Case Studies on Transport Policy xxx (xxxx) xxx–xxx

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Case Studies on Transport Policy

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/cstp

A content analysis of transportation planning documents in Toronto and

Montreal
⁎
Shabnam Bistaa, Justin B. Hollanderb, , Minyu Situc
a
Department of Urban and Environmental Policy and Planning, Tufts University, Medford, MA, USA
b
Department of Urban and Environmental Policy and Planning, 97 Talbot Avenue, Tufts University, Medford, MA 02155, USA
c
Graduate Program in Community and Regional Planning, University of Texas at Austin, Austin, TX 78712, USA

A R T I C LE I N FO A B S T R A C T

Keywords: In a well-designed public transportation system, planners aim for service to be frequent, fast and cost-effective.
Content analysis The absence of connectivity in a transit system results in public transportation becoming the least appealing
Transportation planning mode of choice. This research focused on the last-mile problem (LMP) and its existing interventions in two
Canada Canadian cities. It explored the framework employed and language used within transportation planning docu-
Last-mile problem
ments in order to address the last-mile problem (LMP). Through a two-pronged content analysis method, 10
Policy analysis
planning documents from Toronto and Montreal were examined to identify ways in which the last-mile problem
is engaged and what kind of strategies are provided to address the issue. The manifest content analysis revealed
that only two planning documents directly address the last-mile problem. However, the latent content analysis
demonstrated ways in which the rest of the key-terms were utilized to further engage with the LMP, resulting in
three recurring themes. Several policy recommendations expand on the three themes extracted from the content
analysis with emphasis on shared-mobility, public-private partnerships and diversifying land-use as last-mile
strategies.

1. Introduction Toronto, Montreal, Vancouver, Calgary and Edmonton (Simmins,

Rapid population growth and urbanization have shifted develop-
ment patterns all over the world. Denser and more compact built form
will be required as metropolitan areas accommodate new residents.
Development interest in residential, commercial and office spaces in
areas with direct access to transit systems has created a demand for
more walkable and mixed-used neighborhoods (Ratner and Goetz,
2013). Public transportation becomes the least appealing mode of
choice when riders are unable to easily connect to their final destination
(Zellner et al. 2016). Generally, these areas within a half-mile walk-
ability to a transit station are considered to be a transit-oriented de-
velopment (Ratner and Goetz, 2013). A major limitation for the urban
population in utilizing public transit is the last-mile problem (Cheng
et al., 2012). The last-mile problem (LMP),1 also known as the first/last
mile problem, refers to the lack of public transportation modes from a
home to a workplace and vice versa.
In Canada, over 80 percent of the population occupies urban areas
and over 57 percent live in the five largest urban regions of Canada:
2017). Urban areas require a strong and reliable transportation network
to connect people and places. In Quebec and Montreal, an accelerated
pattern of urban sprawl has negatively impacted public transportation
infrastructures and increased long commuting times (Nazarnia et al.,
2016). Urban sprawl is another significant contributor to the last-mile
problem. Cities such as Toronto and Montreal have been working to
improve their downtown centers and extend their public transportation
networks to the urban fringes to combat urban sprawl (Simmins, 2017).
Toronto and Montreal are the two most populous cities in Canada
(Simmins, 2011). Toronto is the largest city in the Province of Ontario
with a population of 2.9 million, as of the 2016 Census Data from
Statistics Canada. Montreal is the largest city in the Province of Quebec
with a population of approximately 1.7 million, as of the 2016 Census
Data from Statistics Canada. The population for both cities has, for the
most part, increased throughout the years and urbanization has rapidly
made these areas very desirable for people. Due to their population
growth, Toronto and Montreal have a relatively extensive public transit
system that consists of trains, rapid rail lines, buses and streetcar

⁎
Corresponding author.
E-mail addresses: Shabnam.bista@tufts.edu (S. Bista), justin.hollander@tufts.edu (J.B. Hollander), minyu.situ@tufts.edu (M. Situ).
1
When the last mile problem (LMP) is mentioned please note that it can be used interchangeably with the first and last mile problem (FLMP). For the purposes of
this research the term has been shortened to the last-mile problem (LMP).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cstp.2020.06.007
Received 26 November 2019; Received in revised form 11 June 2020; Accepted 23 June 2020
2213-624X/ © 2020 World Conference on Transport Research Society. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Please cite this article as: Shabnam Bista, Justin B. Hollander and Minyu Situ, Case Studies on Transport Policy,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cstp.2020.06.007
S. Bista, et al.
networks (Statistics Canada).
Urban transportation is in the midst of rapid change and the last-
mile problem plays a critical role in transit use. There are various fac-
tors that are at play such as the physical environment, conditions of the
built environment, land-use and density. People express the need and
desire to travel but at the same time are only willing to go a certain
distance before they reach their threshold. In transportation literature
and studies, the average distance people are willing to travel to a transit
stop is a 1/4 mile, this of course varies slightly depending on the transit
service mode and geographic location (Tilahun et al., 2016a,b). The
complexity of the last-mile problem necessitates a multi-faceted ap-
proach consisting of land-use, urban design and transportation solu-
tions.
While there are a number of articles that focus on the role of the
urban form and built environment in closing the last-mile gap, there are
no extant studies that have attempted to enumerate or categorize the
scope of policy or planning activities to address the LMP. At municipal
and provincial levels, little is known about the connection between
comprehensive policymaking of LMP and policy implementations re-
garding LMP. Therefore, this paper seeks to fill that gap and reports on
research we conducted, employing a content analysis approach and
taking an in-depth look at planning documents at municipal and pro-
vincial levels.
The objective of this research was to understand the last-mile pro-
blem and possible solutions in Canadian cities. The following research
questions were asked:
1. How do the transportation plans at different levels of government
engage with the last mile problem in Canadian cities?
2. Have solutions for the LMP already been implemented in these ci-
ties? If so, what are they?
3. What policies are being proposed for further mitigation of the last-
mile problem?
The purpose of this study is to contribute to the existing literature
on transportation planning and policy that address the last-mile pro-
blem in major urban areas in Canada. Further study of this issue is
critical in shifting transportation policies and development patterns in
order to create a better-connected network of transit, streets and
people. We conducted the research to find out how transportation plans
at different levels of government planning documents engage with the
last mile problem (LMP) in Canadian cities, the solutions for last-mile
problem that already implemented in other cities, and the policies
being proposed for further mitigation of the last-mile problem.
2. Literature review
2.1. Canadian transportation context
The jurisdiction over transportation systems fall under three gov-
ernments in Canada: Federal, Provincial and Municipal governments.
When it comes to urban transit systems within Core Metropolitan Areas,
the responsibility primarily falls on the municipal government with
some level of partnership with the provincial governments (Lawson,
2015). On a federal level, transportation policy making, and regulatory
activities are managed by Transport Canada, an organization that is
part of the Government of Canada. In addition to the work on the
federal level, transportation planning and strategies are typically
threaded throughout municipal plans in Canada. Municipalities are
required to produce land-use plans and master plans that follow pro-
vincial principles and regulations (Lawson, 2015).
Transportation policies are encouraged to promote density and land
use mix that reduce vehicle trips and diversify the modes of public-
transit. In municipalities with higher population density, giving public
transit and infrastructure priority is particularly important in order to
create a transportation network that connects urban growth centers and
2
Case Studies on Transport Policy xxx (xxxx) xxx–xxx
combats the last-mile problem (Lawson, 2015). Transportation plays a
vital role in economic growth, accessibility, equity and quality of life in
cities. In order to increase and sustain the use of public transit by the
majority of the population, Transit-oriented development (TOD) and
focus on public transportation have been key development strategies
that metropolitan cities have included in their planning (Curtis et al.,
2009). TOD is an integrated planning strategy involving transportation
and land use in a way that promotes public transit use and active
transportation, while discouraging automobile use (Curtis et al., 2009).
The focus of TOD planning is on increasing the diversity of land use by
densifying residential and commercial in one place and implementing
pedestrian and transportation friendly urban design (Cervero and
Sullivan, 2011; Wang, 2015). In recent years, the national government
in Canada has also sought to encourage local and regional governments
to embrace new technological innovations in transportation through a
competitive funding program called Smart Cities Challenge
(Government of Canada, 2020).
2.2. Transportation planning in Toronto
The City of Toronto is located in the Province of Ontario, Canada. At
2.9 million, Toronto has the largest population compared to any other
city in Ontario and Canada (Statistics Canada). There are different
transportation agencies that operate within the different levels of re-
gions and government. On the municipal level, there is the Toronto
Transit Commission (TTC) which serves the Greater Toronto Area and
includes subways, streetcars, buses, and services for residents who need
accessible transportation. The TTC also ranks as the third largest public
transit system among the North American cities. Their focus is servicing
transit riders within Toronto and planning, maintaining and operating
public transit related services including parking in some cases (City of
Toronto, 2017b). According to the TTC’s Ridership Growth Report, the
ridership trajectory has leveled in the past three years (City of Toronto,
2017b). The leveling or potential decrease in ridership could be at-
tributed to a number of factors including the last-mile problem. On a
regional level, GO Transit which is a division of Metrolinx since 2009,
provides public transit service to the Greater Toronto and Hamilton
Area (GTHA), connecting with the TTC in the Toronto area as well (GO
Transit).
While Toronto was not selected for funding through the national
government’s Smart Cities Challenge, the city has coalesced many of its
own initiatives to enhance transportation technology around smart ci-
ties (City of Toronto, 2018).
2.3. Transportation planning in Montreal
The city of Montreal has a population of 1.7 million (Statistics
Canada). Montreal was also witnessing urban sprawl which puts in-
frastructure and people away from city centers where transportation is
notably the most robust and extensive. In the early 2000′s, the merging
of the island of Montreal shifted the population trend from the suburbs
resulting in 53 percent of the residents living in the city center.
Similar to Toronto, Montreal consists of different levels of trans-
portation agencies in Greater Montreal and the Province of Quebec. The
Société de transport de Montréal (STM), founded in 2002 is a public
transportation agency that manages the transit buses and all rapid
transit services in Montreal (City of Montreal). Within STM is the
Montreal Metro which is the underground transit system with four lines
connecting the various neighborhoods within the island of Montreal
(STM). On a regional level, the Réseau de transport métropolitain
(RTM), operates the public transit system for the Greater Montreal
Region. The transit modes include commuter rail and bus services.
According to the STM Activity Report from 2018, the ridership for
convention and electric public transportation have increased. There
was a 4.9 percent increase in number trips for conventional ridership
and a 3.5 percent increase in electric ridership (STM, 2018). As the
S. Bista, et al.
region continues to expand and push towards their sustainability goal,
ridership increase is critical.
Montreal was selected in the recent national government smart ci-
ties competition and received $50 million in funding. The city com-
mitted to using the money to embrace new transportation technology,
invest in enhancing mobility, and better connecting residents to healthy
food (Newswire, 2019).
2.4. Last-mile problem and existing interventions
Early on, “last-mile” was used to describe the difficulty of con-
necting homes to the main telecommunications network (Scheibe et al.,
2006). Regardless of the context, the last-mile problem has always re-
ferred to the issue of disconnect whether it be phone service, delivery
services or transportation.
In a well-designed public transportation system, service is meant to
be frequent, fast and cost-effective. However, when riders are unable to
easily connect to their final destination public transportation becomes
the least appealing mode of choice (Zellner et al., 2016). Ly and Irwin
(2017) suggest that transport policies need to be customized better to
address the obstacles which individuals face regarding modal choice. In
transportation literature and studies, the average distance people are
willing to travel to a transit stop is a ¼ mile, this of course varies
slightly depending on the transit service mode and geographic location
(Tilahun et al., 2016a,b). Other challenges such as lack of information
about different modes of transit, limited or no connection to active
transportation and a disjointed built form exasperates the last-mile
problem.
The issue of vehicle miles traveled, and single-occupant vehicles
continues to persist as people prefer the convenience of a mode that
allows them to reach as close as possible to their destination (Lesh,
2013). Zellner et al. (2016) conducted research on how transportation
enhancements such as shuttles between destinations and infrastructure
improvement for pedestrians and cyclists are ways in which they could
solve the last mile problems. The desire to use public transportation is
negatively impacted if there are multiple transfers between different
modes of transportation, which still results in the transit rider not
ending up at close to their final destination (Zellner et al. 2016). Van
Der Kloof et al. (2014) indicated that individuals’ movement can be
thought of as being “convertible”, whereby depending on the unique
situation of a given person, their trips can be “converted” from one
mode to another. People’s decisions regarding their mode of transpor-
tation is impacted when individual or collective mobility is hindered.
Several studies provide a variety of solutions that have been dis-
cussed and implemented in urban areas to address the last-mile pro-
blem. Some of the more recurring solutions proposed within the lit-
erature are bike-sharing, ride-sharing, car-pooling and high occupancy
vehicle (HOV) lanes. The traditional role of ride-sharing, using
Transportation Network Companies (TNC) such as Uber, Lyft and Via
have also been debated in urban planning for some time. However, the
rapid growth of these companies created competition for regular taxi-
cabs as well as public transportation. What was meant to be a solution
assisting public transportation became a direct competitor. Through
policy changes and flexibility from municipalities and regional agen-
cies, there has been a substantial shift to integrate public transit and
ride-sharing (Stiglic et al., 2018).
The other solution is public bike-sharing, as a new mode of mobility
was introduced in the mid-2000s, it continues to be adopted by many
cities (Parkes et al., 2013). In the United States, metropolitan areas
have also participated in shared mobility strategies. According to the
American Public Transportation Association (APTA), the Chicago
Transit Authority (CTA) received funding from the Mobility on Demand
Sandbox (MOD) Grant Program to create 58 bike-sharing stations for
Divvy. The public bike-shares were located across the city to in-
corporate availability of bikes and docking stations near transit stops. In
Canada, the City of Montreal created a non-profit organization in 2014
3
Case Studies on Transport Policy xxx (xxxx) xxx–xxx
to manage the bike-sharing network. This was also part of a sustainable
development strategy and their mission was to promote active trans-
portation across Montreal, Longueuil and Westmount (BIXI; DeMaio,
2009). Similarly, in Toronto, Ontario, Bike Share Toronto was created
to provide on-demand biking for residents and visitors. The docks are
located all over the city with emphasis on transit hubs (Bike Share
Toronto).
Alternative transit systems such as shuttles have also become com-
monly implemented solutions in urban areas. In the Hepingli area of
Dongcheng District, Beijing researchers modeled shuttle bus routes
linking them to rapid transit stops, workplaces, residential areas and
other local sites around the city. Varying bus sizes helped to avoid
congestion by creating quick and efficient routes, so riders are waiting
no more than five minutes at a time (Xie et al., 2010).
This literature review demonstrates that the last-mile problem in
urban areas is a well-researched topic within the context of transpor-
tation, particularly in North American cities. There are several inter-
ventions recommended that focus on active transportation, shared-
mobility, intergovernmental collaboration, technology and public-pri-
vate partnerships; however, there are still gaps within the literature
that need to be addressed.
The more recent literature on the last-mile solutions provides stra-
tegic and innovative methods. In 2016, Columbus, Ohio won the U.S
Department of Transportation Smart City Challenge grant competition,
which was designed to promote and assist cities with technological
advances in urban transportation. The City of Columbus submitted a
plan which included bridging the first and last-mile gap in public
transportation in order to connect marginalized populations to the rest
of the city (Chieppo, 2016). In addition to proposing electric self-
driving vehicles to go from transit stations to final destinations, the
city’s plan also included creating “smart corridors” as a way of con-
necting Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) systems to transportation infra-
structures (Torres, 2018).
The Regional Transportation District (RTD) in Denver, Colorado,
formed a partnership with a private company called Panasonic and the
State Transportation Department to create an autonomous shuttle that
connects passengers from Peña Station to nearby office parks and other
bus stops in the area (Regional Transportation District, 2019). The
shuttle launched in early 2019 and the weekday shuttle times are
available on the RTD website. These cities were able to find alternative
funding and influence partnerships with private companies in order to
achieve their vision.
2.5. Assessment of transportation planning
In general, past historical assessments of transportation policy
mainly focused on transportation accessibility and the impact on
neighborhood density, demographic distribution, population mobility,
distribution of residential and commercial zone, and economic devel-
opment (Von Thünen, 1875; Muth, 1969; Mills, 1967; Alonso, 1964;
Waddell et al., 2007). However, present traffic conditions were the
products of a range of infrastructure investments in earlier planning.
LMP has been a growing transportation problem caused by previous
transportation planning, which is driven by the complex intersection of
land use, urban form and human behaviors. Waddell et al. (2007)
wondered whether the analyzed ranges of earlier assessments were not
comprehensive enough to be conducted to evaluate the consequence of
current transportation developments, especially on alternative trans-
portation investment. Some scholars find that transport policies should
be customized better to fix the obstacles which current individuals face
(Ly and Irwin, 2017; Norton, 2008). Additionally, Norton (2008)
pointed out that it was necessary to reform the local planning through
the understanding of policy content in the master plan or report, so as
to keep the pace with real-time problems.
Local governments in North American play significant roles in
shaping transportation improvements through their publication of
S. Bista, et al.
master reports, plans, and regulations. Brooks (2003) and Hopkins
(2001) both indicated that a plan could be viewed as the policy in
practice which was composed of uncertainty and the pluralistic goals.
Planning documents are the repository providing “fact-based” in-
formation and analysis (Norton, 2008). For the purpose of system-
atically evaluating the comprehensive content of local planning, con-
tent analysis provides the analysis of written communication, which
aims to extract various categories representing the meaningful char-
acteristics of study interests (Norton, 2008; Singleton and Straits, 1999,
pp383; Putt and Springer, 1989, pp242-251). Norton (2008) empha-
sized that those meaningful categories as the representative of the
symbolic content reflected the plan-making procedures and local deci-
sion-making products. So far, researchers have used this method to
evaluate plans and zoning codes by developing evaluation measures for
different variables and using those measures to identify the frequency
and strength of the specific terms (Norton, 2008, 433) or to assess the
emphasis of planning documents (Hollander and Cahill, 2011;
Hollander, 2018).
Most of content analyses in transportation research are set up more
as meta-analyses, whereby the content of numerous journal and con-
ference papers are examined systematically (Das et al., 2017), rather
than on local policy planning and reports. In this study, given to LMP as
the subject of this research, it is necessary to extend the object of
content analysis from academia to government-wide, so as to get close
to the “fact-based” analysis of both policymaking and policy-im-
plementation.
Overall, the literature review of the transportation policy assess-
ment demonstrated the reform of policy focus and the above case re-
view provided a framework necessary for understanding transportation
planning in Canada, especially in Toronto and Montreal; additionally, it
focuses the empirical contribution of this research around the last-mile
problem and its existing interventions in two Canadian cities.
3. Methodology
This research used content analysis to explore how transportation
plans address the last-mile problem in Canadian cities. The analysis is
separated into the two case studies: Toronto and Montreal. Each section
provides a brief history of the city and the geographic area under the
municipal, regional and provincial government. The sections include
background information on government agencies involved in producing
each planning document.
3.1. Data
The documents included in this research were selected based on the
level of comprehensiveness, the author, the geographic location of the
study and the year published.
Brooks (2003) and Hopkins (2001) report that older plans and re-
ports were not compelling enough for policy analysis because they di-
verge from current societal conditions (Brooks, 2003; Hopkins, 2001).
Since our study focused on Last-Mile problems, historically, the last-
mile phenomenon is a researched topic within the context of tele-
communications (Scheibe et al. 2006). Since 2010, more research in the
past 10 years has situated this phenomenon within the context of public
transportation. (Chong et al., 2011; Zellner et al., 2016). Thus, we
aimed at the most current transportation plans released in past fifteen
years, in which we were able to keep track of how and when Canadian
governments tended to focus on LMP-related topics. This approach al-
lows us study the most relevant information and development trends of
LMP problems in two Canadian cities.
In addition, having a variety of authors and agencies at different
geographic scales in various government levels was also essential be-
cause of the importance of including different perspectives and strate-
gies. In Canada, the municipal governments follow regulations set up by
the provincial and national government therefore ensuring that the
4
Case Studies on Transport Policy xxx (xxxx) xxx–xxx
reports studied shared common legal and institutional qualities. Our
sample of reports included only official plans or reports released from
various levels of government in Canada (for Montreal and Toronto) in
order to ensure the consistency of comparison timing between our two
selected cities.
Given that the above criteria and the limited total universe of offi-
cial transportation master plans, we had selected five plans per case
study: for Toronto, the plans (Appendix A) are from the last seven years
and for Montreal, the plans (Appendix B) are from the last fifteen years,
as these were the most recent ones available and accessible to the
public.
3.2. Content analysis
For the purposes of this research, the content analysis method was
used to explore an identified phenomenon, the last-mile problem.
Content analysis is used for a variety of reasons such as finding new
insights and exploring an identified phenomenon (Krippendorff, 2013).
This research used content analysis of secondary data as a strategy to
measure the engagement of the selected plans with the last-mile pro-
blem. The secondary data analyzed were documents generated by dif-
ferent government and transportation agencies.
A two-pronged approach was utilized for the content analysis:
manifest and latent. To set up the method for the two types of content
analysis it was important to employ specific procedures, to ensure the
analysis was conducted with limited bias and full objectivity. Manifest
content analysis is a quantitative approach that measures the text by the
number of words or phrases. The measurement of frequency and in-
tensity regarding the key text were particularly adopted by research
analyzing planning and zoning codes (Norton, 2008). So far, past re-
search concerning land-use planning had effectively conducted their
evaluations of planning reports by analyzing the frequency of particular
research text (Burby and May, 1997; Talen and Knaap, 2003). The la-
tent content analysis provides a qualitative approach to interpreting the
text to find meaning (Gaber and Gaber, 2007). Coding was a two-step
process that required: a. “identification several categories that directly
related to the research question before looking at the text” and b.
“generating text-specific categories through the open-coding reading of
the text” (Gaber and Gaber, 2007, 110). After gathering the initial data,
researchers can go back and look at the surrounding context and further
analyze the document (Hsieh and Shannon, 2005). It is ideal to pursue
both approaches to attain an accurate meaning of the text and have a
more unbiased result and analysis (Gaber and Gaber, 2007).
Mobility across a region is facilitated by public and private modes of
transportation which generally include buses, trains, rapid-transit,
streetcars and cars. If public transportation systems are designed with
the goal of moving people most efficiently from point A to point B, then
they must be designed in such a way that they incorporate a diversity of
needs. In many cases, these systems become ineffective when there is
little to no connectivity between different modes of transportation.
Urban mobility is key in solving the last-mile problem. The definition of
the term mobility within the context of transportation has shifted. The
term meant movement of people and goods but now has a more com-
plex definition to understand urban areas. For the purposes of this re-
search, mobility is organized in two ways: collective and individual
transportation (Rodrigue, 2016). The collective transportation focuses
on “providing publicly accessible mobility over specific parts of a city,”
and the individual transportation focuses on “any mode where mobility
is the outcome of a personal choice and means such as the automobile,
walking, cycling and etc.,” (Rodrigue, 2016).
The seven key terms for this analysis were identified based on the
literature review on the last-mile problems, existing interventions and
key gaps in literature. Using manifest content analysis method, the key-
terms were searched manually for frequency in the plans listed above
for Toronto and Montreal. The key terms used were as follows:
S. Bista, et al. Case Studies on Transport Policy xxx (xxxx) xxx–xxx

Fig. 1. Key-terms present in the Toronto and Montreal plans.

● Last-mile Toronto is displayed in Table 1 and for Montreal, in Table 2. The result
● Public transit in both tables are separated by the plan and display a raw count of each
● Mixed-use key-term, year of publication, author, number of pages and a total
● Connectivity amount of each key term within the selected documents.
● Mobility
● Multimodal 4.1. Toronto
● Transit-oriented
The manifest content analysis revealed that the key term ‘last-mile’
Following the word count, the latent content analysis was used to was mentioned only within the two major Transportation Plans and
study the context of the identified key terms to discern the last-mile appeared the most in the 2041 Regional Transportation Plan for the
problem and solutions in the two Canadian cities. Greater Toronto and Hamilton Area (GTHA) prepared by Metrolinx in
2018 (Table 1).
4. Results The term ‘mobility’ and ‘mixed use’ had the highest total count with
a frequency of over 200 words each. The term ‘mobility’ appears the
Based on the data gathered from the content analysis of the five most in ConsumerNext – The Transportation Master Plan prepared by
government plans in Toronto and Montreal, a comparison of the total the City of Toronto. The study area in the plan was identified by the
count for the key words for documents related to Montreal and Toronto Municipal Class Environmental Assessment process in 2015 which
are represented in Fig. 1. The key-terms broken down by each plan for guides long-term transportation planning in defined areas

Table 1
Count of the key terms for each document analyzed in Toronto. (See footnote for the full name and author of each plan).
TOCore1 2041 RTP2 BuildON3 ConsumerNext4 Official Plan5 Total

Year 2018 2018 2017 2017 2015

Author Toronto Metrolinx Ontario Toronto Toronto
# of Pages 92 204 120 175 165
Last-mile 0 17 0 2 0 19
Public-transit 3 36 3 3 19 64
Multimodal 1 21 5 12 2 41
Mixed-use 120 4 7 38 57 226
Connectivity 11 10 9 40 3 73
Mobility 11 135 1 181 18 346
Transit-oriented 0 9 0 1 0 10

1
TOCore Downtown Strategy produced by the City of Toronto as part of their Official Plan but adopted separately by the City Council.
2
2041 Regional Transportation Plan for the Greater Toronto and Hamilton Area by the transportation agency Metrolinx.
3
BuildON – Greater Golden Horseshoe Area Growth Plan by the Province of Ontario.
4
ConsumerNext – The Transportation Master Plan for the Consumers Roads Business Park by the City of Toronto.
5
Toronto Official Plan by the City of Toronto with a statutory Five-Year Review that was recently completed in 2015.

5
S. Bista, et al. Case Studies on Transport Policy xxx (xxxx) xxx–xxx

Table 2
Count of the key terms for each document analyzed in Montreal. (See footnote for the full name and author of each plan).
Downtown1 TEAP2 PMAD3 Transportation4 Master5 Total

Year 2016 2015 2012 2008 2004

Author Montreal Quebec CMM Montreal Montreal
# of Pages 60 72 220 220 217
Last-mile 0 0 0 0 0 0
Public transit 34 35 9 415 73 566
Multimodal 0 0 0 0 0 0
Mixed-use 3 0 13 0 24 39
Connectivity 12 0 30 26 21 89
Mobility 15 22 20 28 7 92
Transit-oriented 0 0 11 0 0 11

1
Downtown Strategy: Building Momentum produced by the City of Montreal.
2
Transportation Electrification Action Plan produced by the Province of Quebec.
3
Attractive. Competitive and Sustainable Greater Montreal – Metropolitan Land Use and Development Plan by the Montreal Metropolitan Community.
4
The Transportation Plan by the City of Montreal.
5
The Master Plan by the City of Montreal.

(ConsumerNext, 2017). The majority of the study area is part of the
Consumers Road Business Park, an area that is experiencing population
growth and dense development but lacking proper transportation con-
nections. The TOCore Downtown plan used the word ‘mixed use’ 120
times which was the highest among all of the plans. The study area
mentioned within the plan is expanding the building stock to include
residential units and other types of mix of uses (TOCore, 2018). Ad-
ditionally, being the economic hub of the Greater Toronto and Ha-
milton Area, it is critical that the Downtown area include more re-
sidential units in order to facilitate the live/work environment and
promote densification.
Surprisingly, the term ‘transit-oriented’ was only mentioned within
the two transportation plans and not in the BuildON, Ontario or the
Official Toronto Plan (Appendix A) given the benefits TOD can provide
for the last-mile challenge and transit ridership. The word ‘public-
transit’ was found in all of the documents but was highest in the 2041
Metrolinx Plan and second highest in the Official Plan for the City of
Toronto. The latter document sets forth goals for the city with emphasis
on public-transit as a way to support employment districts, and to im-
prove the public realm with integration of active transportation (The
Official Plan 2015). Overall, the 2041 Regional Transportation Plan
released by Metrolinx for the Greater Toronto and Hamilton Area was
the most inclusive of all of the key-terms within the 204-page document
(Table 1).
4.2. Montreal
The primary manifest content analysis revealed that none of the
documents directly state the words ‘last-mile’ or ‘multimodal’. The term
‘public transit’ had the highest total count at 415 in the 2008
Transportation Plan by the City of Montreal. The Metropolitan Land Use
and Development Plan (PMAD) written in 2012 by the Montreal
Metropolitan Community (CMM), had the least number of ‘public
transit’ but the highest count for ‘connectivity’ and the only plan that
mentioned the term ‘transit-oriented’ (Table 2). The current efforts led
by the CMM around planning are focused on expanding and connecting
the public transportation network, hence the focus on the terms ‘public-
transit’, ‘transit-oriented’ and ‘connectivity’ (Nazarnia et al., 2016).
The term ‘mobility’ and ‘public-transit’ were present in all of the
documents that were analyzed. The absence of the term ‘last-mile’ was
infrastructure,” (Montreal Master Plan, 2004, 147).
Overall, the plans for Montreal were longer compared to the ones
from Toronto but included fewer key-terms, particularly the PMAD plan
with 220 pages but only 83 key-terms in total (Table 2).
In addition to the more detailed tables with the count for each key-
term within the five separate plans, it was important to create a broader
understanding how the key-terms in general were engaged within the
two case studies. The Fig. 1 below represents a visualization of the
aggregated key-terms across the five selected documents for Toronto
and Montreal.
Largely, the key term ‘transit-oriented’ and ‘connectivity’ was
mentioned approximately the same number of times within all of the
plans for Toronto and Montreal. None of the key-terms had a zero
percent frequency in the Toronto documents, compared to the Montreal
documents.
5. Discussion
The results of the content analysis revealed ways in which the terms
we identified are engaged with in the transportation plans. A sub-
stantial number of last-mile related transportation and land use key-
terms were present in the documents for Toronto and Montreal. Given
the location and utilization of the key-terms within the documents,
three recurring themes were identified which help answer the questions
posed by this research (Table 3).
While the three themes are present in each of the key-term analyses,
Table 3 presents the break-down of terms within each theme. The ‘In-
corporation of Technology’ theme is best defined by the key-terms ‘last-
mile’ and ‘mobility’. The concept of Mobility as a Service (MaaS) has
been proven to address the last mile problem by creating a better transit
experience through technology, such as providing real-time transit in-
formation (2041 RTP 2017, 37). The ‘Promotion of Active Transpor-
tation’ theme focuses on the concept of creating a mixed-use, connected
and multimodal city which facilitates different forms of active
Table 3
Key terms analyzed within the case study documents from Montreal and
Toronto and relevant themes that emerged.
Key Terms Themes

unexpected because Greater Montreal has experienced population Last-mile Incorporation of Technology
growth and movement of people into the suburbs. However, there were Mobility
many references to the last-mile problem within the documents. For Mixed-use Promotion of Active Transportation
example, in the Master Plan from 2004, Montreal provides design Connectivity
Multimodal
guidelines for public transportation access points which stresses the
Public-Transit Better integration of Transportation and Land-Use
need to create “short and direct pedestrian routes that reduce walking Transit-oriented
distances between residential areas and public transportation

6
S. Bista, et al.
transportation such as biking and walking. Finally, the ‘Better in-
tegration of Transportation and Land-Use’ incorporates the words
‘public-transit’ and ‘transit-oriented’ to connect the ideas of develop-
ment that has transit access and is pedestrian friendly.
5.1. Incorporation of technology
The emerging role of technology in transportation was acknowl-
edged within the majority of the selected planning documents. As on-
demand mobility becomes the norm, the rise of technology such as Uber
and Lyft are becoming more prevalent. By allowing technology to assist
in creating multimodal options, municipalities can offer better options
for transit users and focus these innovations in areas where the last-mile
persists. The plans mention improvements of public transit systems and
increasing mobility through technology by making sure transit riders
have real-time and reliable information to plan their travels. The na-
tional government’s push for a smart cities program, including a sub-
stantial grant to the City of Montreal, may have played a role in shaping
each city’s embrace of transportation technology.
In Toronto, the 2041 Regional Transportation Plan (RTP) for the
GTHA, identified the technological innovation of “Mobility as a Service
(MaaS) under Strategy 3 which focuses on optimizing the transporta-
tion system. Mobility as a Service refers to “integrated mobility services
available by subscription and offer access to public and private trans-
portation services” (2041 RTP 2017, 37). Similar last-mile strategy was
mentioned in the Montreal Transportation Plan from 2008, where
technology that proves real-time public transit information was en-
couraged to increase mobility.
Furthermore, the Transportation Master Plan (TMP) from the City of
Toronto provided an example of emerging incorporation of technology
called EcoMobility Hubs. The concept was defined as infrastructure that
has the potential to address the “first and last mile” problem via a one-
stop service point for multimodal systems called “EcoMobility hubs”
(ConsumerNext, 2017, 77). As the municipality and residents shift their
travel behavior towards more sustainable and reliable options, creating
a combined service where people can access car-share, electric charging
stations, bike-shares and public transit becomes an attractive solution.
In particular, areas outside the urban cores facing the last-mile pro-
blem, such as the study area in the TMP, Consumers Business Park Area,
benefit from multimodal transportation hubs. Providing infrastructure
is a point of concern for EcoMobility Hubs; however, using existing
transportation infrastructure and expanding into parking lots has been
identified as a potential solution.
In the Montreal region, the integration of technology focuses more
on the electrification of transportation and reduction of greenhouse gas
emissions. Montreal is part of a City Mobility initiative created by the
Volvo Group in partnership with Société de transport de Montréal
(STM) and will be the first “Mobility City” in North America. The in-
itiative allows STM the acquisition of three fully electric city buses to
mitigate GHG emissions. The program also works with private and
public stakeholders to engage them in “sustainable urban mobility” and
“implementing transportation electrification” (Transportation
Electrification Action Plan, 2015, 23). The Province of Quebec is in-
centivizing other municipalities to implement eco-mobility urban
planning by offering financial assistance for participation in programs
like City Mobility and other forms of sustainable urban development
(Transportation Electrification Action Plan 2015, 45). Some of the other
sustainable transit options that increase multimodal options, reduce
emission and are achievable in the immediate future include streetcars,
trolleys and light rail transit (Transportation Electrification Action Plan
2015, 23). Although technology assists in improving the sustainability
of the transportation sector, to further “sustainable urban mobility”,
municipalities have to promote other modes of transportation as well.
7
Case Studies on Transport Policy xxx (xxxx) xxx–xxx
5.2. Promotion of active transportation
Active transportation refers to “human-powered travel, including
but not limited to, walking, cycling, inline skating and travel with the
use of mobility aids, including motorized wheelchairs and other power-
assisted devices moving at a comparable speed.” (2041 RTP 2018, 121).
Active transportation is particularly important when it comes to the
last-mile problem because lack of infrastructure prohibits people from
accessing public transportation.
In Toronto, LMP is predominant around certain GO stations which
connect suburbs and urban fringes to urban core areas. Transit riders
end up driving and parking at the GO stations to connect to the public
transportation. The GO Rail Station Access Plan shows that currently 38
percent of the people are using other modes to access GO stations and
by 2031 that number can almost double to 62–64 percent (2041 RTP
2018, 76). The ‘all other modes’ includes carpooling shuttles and active
transportation, reducing individual VMT. A strategy to reach the 2031
goal for GO station access was to promote active transportation through
Transportation Demand Management programs for employment areas
outside of the urban cores. The Metrolinx Smart Commute Program
works with over 300 employers in the region to provide “TDM in-
itiatives such as carpooling, active transportation promotion, and dis-
counted transit passes,” (2041 RTP 2018, 80). The above reflected that
active transportation has emerged as one of the multimodal choices to
appear to address the last-miles problem.
Furthermore, the City of Toronto introduced the Toronto Walking
Strategy which aimed to build physical infrastructure for a pedestrian
friendly environment and integrate seamlessly with public transit (The
Official Plan 2015, 2–27). Another recommendation made in the
Toronto Official Plan from 2015 links the public realm and active
transportation by recommending “improving quality and convenient
of active transportation with full consideration to the needs of pedes-
trians, cyclists and public transit users” (The Official Plan 2015, 3–3).
Ensuring the pedestrian-friendliness among point-to-point connectivity
of active transportation can promote pedestrians’ perception of transit
safety, so as to increase personal willingness in choosing active trans-
portation. This would be able to effectively shift people’s choice re-
garding last-mile related transportation tools from electronic-powered
travel to human-powered travel.
The Montreal Transportation Plan of 2008 lists promotion of active
transportation as one of the main formulations of the plan along with
investments in public transportation. The Metropolitan Land Use and
Development Plan (PMAD) for Greater Montreal includes the need for
active transportation in their plan objectives. They propose building an
interconnected network of walking and cycling, along with local bicycle
networks that connect the whole island of Montreal. The PMAD also
proposes a Metropolitan Bicycle Network that will interweave a net-
work of 1,000 km, equivalent to almost 621.3 miles of bicycle paths
connecting existing paths from all the municipalities in the region. The
newer segments of the network will provide access to transit-oriented
development areas and transit hubs (PMAD, 2012 166). The extensive
bike network, still in progress, already proved to be effective since in
2015, 56 percent of adult cyclists said they use their bikes to commute
to work at least once a week in Montreal and overall 1.9 million re-
sidents in Quebec use cycling as a means of transportation (Cycling in
Quebec, 2015). The above revealed that the Montreal government fo-
cused on giving infrastructure priority so as to build an active trans-
portation network that combats the last-mile problem.
5.3. Better integration of transportation and land use
Focusing on transit-oriented development allows cities to create
spaces that provide a balance of different land uses such as commercial,
residential and office coupled with access to public transit.
One way to further integrate land use and transportation is through
the concept of Mobility Hubs. According to the 2041 Regional
S. Bista, et al.
Transportation Plan (2041 RTP 2018), “43 of the 51 Mobility Hubs
identified in The Big Move (2009) have experienced residential and
employment growth, with the median growth rate of each Mobility Hub
approximately double that of the region’s overall growth” (2041 RTP
2018, 92). The reason for such growth in the Mobility Hubs is attributed
to the critical establishment of transit-oriented development and con-
nection to regional transit. The Hubs also help create a live/work en-
vironment that presents a solution to the last-mile problem, especially if
they are located on the outskirts of the urban core. Creating the
Mobility Guidelines to develop the hubs, proved to be a tool for mu-
nicipalities in addressing the last-mile problem and take opportunities
to combine existing and future rapid transit with a development com-
ponent. The plan strategizes evaluating incentives to encourage transit-
oriented development and implementing policies for municipal trans-
portation master plans, so they are aligned with regional goals (2041
RTP 2018, 96).
BuildON -The Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe Area
(The Growth Plan GGH) from 2017, written by the Provincial
Government of Ontario, has identified 25 urban growth centers where
the built environment has shifted towards a compact, mixed-use and
transit-oriented development (The Growth Plan GGH, 72). Similar to
the Mobility Hubs, the Growth Plan introduced the ‘Complete
Communities’ concept where a combination of compact built form and
densification results in efficient use of land with a range of housing
stock and public transit options (The Growth Plan, GGH, 69). Within
the ‘Complete Communities’, there are no restrictions for a specific type
of housing which is rare when thinking about densification. The type of
housing can include “detached and semi detached houses on small lots
as well as townhouses and walk-up apartments, multi-story commercial
developments, and apartments or offices above retail,” (The Growth
Plan, GGH, 69). Commonly mixed-use areas have dense residential
buildings that are almost always larger apartment buildings generally
opposed outside of urban areas. Allowing a more flexible approach
could encourage a better mix.
The Downtown region in Toronto has “two subway lines, the
streetcar network, GO Rail, buses, Union Station and the rail link to the
Toronto Pearson International Airport and a pedestrian tunnel to Billy
Bishop Toronto City Airport” (TOCore 2018, 4). Given the expansive
network of public transportation within the Downtown, there are sev-
eral areas now designated as Mixed-Use and will experience an increase
in the residential housing stock, mitigating with the last-mile problem.
The Montreal Master Plan from 2005, discussed the ability to pro-
vide an estimated total of 150,00 new units of housing through the
conversion of vacant lots, abandoned buildings and re-developable in-
dustrial spaces. Along with much needed housing for the growing po-
pulation, the additional units are located in areas that are well served
by public transportation and infrastructure (Montreal Master Plan,
2004, 25). By being proactive about the placement of future housing,
Montreal was cognizant about transit-oriented development. Lastly, the
PMAD plan for Greater Montreal introduces the creation of new ‘Eco-
Districts’, also known as sustainable neighborhoods. These districts are
guided by the idea of multifunctionality of spaces and recommend “a
better horizontal and vertical integration of building uses to cultivate
dynamic community life,” (PMAD 2013, 53). Eco-Districts are also
promoting sustainability through transit-oriented development.
In conclusion, the last-mile problem is taken into consideration in
some of the planning documents in Toronto and Montreal, based on this
research and the literature review. Both cities and their respective
provinces, Ontario and Quebec, have employed solutions throughout
the region. Shared-mobility strategies such as a bike-sharing and car-
sharing are solutions that have already been implemented in many
Canadian cities including Toronto and Montreal. According to the result
analysis of this research, there are other policies that should be taken
into consideration.
(1) Investing in Microtransit: Microtransit is defined as publicly or
8
Case Studies on Transport Policy xxx (xxxx) xxx–xxx
privately-operated transit which can supplement fixed-route transit
services by incorporating flexible routing and scheduling (Shaheen
and Chan 2016). A policy recommendation for Toronto and Mon-
treal would be to consider funding microtransit in areas with higher
population density but limited access to public transit. In terms of
finances, microtransit proves to be a better solution as well because
they are more affordable and require less maintenance than tradi-
tional fixed route transportation.
(2) Leveraging public-private partnerships: The focus for this re-
commendation is ways in which municipalities can capitalize on
their partnership with private companies. Given the popularity and
wide-reach of non-traditional, on-demand ride-sharing services,
municipalities should start exploring long-term partnerships with
Transportation Network Companies (TNC) such as Uber, Via and
Lyft. Currently, the process of creating a partnership with third
parties and private companies varies greatly on the location, size
and scale of the city.
(3) Building mixed-use districts and diversifying land-use: Although
mixed land use is promoted in some of Montreal planning docu-
ments, the policy recommendations do not focus on any regulatory
zoning tools. Incentivizing future developments to focus on mixed-
use development is a policy suggestion for both Montreal and
Toronto, as this will allow for a work-life atmosphere and also re-
vitalize low-density areas.
6. Conclusions
By answering our research question that how the comprehensive
plans at different levels of government engage with the last mile pro-
blem in Canadian cities, this research found that only two out of the
total ten documents, explicitly mention the last-mile problem. Both of
the documents are from the Toronto samples and they are: the 2041
Regional Transportation Plan (RTP) for the GTHA and the Toronto
Transportation Plan. The term ‘last-mile’ was not present in the Toronto
downtown strategy plan which can be attributed to the extensive
transportation network and robust connectivity within public transit.
Moreover, the term was not found in the provincial or the official
municipal plan related to Toronto. The Official Plan from 2015 men-
tions shared-mobility and promotion of active transportation which are
possible solutions to the last-mile problem without directly referencing
the term. Lastly, since low-density suburban areas tend to experience
the last-mile problem more often, it is surprising that the provincial
growth plan does not talk about the last-mile problem directly. In the
selected documents for Montreal, the last-mile problem was not men-
tioned in any of the samples prepared by the different government
agencies. Within the Montreal documents however, terms referencing
intermodal connections and active transportation were present, im-
plying the need for multiple modes of transportation which is another
solution for the last-mile problem.
In terms of the second and third questions posed in this research, the
themes extracted from the content analysis reflected many of the ex-
isting and proposed solutions that address the last-mile problem.
Through the literature review and content analysis of the documents
there are certain solutions for the last-mile already identified in Toronto
and Montreal such as: bike-shares, pedestrian networks, integration of
real-time information and activation of mixed-use planning. Based on
the strategies recommended in The Big Move and revisited by the 2041
Regional Transportation Plan, Metrolinx added over 42,000 bike racks
at various GTHA transit stations. The Triplinx regional travel planning
tool was also created to provide consolidated transit information (2041
RTP 2018, 28). In Montreal, the Metropolitan Bicycle Network is still in
progress, adding another 300 km of bike paths to better connect the
active transportation mode. Both cities focused on the downtown core
areas as these are the most developed neighborhoods and incorporate
mixed-use and transit-oriented development.
In terms of the latent content analysis of the documents from the
S. Bista, et al.
Canadian cities of Toronto and Montreal that revealed the last-mile
problem was addressed in a variety of ways. This research discussed
three possible policy recommendations to further address the last-mile
problem: invest in Microtransit, leverage public-private partnerships
and building mixed-use districts and diversify land-use
The last-mile problem and urban transportation are both ever
evolving and cities around the world are taking notice. Transportation
challenges become more convoluted as the population increases and the
built areas within urban cores expand. The onus falls on all levels of
government to provide the highest quality of publicly accessible
transportation modes in order to move people across geographic
boundaries. The strategies and interventions along with all of the
technological innovations are headed in the right direction.
7. Limitations and recommendations for future research
As with various other kinds of research methods, content analysis
has its own limitations. Manual analysis inherently leaves room for
human error. Another limitation present was the language barrier.
Montreal is a French speaking city hence, many of the plans were in
French. Having to select plans that provided a translated English ver-
sion could have resulted in the exclusion of the more comprehensive,
recent or representative documents.
Additionally, given that the number of planning documents assessed
in this study was small, our ability to generalize is limited. Future re-
search ought to include additional study cities and expand the total
universe of plans and reports analyzed. Future research can also build
on this work by encoding our approach into a natural language pro-
cessing tool that could handle much larger volumes of documents and
Appendix A:. Toronto plans.
Plan Author
2041 Regional Transportation Plan for the Metrolinx
Greater Toronto and Hamilton Area (G-
THA)
TOCore: Planning Downtown the City of Toronto
Planning and
Development
ConsumerNext: Transportation Master Plan the City of Toronto
The Official Plan the City of Toronto
Planning and
Development
BuildON - Growth Plan for the Greater Golden the Province of Ontario
Horseshoe Area
Case Studies on Transport Policy xxx (xxxx) xxx–xxx
words (as described in Hollander et al., 2016).
Future research could also include an in-depth demographics and
transit survey analysis with a focus on accessibility. It’s important to
investigate where the last-mile problem is most prominent and who is
being impacted the most. Including some of the future research re-
commendations would shed more light on explanatory variables that
might influence the last-mile problem. The impacts of those transpor-
tation plans regarding last-mile problems on different stakeholders are
worth exploring further in future research.
Glossary
LMP: Last mile problem. When the last mile problem (LMP) is
mentioned please note that it can be used interchangeably with the first
and last mile problem (FLMP). For the purposes of this research the
term has been shortened to the last-mile problem (LMP).
Funding
We wish to acknowledge the Research Support Program on
Intergovernmental Affairs and Québec Identity, Government of Québec,
Secrétariat aux affaires intergouvernementales canadiennes (SAIC) for
their financial support of this research.
CRediT authorship contribution statement
Shabnam Bista: Methodology, Investigation. Justin B. Hollander:
Conceptualization, Methodology, Validation, Supervision. Minyu Situ:
Validation.
Published Summary
year
2017 The 2041 Regional Transportation Plan incorporates the 30 regional and local governments in
the Greater Toronto Hamilton Area and represented by Metrolinx, Province of Ontario, the
Federal Government, transit agencies and other municipalities. The plan focused on connected
multimodal regional transportation system. The overarching goal was to improve public-
transit and encourage the different actors involved to consider the movement of people and
not just vehicles in the region.
2017 The TOCore Planning Downtown document is a 25-year vision for the City of Toronto’s to
become a center of cultural and economic activity. Within this plan, five infrastructure related
strategies have been developed and they include: community facilities, parks and public
realm, mobility, energy and water. This updated planning framework focused on the
population and employment growth in Downtown and discussed efforts to try to create
desirable live/work spaces and foster community through Mixed-Use districts.
2017a The study area of this TMP is the Consumers Road Business Park and areas surrounding the
Sheppard and Victoria Park station and intersection. The emphasis, similar to the Downtown
Plan, was on complete communities which supports employment growth and increased
residential units in the study area. The recommendations combined the built environment,
public benefits, open space, and a robust transportation network for residents in the area.
2015 Every municipality has to create an official plan. The City of Toronto Official Plan was
approved in 2006 by the Local Planning Appeal Tribunal (LPAT). The official Five-Year
Review was started in 2011. The consolidation of policies from various sections was adopted
in 2015 by the City Council. The plan focuses on different sectors like transportation,
employment, housing and the environment. The transportation section is particularly relevant
because the policies focus on cycling, automated vehicles and other shared mobility services.
2012 The Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe Area is a part of a larger provincial plan
called BuildON for Ontario. This is a large infrastructure investment in public services such as
schools, roads, hospitals and public transit. This plan is in anticipation of the projected growth
in this region. Ontario emphasizes the need to improve current public transit systems and
expand the network so various regions are connected which in turn can lead to a stronger
economy.
9
S. Bista, et al. Case Studies on Transport Policy xxx (xxxx) xxx–xxx

Appendix B:. Montreal plans

Plan Author Published Summary

year

Downtown Strategy: Building on Momentum
Transportation Electrification Action Plan
Attractive, Competitive and Sustainable Greater Mo-
ntreal a Metropolitan Land Use and Develop-
ment Plan
Transportation Plan
The Master Plan
the City of Montreal 2016 The Downtown Strategy plan is aiming to be fully implemented by 2030. The plan
encompasses various sectors of the city like transportation, housing, employment and
economic development. In addressing the growth and momentum that the Downtown
area is experiencing, the document focuses on five principles: density, mix of uses,
accessibility, quality and perspective. The highlighted actions include integrated public
transit system with other infrastructure like schools and residential areas allowing for
more people to live in Downtown.
the Quebec Minister of 2015 This document lays out the plan for electrification of transportation in the Province of
Transportation Quebec by 2020. Given the ample supply of clean energy and renewable resources in the
province, the Quebec government wants to lead the charge in sustainable and energy
efficient mobility. The plan wants to create the sustainable industry associated with this
kind of undertaking, while also combating climate change by reducing greenhouse gas
emissions.
the Montreal 2012 The plan is based on multiple documents previously written by the CMM with a focus on
Metropolitan land use planning, transportation and the environment. The Metropolitan Land Use and
Community (CMM) Development Plan (PMAD) PMAD proposes multiple policies and objectives to help
frame the Greater Montreal region’s rapid urbanization and sustainable development.
City of Montreal 2008 As one of the first transportation plans for Montreal, the document follows the footsteps
Transportation Division of the Montreal Summit from 2002 and the Montreal Master Plan from 2004. The plan
assesses major investments that the city should consider making in order to improve road
infrastructure and the public transit network. It outlines 21 specific development
programs to reimagine Montreal in the next 10 years. One of the key elements guiding
this development process is the densification and consolidation of various building stock
in the urban core of Montreal.
the City of Montreal 2004 The plan was created after the Montreal Summit in 2002. It lays out the long-term vision
for the city development. This document became the official municipal reference for any
urban planning related issues and growth. The chapters address various planning
challenges in Montreal including climate change, transportation, employment and urban
design. This has not been updated since 2004.

References
Alonso, W., 1964. Location and land use. Toward a general theory of land rent. Location
and land use. Toward a general theory of land rent.
Brooks, M. P. 2003. Planning Theory for Practitioners (Chicago, IL and Washington, DC.
Burby, R., May, P., 1997. Making government plan. Johns Hopkins University Press,
Baltimore.
Talen, Emily, Knaap, Gerrit, 2003. Legalizing smartgrowth: An empirical study of land
use regulation in Illinois. Journal of Planning Education and Research 22 (4),
345–359.
Cervero, R., Sullivan, C., 2011. Green TODs: marrying transit-oriented development and
green urbanism. Int. J. Sustainable Devel. World Ecol. 18 (3), 210–218. https://doi.
org/10.1080/13504509.2011.570801.
Cheng, S.-F., Nguyen, D.T., Lau, H.C., 2012. A Mechanism for Organizing Last-Mile
Service Using Non-Dedicated Fleet. In: 2012 IEEE/WIC/ACM International
Conferences on Web Intelligence and Intelligent Agent Technology. IEEE, Macau,
China, pp. 85–89.
Chieppo, Charles. 2016. “Is Columbus the Future of Urban Transportation?” Data-Smart
City Solutions. 2016. https://datasmart.ash.harvard.edu/news/article/is-columbus-
the-future-of-urban-transportation-864.
Chong, Z.J., Qin, B., Bandyopadhyay, T., Wongpiromsarn, T., Rankin, E.S., Ang, M.H.,
et al., 2011. Autonomous personal vehicle for the first-and last-mile transportation
services. In: 2011 IEEE 5th International Conference on Cybernetics and Intelligent
Systems (CIS) (pp. 253-260). IEEE.
City of Toronto, 2017a. “ConsumerNext: Transportation Master Plan” n.d. Accessed
September 13, 2019. https://www.toronto.ca/legdocs/mmis/2017/pg/bgrd/back-
groundfile-103947.pdf.
City of Toronto, 2017b.“Toronto Transit Commission.” City of Toronto (blog). August 25,
2017. https://www.toronto.ca/city-government/accountability-operations-cus-
tomer-service/city-administration/city-managers-office/agencies-corporations/tor-
onto-transit-commission/.https://doi.org/10.1109/WI-IAT.2012.254.
City of Toronto. 2018. “2018 Issue Briefing: Smart Cities Initiatives”. https://www.tor-
onto.ca/city-government/council/2018-council-issue-notes/smart-cities-initiative/.
Accessed June 11, 2020.
City of Toronto, 2019. TOCore Downtown Strategy. https://www.toronto.ca/legdocs/
mmis/2019/cc/bgrd/backgroundfile-135953.pdf. Accessed 7/2/20.
City of Toronto, 2017. ConsumerNext – The Transportation Master Plan for the
Consumers Roads Business Park by the City of Toronto. https://www.toronto.ca/city-
government/planning-development/planning-studiesinitiatives/consumersnext/
background-reports-consumersnext/. Accessed 7/2/20.
Curtis, C., Renne, J., Bertolini, L., 2009. Transit oriented development: Making it happen.
Ashgate Publishing, Ltd.
Cycling in Quebec. 2015. “Velo Quebec”. http://www.velo.qc.ca/en/Publications/
Cycling-in-Quebec.
Das, S., Dixon, K., Sun, X., Dutta, A., Zupancich, M., 2017. Trends in transportation re-
search: Exploring content analysis in topics. Transp. Res. Rec. 2614 (1), 27–38.
DeMaio, Paul, 2009. Bike-sharing: history, impacts, models of provision, and future. J.
Public Transp. 12 (4). https://doi.org/10.5038/2375-0901.12.4.3.
Gaber, John and Sharon Gaber, 2007. Qualitative Analysis for Planning & Policy: Beyond
the Numbers. Chicago: American Planning Association Planners Press.
Government of Canada, Impact Canada. 2020. “Government of Canada launches the
Smart Cities Challenge”. https://impact.canada.ca/en/node/117. Accessed June 11,
2020.
GO Transit. “What Is GO? | About Us | GO Transit.” n.d. Accessed March 15, 2019.
https://www.gotransit.com/en/about-us/what-is-go.
Hollander, Justin B., Cahill, Bernard, 2011. Confronting population decline in the Buffalo,
New York, Region: a close reading of the erie-niagara framework for regional growth.
J. Arch. Plann. Res. 28 (3), 252–267.
Hollander Justin B., 2018. “Coming to Terms with Change: Contemporary Policy
Responses.” In: An Ordinary City. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham.
Hollander, Justin B., Erin Graves, Henry Renski, Cara Foster-Karim, Andrew Wiley, and
Dibyendu Das. 2016. Urban social listening: Potential and pitfalls of using social
media data in studying cities. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
Hopkins, L.D., 2001. Urban development: The logic of making plans, vol. 166 Island
Press.
Hsieh, Hsiu-Fang, Shannon, Sarah E., 2005. Three Approaches to Qualitative Content
Analysis. Qual. Health Res. 15 (9), 1277–1288. https://doi.org/10.1177/
1049732305276687.
Krippendorff, Klaus, 2013. Content Analysis: An Introduction to its Methodology. Sage
Publications.
Lawson, John, 2015. Transportation Policy and Planning in Canada. Transport Institute at
Universidad Nacional de San Martin.
Lesh Matthew Curtis. n.d. “Innovative Concepts in First-Last Mile Connections to Public
Transportation.” Urban Public Transportation Systems 2013, Proceedings, 63–74.
Accessed March 3, 2019. https://doi.org/10.1061/9780784413210.007.
Ly, H., Irwin, J., 2017. The relationship between perceptions of discounted public transit
and physical activity: Cross-sectional online survey in Canada. Case Studies on
Transport Policy 5 (2), 279–285.
Metrolinx. 2017. “2041 Regional Transportation Plan” n.d. Accessed September 30, 2018.
Metrolinx. 2009. “The Big Move - Introduction.” n.d. Accessed March 15, 2019. http://
www.metrolinx.com/thebigmove/en/introduction/1_2_GTHA.aspx.
Nazarnia, Naghmeh, Schwick, Christian, Jaeger, Jochen A.G., 2016. Accelerated urban
sprawl in montreal, quebec city, and zurich: investigating the differences using time
series 1951–2011. Ecol. Ind. 60 (January), 1229–1251. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
ecolind.2015.09.020.
Newswire Canada. 2019. “The Government of Canada Announces Winners of the Smart
Cities Challenge.” https://www.newswire.ca/news-releases/the-government-of-ca-
nada-announces-winners-of-the-smart-cities-challenge-859468435.html. Accessed

10
S. Bista, et al.
June 11, 2020.
Norton, Richard K., 2008. Using content analysis to evaluate local master plans and
zoning codes. Land Use Policy 25 (3), 432–454. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
landusepol.2007.10.006.
Parkes, S.D., Marsden, G., Shaheen, S.A., Cohen, A.P., 2013. Understanding the diffusion
of public bikesharing systems: evidence from Europe and North America. J. Transp.
Geogr. 31), 94–103.
Putt, A.D., Springer, J.F., 1989. Policy Research: Concepts, Methods, Applications.
Prentice Hall.
Ratner, Keith A., and Andrew R. Goetz. 2013. “The Reshaping of Land Use and Urban
Form in Denver through Transit-Oriented Development.” Cities, Special Section:
Analysis and Planning of Urban Settlements: The Role of Accessibility, 30 (February):
31–46.
Rodrigue, J.P., 2016. The geography of transport systems. Taylor & Francis.
Mills, E.S., 1967. An aggregative model of resource allocation in a metropolitan area. Am.
Econ. Rev. 57 (2), 197–210.
Muth, R. F. 1969. Cities and Housing; The Spatial Pattern of Urban Residential and Land
Use.
Scheibe, K.P., Carstensen Jr, L.W., Rakes, T.R., Rees, L.P., 2006. Going the last mile: a
spatial decision support system for wireless broadband communications. Decis.
Support Syst. 42 (2), 557–570.
Shaheen, Susan, Chan, Nelson, 2016. Mobility and the sharing economy: potential to
facilitate the first- and last-mile public transit connections. Built. Environ. 42 (4),
573–588. https://doi.org/10.2148/benv.42.4.573.
Simmins, Geoffrey, “Urban and Regional Planning”. In the Canadian Encyclopedia.
Historica Canada. Article published November 03, 2011; last modified February 10,
2017. https://www.thecanadianencyclopedia.ca/en/article/urban-and-regional-
planning.
Stiglic, Mitja, Agatz, Niels, Savelsbergh, Martin, Gradisar, Mirko, 2018. Enhancing urban
mobility: Integrating ride-sharing and public transit. Comput. Oper. Res. 90, 12–21.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cor.2017.08.016.
Singleton, R.A., Straits, B.C., 1999. Approaches to Social Research, Third Edition. Oxford
University Press, NewYork.
Tilahun, N., Thakuriah, P.V., Li, M., Keita, Y., 2016a. Transit use and the work commute:
analyzing the role of last mile issues. J. Transp. Geogr. 54, 359–368.
The City of Montreal. 2004. “The Master Plan” n.d. Accessed September 13, 2019. http://
ville.montreal.qc.ca/portal/page?_pageid=2762,3099656&_dad=portal&
_schema=PORTAL.
The City of Toronto Planning and Development. 2017. “TOCore: Planning Downtown” n.
11
Case Studies on Transport Policy xxx (xxxx) xxx–xxx
d. Accessed September 13, 2019. https://www.toronto.ca/legdocs/mmis/2017/ed/
bgrd/backgroundfile-99603.pdf.
The City of Toronto Planning and Development. 2015. “The Official Plan” n.d. Accessed
September 13, 2019. https://www.toronto.ca/city-government/planning-develop-
ment/official-plan-guidelines/official-plan/.
The Montreal Metropolitan Community (CMM). 2012. “The Metropolitan Land Use and
Development Plan” http://cmm.qc.ca/fileadmin/user_upload/pmad2012/doc-
umentation/20120813_PMAD_eng.pdf.
The Province of Ontario, 2012. “BuildON - Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe
Area” n.d. Accessed September 13, 2019. https://www.ontario.ca/page/building-
ontario.
The Quebec Minister of Transportation. 2015. “Transportation Electrification Action
Plan” n.d. Accessed September 13, 2019. http://medias.mtq.fabrique3.net.s3.ama-
zonaws.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/10/CIAO-047-MTQ-LGS-RapportENv3.pdf.
The Société de transport de Montréal (STM), 2018. STM Activity Report 2018. Accessed
November 15, 2019.. http://www.stm.info/sites/default/files/pdf/fr/ra2018.pdf.
Tilahun, Nebiyou, Piyushimita (Vonu) Thakuriah, Moyin Li, and Yaye Keita. 2016b.
“Transit Use and the Work Commute: Analyzing the Role of Last Mile Issues.” Journal
of Transport Geography 54 (June): 359–68. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jtrangeo.
2016.06.021.
Torres, Nancy. 2018. “How Columbus Is Accomplishing Its Smart City Vision.” Data-
Smart City Solutions. 2018. https://datasmart.ash.harvard.edu/news/article/how-
columbus-accomplishing-its-smart-city-vision.
Van Der Kloof, A., Bastiaanssen, J., Martens, K., 2014. Bicycle lessons, activity partici-
pation and empowerment. Case Stud. Transport Policy 2 (2), 89–95.
Von Thünen, J.H., 1875. Der isolirte staat in beziehung auf landwirtschaft und natio-
nalökonomie, vol. 1 Wiegant, Hempel & Parey.
Wang, Hai. 2015. “Design and Operation of a Last Mile Transportation System,”
Dissertation. MIT Sloan School of Management.
Waddell, P., Ulfarsson, G.F., Franklin, J.P., Lobb, J., 2007. Incorporating land use in
metropolitan transportation planning. Transp. Res. Part A: Policy Practice 41 (5),
382–410.
Xie, C., Gong, H., Wang, F., 2010. A Solution for the Last Mile Problem of the Beijing
Rapid Transit Network: Local Shuttle Bus System. In: 2010 18th International
Conference on Geoinformatics, pp. 1–6. https://doi.org/10.1109/
GEOINFORMATICS.2010.5567502.
Zellner, Moira, Massey, Dean, Shiftan, Yoram, Levine, Jonathan, Arquero, Maria Josefa,
2016. Overcoming the last-mile problem with transportation and land-use improve-
ments: an agent-based approach. Int. J. Transp. 4 (1), 1–26.