00 O) CO h- CO undary Ri co Postal Code Meadows V3Y-2 le Ridge V2X-9 |j - Mission (Dewc V4S-8 '. sion (East V2V-6 liwack V2R-3 th Vancou V7G-1 th Vancou* V7N-2 V7M-3 is Bay & B V0N-3 VON-2 imond V6Y-3 V6Y-3 V7E-4 V7A-1 iog) puouii V6V-2 | |H- Pitt 1 |l - Mapl CO |j - Mission (Dewc m |K - Mis: m |L - Chil CN |M - Nor o |N-NOII m CM CM CO |o - Lior CM r-in |p -Rich CO 5 SB 3 |Q - Rich o 1 1 7 E si sf C O 0.833 0.667 J •* 0.375 j C N C O C O C M o C N l 1  25 J I 183  I C N Rea For Move Unrelated To Work To Be Closer To Work To Be Closer To Work Unrelated To Work Unrelated To Work Unrelated To Work Unrelated To Work To Be Closer To Work Unrelated To Work 0 s.» 01 m 5 « Before Before Before Before After Before Before Before Before Chge Res. Yes j No Yes No Yes Yes No Yes Yes 1 N ° 1 No Yes o z Yes Yes No Previous Positions Moved Up To UM Moved Around AtSL Moved Around AtSL i Moved Up To j UM Moved Up To UM N/A Employee Status Upper snage/Other Instructor/ Coordinator Iministrative Support Instructor/ Coordinator Iministrative Support Iministrative Support Upper anage/Other Instructor/ Coordinator Iministrative Support Iministrative Support Instructor/ Coordinator Instructor/ ^>ordi nator 11 i i Instructor/ Coordinator iministrative Support Instructor/ Coordinator Employee Status s Ac < < 5 Instructor/ Coordinator < < < 3 s» -> >-C O 0.667 C O t o 1.333 C O inge In nmute Commute Commute Commute Commute Commute Commute Commute Commute • Commute • Commute Change • Commute • Commute • Commute Change r Commute lorter lorter inger lorter lorter torter lorter lorter loiter lortei No i lortei lortei lortei No in in _ i in C O w < / ) w C O ( / ) in C O C O Satisfaction Generally Very Happy Generally Satisfied Extremely Happy Extremely Happy Generally Very Happy Generally Satisfied Generally Very Happy Extremely Happy Does Not Matter Generally Satisfied Generally Very Happy Extremely Happy Generally Satisfied Extremely Happy Somewhat Satisfied Generally Satisfied II sither Bike lither •ither irther sither •ither sither 1 sither jtther sither sither sither sither sither | 5 z Bike z z z z z z z z z z z z z z Vlode Car Car Car | Car Bus Car Car Car Car Car Car Car Car Car Car Car » > C M T - C M o - C N - C M C N - C O - i n -B7T Licens Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes I Yes Yes Yes o h - OJ x E lutes lutes lutes lutes lutes I lutes lutes lutes lutes nutes nutes nutes i £ C nutes nutes 15 Mir 20 Mir 15 Mir 20 Mir 90 Mil 35 Mil 60 Mil 35 Mil 20 Mil UIAI03 35 Mil 45 Mil 40 Mil 35 Mil 65 Mil 70 Mil o - XL M o > Minutes Minutes ' Minutes > Minutes i Minutes > Minutes I Minutes I Minutes > Minutes 15 Minutes ) Minutes ) Minutes > Minutes ) Minutes ) Minutes ) Minutes r m C N i n m (_> to UJ C N t_j C O UJ C M 15 Minutes C O C O C M C O m C O Influence A Great Deal A Great Deal A Great Deal Completely Completely Completely Somewhat Not Very Much None Not Very Much A Great Deal None Not Very Much A Great Deal A Great Deal None Would Like To Move Remain In Alt. Neigh. Move To Central LM Remain In Alt Neigh. Move To Central LM Move To Central LM Move To Centra! LM Remain In Alt Neigh. Move To Unrelat Area Remain In Alt Neigh. Remain In West End Remain In West End Remain In Alt. Neigh. Remain In Art Neigh. Remain In Alt. Neigh. Move To Unrelat Area Move To Unrelat Area ype •use >use I luse I iuse j Owned "ownhouse juse 1 juse I iuse )use 1 )use >use Duse suse suse Duse •using 1 (vned He i I "S <§ snted He Owned "ownhouse [72 Ave] I TJ Oi <i =nted He X "8 //ned He X anted He I •o 01 I "8 I "8 I T l C O X >» or 8? ac 6 oc . £ E o 8 oi £ z irth Su o C O C O C O juth Si C O o C O o i n Oi White F o o C O f l ilta/Nc IC-3 I IC-5 V3V-6 [C-1 r z Ita/Sc 111 IE-2 JX-2 Ul iW-3 elta urrey IA-4 IA-2 1B-3 < 3A-6 £ 3 Q > > V3V-6 > tSur > W a -c > > > > V3 D 6 > tf> > > > igley > > a |R - Norl C O C O C O 00 B l n IU in IT - Norl C O C O C O m s L O C O Iu - Sou O C O lv - Sou C M |w • Lar C M C O 118 Appendix D Appendix D 1. Statistical Analysis of Survey Results for Chapters 4 and 5. 119 Figure D l - Statistical Analysis of Survey Results for Chapters 4 and 5. Chapter 4 Neighbourhood Characteristics Neighbourhood Characteristics versus Rated Neighbourhood The observed and expected cell frequencies are used to arrive at is the probability of independence or p(Hy:0) which is equal to 0.115. This value indicates those chances of dependence between how employees rate their neighbourhood and their neighbourhood characteristics are statistically insignificant. With 13 degrees of freedom (d.f.) chi-square is equal to 19.259. Using a level of significance equal to 0.05, the chi-square value 19.259 is less than the table value of 22.362. Thus, we cannot disprove the null hypothesis (H0). Regardless of how employees rate their neighbourhood, the majority values similar characteristics. Observed Frequencies Neighbourhood Character ist ics Rated Neighbourhood <6 >7 Totals Personal history (past experiences) 0 25 25 A safe and quiet neighbourhood environment 3 44 47 Older homes 2 16 18 Newer homes 2 6 8 Architectural style of homes 0 16 16 Homes that are smaller than 33' x 75' (2500 sqft) 0 12 12 Homes that are larger than 33' x 75' (2500 sqft) 0 7 7 Lots that are smaller than 50' x 120' (6000 sqft) 2 4 6 Lots that are larger than 50' x 120' (6000 sqft) 0 14 14 Local community park 3 38 41 Local community centre 2 24 26 An abundance of natural landscape 2 41 43 People are generally friendly 2 45 47 Property and homes are generally well kept 5 50 55 Totals 23 342 365 Expected Frequencies Rated Neighbourhood Neighbourhood Characterist ics <6 >7 Personal history (past experiences) 1.575342 23.42466 A safe and quiet neighbourhood environment 2.961644 44.03836 Older homes 1.134247 16.86575 Newer homes 0.50411 7.49589 Architectural style of homes 1.008219 14.99178 Homes that are smaller than 33' x 75' (2500 sqft) 0.756164 11.24384 Homes that are larger than 33' x 75' (2500 sqft) 0.441096 6.558904 Lots that are smaller than 50' x 120' (6000 sqft) 0.378082 5.621918 Lots that are larger than 50' x 120' (6000 sqft) 0.882192 13.11781 Local community park 2.583562 38.41644 Local community centre 1.638356 24.36164 An abundance of natural landscape 2.709589 40.29041 People are generally friendly 2.961644 44.03836 Property and homes are generally well kept 3.465753 51.53425 120 Renters and Owners Rated Neighbourhood versus Housing Type The probability p(Hy:0) = 0.017. This value indicates that the differences between the observed frequencies and the corresponding expected frequencies are large enough to produce a chi-square value to be significant. With degrees of freedom (d.f.) equal to 1, chi-square is equal to 5.74095. Thus, we can disprove the null hypothesis (H0) because the chi-square value of 5.74 is greater than the table value of 3.841. Chances are, employees who own their dwelling will rate their neighbourhood greater than 7. Observed Frequencies Housing Type Rated Neighbourhood owned rented Total <6 4 7 11 >7 46 17 63 Total 50 24 74 Expected Frequencies Housing Type Rated Neighbourhood owned rented <6 7.43243 3.56757 >7 42.5676 20.4324 Rated Neighbourhood versus Years Lived in Neighbourhood The discrepancies between the observed and expected frequencies are large enough to produce a chi-square statistic that is significant. The probability p(Hy:0) = 0.0269. With degrees of freedom (d.f.) equal to 1, chi-square is equal to 4.896. Thus, we can disprove the null hypothesis (H0) because the chi-square value of 4.896 is greater than the table value of 3.841. Chances are, employees who rate their neighbourhood higher will have lived in their neighbourhood longer. Observed Frequencies Years Lived in Neighbourhood Rated Neighbourhood <4 >4 Total <6 8 2 10 >7 24 33 57 Total 32 35 67 Expected Frequencies Years Lived in Neighbourhood Rated Neighbourhood <4 >4 <6 4.776119 5.223881 >7 27.22388 29.77612 121 The Inf luence O f Commute Influence of Commute and Commute Time versus Where Employees Would Like to Live The discrepancies between the observed and expected frequencies can be attributed to chance according to the chi-square statistic. The probability p = 0,047 indicates that there is strong association between commute time and the influence commute has on employees to remain in their neighbourhood. With degrees of freedom (d.f.) equal to 9, chi-square is equal to 17.08. Thus, we can disprove the null hypothesis (//0) because the chi-square value of 17.08 is greater than the table value of 16.919. Observed Frequencies Where Employees Would Like to Live Influence of Commute Commute Time Move to Central LM Move to Unrelat. Area Remain in Alt. Neigh. Remain in West End Total <SW (somewhat or less) <30 6 2 4 3 15 >30 1 3 7 11 22 >GD (a great deal or more) <30 9 3 6 3 21 >30 1 2 1 6 10 Total 17 10 20 23 70 Expected Frequencies Influence of Commute Commute Time Where Employee Would Like to Live Move to Central LM Move to Unrelat. Area Remain in Alt. Neigh. Remain in West End <SW (somewhat or less) <30 3.642857143 2.142857143 4.285714286 4.928571429 >30 5.342857143 3.142857143 6.285714286 7.228571429 >GD(a great deal or more) <30 5.1 3 6 6.9 >30 2.428571429 1.428571429 2.857142857 3.285714286 Influence of Commute versus Rated Neighbourhood The discrepancies between the observed and expected frequencies are large enough to produce a chi-square statistic that is significant. The probability p(Hy:0) = 0.0388. With degrees of freedom (d.f.) equal to 1, chi-square is equal to 4.267. Thus, we can disprove the null hypothesis (H0) because the chi-square value of 4.267 is greater than the table value of 3.841. Chances are, employees who rate their neighbourhood higher will be less influenced by their commute. Observed Frequencies Rated Neighbourhood Influence of Commute <6 >7 Total <SW (somewhat or less) 3 34 37 >GD (a great deal or more) 8 23 31 Total 11 63 74 Expected Frequencies Rated Neighbourhood Influence of Commute <6 >7 <SW (somewhat or less) 5.5 31.5 >GD(a great deal or more) 4.6081 26.392 1 2 2 Commute Satisfaction Commute Time versus Commute Satisfaction The cross tabulation between commute satisfaction and commute time change produced differences between the observed and expected frequencies that are large enough to produce a chi square value that is significant. The probability oip(Hy:0) = 0.0141. With 2 degrees of freedom, chi-square is equal to 8.5265, which is larger than the table value of 5.991. Thus, indicates that there is strong association between commute time and satisfaction. Employees who experience shorter time of 30 minutes or less (<30), are at least generally very happy. Those who have longer commute times that are 30 minutes or more (>30), are least satisfied. Observed Frequencies Commute Satisfact ion Commute Time >GVH (generally very happy or more) >SS (somewhat satisfied or more) NH (not happy at all) Total <30 26 13 0 39 >30 12 18 3 33 Total 38 31 3 72 Expected Frequencies Commute Satisfact ion Commute Time >GVH (generally very happy or more) >SS (somewhat satisfied or more) NH (not happy at all) <30 20.583 16.792 1.625 >30 17.417 14.208 1.375 Change in Commute versus Commute Satisfaction The cross tabulation between commute satisfaction and change in commute produced differences between the observed and expected frequencies that are large enough to produce a chi square value that is significant. The probability of p(Hy:0) = 0.0068. With 4 degrees of freedom, chi-square is equal to 14.168 that is significantly larger than the table value of 9.488. The differences between the observed and expected frequencies account for the fact that employees who are experiencing shorter commutes in the postmove period are at least generally very happy with their commute. Those least satisfied are experiencing longer commute during this period. Observed Frequencies Commute Satisfact ion Change in Commute >GVH (generally very happy or more) >SS (somewhat satisfied or more) NH (not happy at all) Total LC (longer commute) 6 13 3 22 NSL (neither shorten Or lengthen trip) 10 8 0 18 SC (shorter commute) 21 8 0 29 Total 37 29 3 69 Expected Frequencies Commute Satisfact ion Change in Commute >GVH (generally very happy or more) >SS (somewhat satisfied or more) NH (not happy at all) LC (longer commute) 11.797 9.2464 0.9565 NSL (neither shorten Or lengthen trip) 9.6522 7.5652 0.7826 SC (shorter commute) 15.551 12.188 1.2609 123 Area Where Employees Live versus Observed Frequencies The association between commute satisfaction and area where employees live is strong. The probability p(Hy:0) = 0.0128. With 15 degrees of freedom, chi-square is equal to 29.75 that is larger than the table value of 24.996. Employees who live further from their place of work are the least satisfied while those who live closer are more satisfied with their commute. Observed Frequencies Commute Satisfaction Area Employees Live >GVH >SS NH Total Lions Bay 0 1 0 1 Maple Ridge/Chilliwack 2 1 0 3 Port Moody/Port Coquitlam/Coquiltam/Surrey 20 10 0 30 Central Vancouver 9 2 0 11 West Vancouver/East Richmond 4 12 3 19 West Richmond 1 4 0 5 Total 36 30 3 69 Expected Frequencies Commute Satisfact ion Area Employees Live >GVH >SS NH Lions Bay 0.5217 0.4348 0.0435 Maple Ridge/Chilliwack 1.5652 1.3043 0.1304 Port Moody/Port Coquitlam/Coquiltam/Surrey 15.652 13.043 1.3043 Central Vancouver 5.7391 4.7826 0.4783 West Vancouver/East Richmond 9.913 8.2609 0.8261 West Richmond 2.6087 2.1739 0.2174 Method of Commute and Alternative Methods of Commute versus Commute Satisfaction The probability of p(Hy:0) = 0.0063 is produced by observed and expected frequencies that are large enough to produce an association between satisfaction and modal-type that is significant. With 12 degrees of freedom chi-square is equal to 27.597 which is larger than the table value of 21.026. The majority of employees who travel exclusively by car and do not use an alternative method of transport are at least generally very happy. The majority of employees who use transit are significantly less satisfied with their commute. Observed Frequencies Commute Satisfact ion Method o f Commute Alternat ive Methods o f Commute >GVH >SS NH Total prebus/postbus Neither 1 4 0 5 Walk Or Bike 1 1 0 2 prebus/postcar Neither 1 1 0 2 precar/postcar Neither 25 22 2 49 Walk Or Bike 5 1 0 6 precar/postcarbus Neither 1 2 0 3 precarbus/postcar Neither 0 o- 1 1 Total 34 31 3 68 124 Expected Frequencies Commute Satisfaction Method o f Commute Alternat ive Methods o f Commute >GVH >SS NH prebus/postbus Neither 2.5 2.2794 0.2206 Walk Or Bike 1 0.9118 0.0882 prebus/postcar Neither 1 0.9118 0.0882 precar/postcar Neither 24.5 22.338 2.1618 Walk Or Bike 3 2.7353 0.2647 precar/postcarbus Neither 1.5 1.3676 0.1324 precarbus/postcar Neither 0.5 0.4559 0.0441 Employee Character is t ics Employee Type and Years Employed at the JI versus Previous Positions Held at the JI The cross tabulation between where employees type, years employed at the JI and previous positions held at the JI p(Hy:0) =0.0167. With degrees of freedom (d.f.) equal to 10, chi-square is equal to 21.70. Thus, we can disprove the null hypothesis (H0) because the chi-square value is greater than the table value of 18.307. Staff employed less than 5 years will not have changed positions except among upper management staff. Chances increase that staff will change positions over a longer period of time. Observed Frequencies Previous Posi t ions Held at the JI Employee Type Years Employed at the JI Moved Around at SL (same level) Moved Up to UM (upper management) N/A Total as (administrative support) <5 4 0 17 21 >5 3 2 6 11 ic (instructors /coordinators) <5 1 0 20 21 >5 0 0 4 4 um (upper management) <5 2 0 5 7 >5 1 3 5 9 Total 11 5 57 73 Expected Frequencies Previous Posit ions Held at the JI Employee Type Years Employed at the JI Moved Around at SL (same level) Moved Up to UM (upper management) N/A as (administrative support) <5 3.164383562 1.438356164 16.39726027 >5 1.657534247 0.753424658 8.589041096 ic(instructors /coordinators) <5 3.164383562 1.438356164 16.39726027 >5 0.602739726 0.273972603 3.123287671 um(upper management) <5 1.054794521 0.479452055 5.465753425 >5 1.356164384 0.616438356 7.02739726 125 Resident ia l Relocat ion Employees Who May Have Moved Their Residence versus Years Lived in Neighbourhood The cross tabulation produced differences between the observed and expected frequencies that large enough to produce a chi square value that is significant. The probability of p(Hy:0) = 0.00027. With degrees of freedom (d.f.) equal to 2, chi-square is equal to 16.375. Thus, we can disprove the null hypothesis (/f0) because the chi-square value is greater than the table value of 5.991. Chances are, employees who have not moved their residence before or after the Jl move have lived in their neighbourhood 4 years or more. Those who have moved have lived in their neighbourhood less than 4 years. Observed Frequencies Years Lived in Neighbourhood Employees Who May Have Moved Their Residence <4 >4 Total mr (move was related) 6 0 6 mu (move was unrelated) 16 8 24 nm (have not moved) 10 27 37 Total 32 35 67 Expected Frequencies Years Lived in Neighbourhood Employees Who May Have Moved Their Residence <4 >4 mr (move was related) 2.8656716 3.1343284 mu (move was unrelated) 11.462687 12.537313 nm (have not moved) 17.671642 19.328358 Influence of Commute versus Employees Who May Have Moved Their Residence The cross tabulation produced differences between the observed and expected frequencies that large enough to produce a chi square value that is significant. The probability of p(Hy:0) = 0.00813. With degrees of freedom (d.f.) equal to 2, chi-square is equal to 9.623. Thus, we can disprove the null hypothesis (H0) because the chi-square value is greater than the table value of 5.991. Employees who did not move are less influenced by their commute. Observed Frequencies Employees Who May Have Moved Their Residence Influence of Commute mr mu nm Total <SW 0 15 22 37 >GD 7 8 16 31 Total 7 23 38 68 Expected Frequencies Employees Who May Have Moved Their Residence Influence of Commute mr mu nm <sw 3.808824 12.51471 20.67647 >GD 3.191176 10.48529 17.32353 126 Summary Housing Type versus Employees Who May Have Moved Their Residence The cross tabulation between housing type and employees who may have moved their residence produce a chi square value that is significant. The probability of p(Hy:0) - 0.033. With degrees of freedom (d.f.) equal to 2, chi-square is equal to 6.79. Thus, we can disprove the null hypothesis (H0) because the chi-square value is greater than the table value of 5.991. Those who did not move their residence are owners. Alternatively, the majority of those whose move was related to the JI move are renters. Observed Frequencies Employees Who May Have Moved Their Residence Housing Type mr mu nm Total owned 2 15 33 50 rented 5 9 10 24 Total 7 24 43 74 Expected Frequencies Employees Who May Have Moved Their Residence Housing Type mr mu nm owned 4.72973 16.21622 29.05405 rented 2.27027 7.783784 13.94595 Rated Neighbourhood versus Employees Who May Have Moved Their Residence The cross tabulation produces a chi-square value that is significant. The probability of p(Hy:0) = 0.00004. With degrees of freedom (d.f.) equal to 2, chi-square is equal to 20.217. Thus, we can disprove the null hypothesis [H0) because the chi-square value is greater than the table value of 5.991. Those who did not move their residence or moved to a neighbourhood unrelated to their place of work rate their neighbourhood higher. Observed Frequencies Employees Who May Have Moved Their Residence Rated Total Neighbourhood mr mu nm <6 5 1 5 11 >7 2 23 38 63 Total 7 24 43 74 Expected Frequencies Employees Who May Have Moved Their Residence Rated Neighbourhood mr mu nm <6 1.040541 3.567568 6.391892 >7 5.959459 20.43243 36.60811 127 Employees Who May Have Moved Their Residence and Commute Satisfaction versus Commute Time The cross tabulation produces a chi square value that is significant. The probability of p(Hy:0) = 0.038. With degrees of freedom (d.f.) equal to 7, chi-square is equal to 14.841. Thus, we can disprove the null hypothesis (H0) because the chi-square value is greater than the table value of 14.067. Employees who moved to be closer to their place of work benefit with shorter commute times (<30) in the postmove period. Their level of commute satisfaction is generally higher than those whose residential move was unrelated to the Justice Institute relocation regardless of commute time. Observed Frequencies Commute Time Employees Who May Have Moved Their Residence Commute Satisfaction <30 >30 Total mr >GVH 4 1 5 >ss 2 0 2 mu >GVH 4 5 9 >SS 6 7 13 NH 0 1 1 nm >GVH 18 6 24 >SS 5 11 16 NH 0 2 2 Total 39 33 72 Expected Frequencies Commute Time Employees Who May Have Moved Their Residence Commute Satisfaction <30 >30 mr >GVH 2.708333333 2.291666667 >SS 1.083333333 0.916666667 mu >GVH 4.875 4.125 >SS 7.041666667 5.958333333 • NH 0.541666667 0.458333333 nm >GVH 13 11 >SS 8.666666667 7.333333333 NH 1.083333333 0.916666667 128 Chapter 5 Justice Inst i tu te Case Study Modal Type versus Change in Commute The cross tabulation produces a chi square value that is not significant. The probability of p(Hy. 0) = 0.30. With degrees of freedom (d.f.) equal to 5, chi-square is equal to 6.064. Thus, we cannot disprove the null hypothesis (H0) because the chi-square value is less than the table value of 11.070. There is not statistical significance between length of commute trip and mode of transport although the majority of trips in the postmove period are shorter. Observed Frequencies Length of Trip Mode LC SC Total prebus/postbus 2 3 5 prebus/postbuscar 1 0 1 prebus/postcar 2 0 2 precar/postcar 15 26 41 precar/postcarbus 1 1 2 precarbus/postcar 1 0 1 22 30 52 Expected -requencies Length of Trip Mode prebus/postbus 2.1154 2.885 prebus/postbuscar 0.4231 0.577 prebus/postcar 0.8462 1.154 precar/postcar 17.346 23.65 precar/postcarbus 0.8462 1.154 precarbus/postcar 0.4231 0.577 

Cite

Citation Scheme:

        

Citations by CSL (citeproc-js)

Usage Statistics

Share

Embed

Customize your widget with the following options, then copy and paste the code below into the HTML of your page to embed this item in your website.
                        
                            <div id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidgetDisplay">
                            <script id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidget"
                            src="{[{embed.src}]}"
                            data-item="{[{embed.item}]}"
                            data-collection="{[{embed.collection}]}"
                            data-metadata="{[{embed.showMetadata}]}"
                            data-width="{[{embed.width}]}"
                            async >
                            </script>
                            </div>
                        
                    
IIIF logo Our image viewer uses the IIIF 2.0 standard. To load this item in other compatible viewers, use this url:
https://iiif.library.ubc.ca/presentation/dsp.831.1-0087700/manifest

Comment

Related Items