REGIONAL DISTRICT OF NANAIMO TRANSIT SELECT COMMITTEE AGENDA
Tuesday, January 21, 2020 10:00 A.M. Board Chambers Pages
1. CALL TO ORDER
2. APPROVAL OF THE AGENDA
3. ADOPTION OF MINUTES
3.1 Transit Select Committee Meeting - September 19, 2019 4
That the minutes of the Transit Select Committee meeting held September 19, 2019, be adopted.
4. DELEGATIONS
4.1 Bill Manners, re: Free Transit for Grade 8 and Above 7
4.2 Kevin Hood and selection of high school students, re: Nanaimo Youth Support 8 Motion: "Innovate to Increase Transit Ridership - Lessons from Kingston, ON"
5. CORRESPONDENCE
6. BC TRANSIT UPDATES
6.1 Fare-Free Transit
7. REPORTS
7.1 BC Transit Fare-Free Transit Report 9
That the BC Transit Fare-Free Transit: A Summary of Considerations for BC Transit report be received for information.
7.2 handyDART Fleet 2020 28
That the Board support BC Transit replacing the existing 15 ARBOC light duty buses with 15 Blue Bird light duty buses. Transit Select Committee Agenda - January 16, 2020
7.3 RDN Transit Bylaws 31
1. That “Southern Community Transit Service Area Amendment Bylaw No. 1230.06, 2020” be introduced, read three times, and forwarded to the Inspector of Municipalities for approval.
2. That “Northern Community Transit Service Amendment Bylaw No. 897.07, 2020” be introduced, read three times, and forwarded to the Inspector of Municipalities for approval.
7.4 Downtown Nanaimo Exchange 40
1. That the Board not extend the agreement at 575 Fitzwilliam Street (Prideaux Exchange) beyond June 30, 2020.
2. That the Regional District of Nanaimo continue to work with the City of Nanaimo to develop a long term agreement for the Downtown Nanaimo Exchange.
7.5 North Nanaimo Transit Exchange Development 42
That the Board support entering into a partnership with BC Transit and Ivanhoé Cambridge to develop a Project Term Sheet for an upgraded transit exchange.
7.6 RDN Transit Verbal Update
8. BUSINESS ARISING FROM DELEGATIONS
9. NEW BUSINESS
9.1 Innovate to Increase Transit Ridership (Lessons from Kingston, ON)
The following motion was referred from the Regional District of Nanaimo Board on December 10, 2019:
That a report be prepared for the Transit Select Committee’s consideration that reviews the successful initiatives implemented by Kingston, ON to increase transit ridership and outline options and implications for similar initiatives that could be implemented in the Regional District of Nanaimo context.
9.2 Transit Connections between the Cowichan Valley Regional District and the Regional District of Nanaimo
The following motion was referred from the Regional District of Nanaimo Board on December 10, 2019:
That representatives from the Cowichan Valley Regional District and BC Transit be invited to meet with representatives from the Regional District of Nanaimo to discuss and explore potential options for connecting the Regional District of Nanaimo public transit system with the Cowichan Valley Regional District transit system.
2 Transit Select Committee Agenda - January 16, 2020
9.3 Transit Connections between the Comox Valley Regional District and the Regional District of Nanaimo
The following motion was referred from the Regional District of Nanaimo Board on December 10, 2019:
That representatives from the Comox Valley Regional District and BC Transit be invited to meet with representatives from the Regional District of Nanaimo to discuss and explore potential options for connecting the Regional District of Nanaimo public transit system with the Comox Valley Regional District transit system.
10. ADJOURNMENT
3
REGIONAL DISTRICT OF NANAIMO MINUTES OF THE TRANSIT SELECT COMMITTEE MEETING
Thursday, September 19, 2019 10:00 A.M. Board Chambers
In Attendance: Director T. Brown Chair Director K. Wilson Electoral Area A Director M. Young Electoral Area C Director B. Rogers Electoral Area E Alternate Director J. Stanhope Electoral Area G Director S. McLean Electoral Area H Director L. Krog City of Nanaimo Director D. Bonner City of Nanaimo Director E. Hemmens City of Nanaimo Director M. Swain District of Lantzville Director E. Mayne City of Parksville Alternate Director T. Westbroek Town of Qualicum Beach
Regrets: Director B. Wiese Town of Qualicum Beach Director S. Armstrong City of Nanaimo Director J. Turley City of Nanaimo
Also in Attendance: Director I. W. Thorpe Chair, Regional District of Nanaimo P. Carlyle Chief Administrative Officer D. Pearce General Manager, Transportation & Emergency Services D. Marshall Manager, Transit Operations B. Miller Superintendent, Transit Service & Delivery E. Beauchamp Superintendent, Transit Planning & Scheduling B. White Superintendent, Transit Operations J. Rose Manager, Transportation, City of Nanaimo N. Hewitt Recording Secretary
CALL TO ORDER The Chair called the meeting to order and respectfully acknowledged the Coast Salish Nations on whose traditional territory the meeting took place. APPROVAL OF THE AGENDA It was moved and seconded that the agenda be approved. CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY
4 Transit Select Committee Minutes – September 19, 2019
ADOPTION OF MINUTES Transit Select Committee Meeting - July 11, 2019 It was moved and seconded that the minutes of the Transit Select Committee meeting held July 11, 2019, be adopted. CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY
BC TRANSIT UPDATES Full Driver Door Daniel Pearce provided a verbal update on the Full Driver Door installation plan.
REPORTS handyDART Taxi Saver Program It was moved and seconded that the handyDART Taxi Saver program frequency be changed to 60 days, and the purchase amount be increased to $80.00, maintaining the requirement of a minimum of one handyDART trip within the 60-day period. CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY
Christmas Day Sunday Level Service Conventional Transit 2019 It was moved and seconded that Conventional Transit on Christmas Day, December 25, 2019, be provided at Sunday level of service. CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY
Regional District of Nanaimo Transit Performance and Fleet Update It was moved and seconded that the Regional District of Nanaimo Transit Performance and Fleet Update report be received for information. CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY
Route 91 and 15 Ridership Update It was moved and seconded that the Route 91 and 15 Ridership Update report be received for information. CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY
5 Transit Select Committee Minutes – September 19, 2019
Licence of Occupation and Use Amendment It was moved and seconded that the Regional District of Nanaimo approve the amended Licence of Occupation and Use Agreement for 1 Port Drive with the City of Nanaimo extending the agreement to June 30, 2020. CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY
It was moved and seconded that the Regional District of Nanaimo consent to permit the temporary use of 575 Fitzwilliam ‘Prideaux Exchange’ for a parking lot for use by RCMP members and staff, until the Regional District of Nanaimo resumes use of the Prideaux Exchange. CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY
Free Transit on Federal Election Day – October 21, 2019 It was moved and seconded that free transit be provided on General Voting Day for the Federal Election on October 21, 2019. CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY
RDN Transit Verbal Update Brandon Miller provided a verbal update on Electronic Fare Collection.
ADJOURNMENT It was moved and seconded that the meeting be adjourned.
TIME: 10:41 AM
______CHAIR
6 Delegation: Bill Manners, re: Free Transit for Grade 8 and Above
Summary: Benefits of a Nanaimo plan to increase ridership and for students to engage in a greater number of activities.
Action Requested: Nanaimo plan to implement Fare Free Transit Passes for students in the SD68 & SD69 areas starting with grade 8 students and moving forward to grade 12 increments one year at a time.
7 Delegation: Kevin Hood and selection of high school students, re: Nanaimo Youth Support Motion: “Innovate to Increase Transit Ridership - Lessons from Kingston, ON”
Summary: The Youth Climate Action Network or YouCAN seeks zero-fare bus passes for high school students within the RDN as part of an effort to fight climate change and would like to support the motion “Innovate to Increase Transit Ridership (Lessons from Kingston, ON)”.
Action Requested: Grant YouCAN status as a stakeholder during production of RDN staff reports pertaining to the motion: “Innovate to Increase Transit Ridership (Lessons from Kingston, ON)”.
8
STAFF REPORT
TO: Transit Select Committee MEETING: January 16, 2020
FROM: Erica Beauchamp FILE: 8770 20 FFT Superintendent, Transit Planning & Scheduling
SUBJECT: BC Transit Fare-Free Transit Report
RECOMMENDATION
That the BC Transit Fare-Free Transit: A Summary of Considerations for BC Transit report be received for information.
SUMMARY
In November 2019, BC Transit released the report ‘Fare-Free Transit: A Summary of Considerations for BC Transit’ which explores the discussion of fare-free public transit. Research into other transit systems throughout the world that have or are going to implement fare-free transit are examined. It was concluded that, while removing fares produces a short-term increase in transit ridership, the increase carries an obligation to continue investing in transit services, which are difficult to fulfill due to reduced funding streams.
Investing in transit infrastructure and services to make it more attractive to discretionary (non-dependent) transit riders while also considering the affordability concerns of youth and low-income users, yields the greatest potential to produce a robust, high-ridership transit system over the long-term.
BACKGROUND
In 2017, the Regional District of Nanaimo and BC Transit conducted a fare review, implementing the DayPASS, lowering monthly pass fees and lowering Custom transit fares to be on par with Conventional transit. The Transit System review planned for 2020 will include another fare review, in which topics such as fare-free transit for youth can be explored in detail. As a starting point for the 2020 fare review, the recently released BC Transit report ‘Fare-Free Transit: A summary of Considerations for BC Transit’ provides an exploration of several transit systems that have previously or recently moved towards fare-free transit, and the considerations for transit systems considering adopting this as a method for increasing ridership.
9 Report to Transit Select Committee - January 16, 2020 BC Transit Fare-Free Transit Report Page 2
Results from the research, based on the BC Transit Report, are that fare-free transit for youth leads to higher amounts of transit use and builds transit riding as a sustainable transportation life skill. Evidence indicates that past travel experiences shape future behaviour and exposure to transit in young adulthood leads to a higher amount of transit use and lower rates of automobile ownership later in life1.
As noted in the BC Transit report, a fare-free transit system typically results in budget shortfalls, creating a lack of available funds to re-invest into the transit system for infrastructure and transit frequency investments. With the current BC Transit model, fare revenue collected belongs to local government (RDN), to help offset the cost of the RDN’s 53.31% of the transit system, thereby providing funds that can be reinvested into improving the transit system. To fund fare-free transit, it is suggested that local governments could look to recoup lost fare revenue through property tax increases. Some transit systems that previously had fare-free transit, such as Hasselt, Belgium, are now reinstating fares for adult passengers’ due to budget shortfalls and rising costs of operations. Other transit systems, e.g. Kingston, Ontario, have implemented fare-free transit for youth, with the goal of building long-term travel habits for young adults.
Evidence gathered through industry research into factors that encourage transit ridership indicate that attributes such as clean, well-maintained buses, courteous operators, on-time performance, overcrowding, trip duration, stop cleanliness and schedule information, have more influence on transit ridership than fare prices. The key to increasing ridership is to target discretionary users, those that have a choice between transit or personal vehicle, by making transit a convenient, efficient and hassle-free option, thereby making transit better for all users.
A full exploration of the fare-free transit concept will be explored through the transit review process planned for 2020.
ALTERNATIVES
1. That the BC Transit Fare-Free Transit: A Summary of Considerations for BC Transit report be received for information.
2. That alternative direction be provided.
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS
There are no financial implications associated with receiving this report. BC Transit conducted the report with their staff time.
STRATEGIC PLAN IMPLICATIONS
Transportation and Transit - Provide opportunities for residents to move effectively through and around the Region.
______Erica Beauchamp [email protected]
1 Klein, N. & Smart, M.J. (2017, March). Remembrance of cars and buses past: how prior life experiences influence travel. Journal of Planning Education and Research 38, no. 2: 139-51
10 Report to Transit Select Committee - January 16, 2020 BC Transit Fare-Free Transit Report Page 3
December 27, 2019
Reviewed by: D. Marshall, Manager, Transit Operations D. Pearce, General Manager, Transportation and Emergency Services P. Carlyle, Chief Administrative Officer
Attachments 1. Fare-Free Transit: A Summary of Considerations for BC Transit
11
Fare-Free Transit A Summary of Considerations for BC Transit
November 28, 2019
12
Table of Contents EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ...... 2 INTRODUCTION ...... 3 BACKGROUND ...... 3 BC TRANSIT FUNDING MODEL ...... 3 TRANSIT FARE ELASTICITY ...... 4 FACTORS AND ATTRIBUTES THAT ENCOURAGE TRANSIT USE ...... 5 FARE PROGRAMS FOR LOW-INCOME RIDERS ...... 6 SCENARIOS FOR INCREASING TRANSIT RIDERSHIP ...... 6 FARE-FREE TRANSIT FOR YOUTH TO ENCOURAGE FUTURE TRANSIT USE ...... 9 FARE-FREE IMPLICATIONS FOR CUSTOM SERVICES ...... 10 FURTHER CONSIDERATIONS ON FARE-FREE TRANSIT ...... 10 CONCLUSION ...... 11 APPENDIX A: EXAMPLES OF FARE-FREE TRANSIT ...... 12 REFERENCES ...... 14
1 13
Executive Summary Some public transit decision-making authorities have come to view the removal of transit fares as the easiest and most effective means of increasing transit ridership and accomplishing environmental and social goals. Given shifts in ridership and mode share are not unilaterally linked to the price of fares, the attached discussion paper is intended to provide stakeholders with a holistic understanding of the benefits and trade-offs associated with fare-free programs. A summary of the considerations for three different approaches to increasing transit ridership is provided in Table 4. Transit service in BC Transit systems is funded through a mix of provincial and municipal contributions that vary based on service type. Fare revenues collected offset the municipal portion of funding, which in turn decreases the reliance on property taxes to fund transit. Cost recoveries vary by system and service, with fare policies set by the municipal governments. Changes to transit fares and service levels are known to impact ridership, with changes in service levels being shown to have a greater impact than changes to fares. Factors influencing transit fare elasticities include type of user, type of trip, geography and length of time since the fare change. Research into factors that influence transit ridership point to service considerations such as trip time, service frequency, extended routes, service reliability and comfort/crowding as being of equal or greater important to transit cost and affordability when it comes to influencing ridership. These findings are supported by BC Transit’s annual Penalty-Reward Analysis, which identifies the attributes of transit that are expected by customers and influence use. Transit agencies have the ability to influence how increases in ridership in their systems are achieved through their chosen approach. Three primary approaches are:
The removal of transit fares to eliminate a barrier to use Invest in transit service and infrastructure to make it a more appealing transportation option Balancing removing the cost barrier for some populations with the need for investment For each of these approaches, the following factors should be considered:
The philosophical purpose of the approach The target demographic The impact on transit ridership and transit fare revenues The impact on transit service and investments The impact on transit administration and planning The impact on BC Transit’s mandated goals: o Contribute to the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions o Contribute to the reduction of traffic congestion o Contribute to improving the mobility of all residents As a part of the blended approach, local governments may employ targeted fare programs to accomplish social goals. Examples of established low-income programs are those in the Victoria Regional and Kamloops Transit Systems. Additionally, fare-free transit for youth has become e regularly considered initiative in BC Transit systems, with the existing program in the Kingston Transit System in Kingston, Ontario commonly referenced.
2 14
Introduction Under its mandate from the Province of British Columbia, BC Transit has the purpose of planning, implementing, maintaining and operating transportation services for citizens of the province that support growth, community planning and economic development1. Through increasing ridership across its services, BC Transit plays an integral role in assisting the Province and local government partners in reaching future greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions targets, reducing congestion in urban centres, and improving the ability of citizens to move throughout their communities. With increased public awareness and discourse around these topics, the question to answer is what is the best method to encourage sustained ridership increases in BC Transit systems? Background In recent years, there have been increasingly frequent discussions across North America and around the world on the merits of removing the user-pay model of transit fares in order to improve access to, and the appeal of, transit in efforts to increase ridership and achieve climate change and congestion goals. In late 2018, Luxembourg announced the intent to remove user fares in March 2020 in hopes of reducing congestion2. Additionally, Paris introduced fare-free transit for youth at the start of 2019 after debating fare-free transit for all to combat air pollution and congestion3. More established examples of fare-free transit are in Tallinn, Estonia, which has been available to all registered residents since 2013, and in Kingston, Ontario, where youth have been receiving complimentary bus passes since 2012. Conversely, the city of Hasselt, Belgium recently reinstated fares for all adult passengers after sixteen years of fare-free transit for all because of rising operational costs and budget shortfalls4. Public discussions regarding fare-free transit have, and continue to be, prevalent within British Columbia as well. In April 2019, Translink staff presented a report on fare-free transit for youth and low-income populations to its Mayors’ Council5. The report was presented in response to the efforts of the All on Board campaign that advocated for fare-free transit for youth and low-income populations and the subsequent motions of several of Translink’s municipal government partners. The report highlighted the funding shortfall that would result from the loss of fare revenues from those populations and the expected impact on transit service if alternative funding sources were not in place. Similarly, BC Transit has provided analysis to some of its local government partners on the impacts of removing transit fares, particularly as they relate to lost fare revenue and the subsequent need for transit service investment should increases to ridership occur. While the majority of these requests have not led to the introduction of fare-free transit, one subsidized program that has been approved is the City of Victoria’s initiative to provide transit passes to its youth residents for use on the Victoria Regional Transit System6. In a subsequent meeting, however, the Victoria Regional Transit Commission voted against pursuing a similar initiative for all youth in the region citing the cost of such a program and the impact it would have on the Commission’s many service and infrastructure priorities7. BC Transit Funding Model As is currently legislated, transit service in BC Transit systems is funded through contributions from provincial and municipal governments. Fare revenues collected offset the municipal governments’
3 15
contributions with the remaining amounts funded through property tax revenues. The current funding contribution from the provincial government is 46.69% for conventional transit systems and 66.69% for custom services on average8. One anomaly to this is the Victoria Regional Transit System, which also receives revenues from a regional gas tax, though revenues from this result in a lessened provincial contribution of 31.7% for conventional service and 63% for custom service9. Operating cost recovery from fare revenues varies depending on the size of the transit system. In general, a higher operating cost recovery is desirable in order to lessen the burden on local tax dollars to fund transit and enable investments in transit service and infrastructure. A summary of average operating cost recoveries and trends by system tier is provided in Table 1. Table 1: Fare Revenue Operating Cost Recovery for Fiscal Year 2018/2019 Average Fare Average Cost System Average Fare Revenue Recovery 3- Classification Revenue ($) Operating Cost Year Trend Recovery (%) Victoria $37,201,473 36.0% -0.8% Tier 1 $3,492,066 30.8% 2.2% Tier 2 $523,354 25.0% 3.5% Tier 3 $252,278 17.2% 0.6% In efforts to fund fare-free transit, municipal governments could look to recoup foregone fare revenue through increasing property taxes to fully fund transit service. Table 2 outlines what the estimated property tax implications would be if fare-free transit were pursued in four example BC Transit systems. It is important to note that these increases to property tax would only cover the costs of fare-free transit within the context of BC Transit’s fiscal 2019/2020 service levels. Should transit ridership grow as a result of fare-free transit being introduced, there would be an expectation on the municipal government to continue to invest in improving transit service, resulting in further increases property taxes. Should further increases to property taxes not be palatable, transit service could be constricted so to not increase costs beyond acceptable levels. Table 2: Estimated Increases to the Transit Portion of Property Taxes Required to Subsidize Fare-Free Conventional Transit (at 2019/20 service levels) Property Tax System Classification Increase Victoria $190 (137%) Tier 1 – Kamloops $90 (82%) Tier 2 – Comox Valley $30 (49%) Tier 3 – Squamish $30 (37%) Transit Fare Elasticity As with many goods and services, the amount of transit fares are understood to be tied to their rate of purchase and use, with increases in fares leading to decreases in ridership and vice versa. Traditionally, transit fares are viewed as inelastic in that the percentage change in ridership is less than that of the associated percentage change in fare rate. It is also understood that fare increases are more elastic than fare decreases as increases result in greater changes to ridership than decreases. Factors that influence transit fare elasticities are the type of user (transit dependent vs.
4 16
discretionary), type of trip (commute vs. non-commute), geography (urban vs. suburban and rural) and time since the fare rate change (short (<2 years), medium (2-5 years) and long (>5 years)) with the understanding that long-term elasticities are generally greater than short-term ones10. Table 3: Transit Fare and Service Short- and Long-Term Elasticities Short Term Long Term Fares -0.2 to -0.5 -0.6 to -0.9 Service 0.5 to 0.7 0.7 to 1.1 Table 3 highlights the average range of short- and long-term elasticities for transit fares and service. As is shown, a one percent increase in transit fares results in a 0.2 to 0.5 percent decrease in transit ridership in the short term and a 0.6 to 0.9 percent decrease in the long term. Conversely, a one percent increase in transit service generally results in a 0.5 to 0.7 percent increase in ridership in the short term and a 0.7 to 1.1 percent increase in the long term. Research also suggests that fare reductions alone are not an effective means of persuading automobile users to adopt transit given their status as discretionary riders and that a combination including higher vehicle user fees and improved transit service lead to increased rates of transit adoption. One case study on fare-free transit in BC Transit systems is that of the Whistler Transit System’s use of fare-free routes in efforts to mitigate congestion in the Resort Municipality of Whistler (RMOW) village. The RMOW has the ability to provide fare-free transit through allocating parking revenues and receiving contributions from private partners to offset foregone fare revenues11. It is observed that, on average, transit ridership increased by 19% in the RMOW when fare-free services were introduced. This increase is likely higher than what would be experienced in other BC Transit systems on account of the density of the population centre in the RMOW, the holistic transportation demand management measures applied, the high frequency and high quality transit service provided, and the use of high parking fees as a disincentive to driving. Factors and Attributes That Encourage Transit Use Understanding the motivations of transit users and non-users is a necessary consideration when making decisions regarding transit fares and investments in transit service. Research points to service-related considerations such as trip time, service frequency, extended routes, service reliability and comfort/crowding as being of equal or greater importance to transit cost and affordability in terms of factors that influence transit use12. These factors are even more significant amongst discretionary riders or non-riders, given their preference towards the convenience and comfort of personal vehicle use, carpools or car shares13. The findings of industry research into the transit attributes that encourage ridership are supported by the outcomes of BC Transit’s annual Penalty-Reward Analysis that examines the key service delivery attributes that influence transit use and customers’ attitude towards transit14. Specifically, the analysis looks to identify the attributes that are expected by customers and will either encourage or discourage transit use depending on whether or not they are present. The results of this survey indicate that factors such as clean and well-maintained buses, courteous operators, safety, on-time performance, overcrowding, trip duration, stop cleanliness and schedule information have a greater influence on customers’ perception of, and willingness to use, transit than fare prices.
5 17
Fare Programs for Low-Income Riders One reason that fare-free transit is advocated for is to improve the ability of low-income residents to travel within their communities by eliminating the cost barrier. In BC, the Ministry of Social Development and Poverty Reduction provides a permanent annual bus pass to low-income seniors and persons with disabilities through the BC Bus Pass program15. There are, however, segments of the population that are low-income that do not meet the eligibility requirements of this program. As a result, many BC Transit systems provide steeply discounted transit fare products to low- income users in efforts to supplement the BC Bus Pass program. Two examples of this are the Victoria Regional Transit Commission’s partnership with the Community Social Planning Council and the City of Kamloops’ Affordable Recreation for Community Health (ARCH) transit pass program. Victoria Regional Transit Commission and the Community Social Planning Council Through a partnership with the Community Social Planning Council (CSPC) started in 1997, the Victoria Regional Transit Commission (VRTC) has enabled local social welfare agencies to provide bus passes to low-income populations at a significantly reduced rate16. Under this agreement, CSPC acts as the central administrator of discounted tickets and monthly passes that are distributed to 83 agencies throughout the region that have a mandate to work primarily with low income populations. Fare products are purchased by CSPC at a 20% discounted rate, with every purchased product matched with one donated at no charge, resulting in an overall discount of 60% per product. In fiscal 2018/2019, $422,175 worth of fare products were distributed to low income populations through CSPC, with the VRTC realizing $168,492 worth of revenue. It is important to acknowledge that this partnership model is in place in several other BC Transit systems, though the method of delivery and discounts provided vary by community. City of Kamloops and the Affordable Recreation for Community Health Transit Pass Program The City of Kamloops offers the Affordable Recreation for Community Health (ARCH) subsidy program to provide individuals with a limited income the opportunity to participate in a variety of recreational activities. In early 2019, it was identified that transportation costs were a considerable barrier that prevented those enrolled in the program from accessing recreation services. As a result, the City of Kamloops Council approved a pilot transit pass program that would provide people enrolled in the ARCH program with a permanent, photo ID bus pass at a rate of $80 annually, paid in one-, three- or six-month increments throughout the year17. This program was introduced at the start of September 2019 and has an approved budget of $636,000 based on the expected number of eligible participants and the annualized cost of an adult monthly pass. Scenarios for Increasing Transit Ridership Depending on their desired or legislated purpose for doing so, transit agencies have the ability adopt a variety of different approaches or strategies to increase transit ridership. Table 4 compares the considerations and expected impacts presented by three different approaches to increasing ridership being: the removal of transit fares to eliminate the potential cost barrier, investing in transit improvements to make it an appealing alternative to the personal vehicle, and a blended approach of both. It is important to acknowledge that while individual motivations and behaviours regarding transit are unique and may vary day-to-day, it is reasonable to assume that the range of strategies outlined in Table 4 account for the majority of these different perspectives.
6 18
Table 4: Scenarios for Increasing Transit Ridership Approaches for Transit Agencies to Increase Ridership Transit Agency Motivations Remove Transit Fares to Invest in Transit Service Blended Investment and Eliminate a Barrier to Use and Infrastructure Access Approach Philosophical Approach By removing fares, transit Investing in transit service Balancing the need for transit becomes more attractive and expansion and infrastructure service and infrastructure available to current users and such as operating facilities, investments to improve the to non-users who are more on-board technology, park & appeal and utilization of likely to take transit over ride lots, and transit priority transit with the need to other more expensive lanes and signals will provide access to vulnerable transportation options. improve the attractiveness of and low-income populations. transit as a mode of choice. Demographic Most Impacted Dependent users – those Discretionary users – those Mixed – use of partnerships without other transportation that would not choose transit with social agencies options due to cost will unless it provided them with increases the availability of benefit through having factors that they value in free or discounted fare increased mobility and other transportation options products to low-income lessened financial such as comfort, populations and continued constraints. convenience and reliability. investment makes transit more appealing to discretionary users. Impact on Ridership Moderate short-term increase Sustained long-term increase Short-term increase with – users to whom fares were – as investments in transit sustained long-term growth – previously a barrier for service occur to improve introduction of, or increase to, frequent use increase their frequency, decrease trip social agency partnerships usage along with those who times and increase coverage, results in short-term increase previously used other more non-users are inclined in ridership from low-income transportation means for to adopt transit use over users and ongoing short-distance trips. Issues of other modes. investments in transit result in overcrowding and changes in corresponding increases in ridership demographics could ridership. result in current discretionary users finding transit less desirable and lead to them choose other transportation means such as driving.
7 19
Approaches for Transit Agencies to Increase Ridership Impact on Fare Revenues Removal of all fare revenues. Fare revenues increase as Fare revenues increase as ridership increases. Fares ridership increases though at priced strategically to a lesser degree depending maintain or improve transit on the scale of social agency system operating cost partnership programs. recovery as service expands and investments occur. Impact on Transit Service and Investments Optimization – allocation of Expansion – investments Expansion – secure funding resources strategically to made in transit service levels model enables investments in accommodate capacity and number of buses. As service expansions and issues without significant systems grow, obligations to related infrastructure investment. Ability to invest in expanded operating requirements and benefits. continue to expand service and maintenance facilities could be at risk without and on-road infrastructure investment in necessary such as priority lanes and infrastructure such as traffic signals are met. operating facilities. Impacts on Transit Administration Removal of fare collection Increases in administrative Potential for limited short- decreases the labour and costs that are tied to the need term increases to support administrative costs for further support as transit social agency partnerships associated with providing service expands and along with continued growth transit services. infrastructure investments are to support transit investment made. priorities.
Impacts on Transit Planning and Decision Making Removal of fare validation Fare validation data is used Improved demographic and decreases the amount of by planning departments to transit use data from the use data available to inform support or inform decisions of social agency partnerships evidence-based decision regarding changes to transit further informs transit making for transit planning service. planning decision-making purposes. processes.
8 20
Impact on BC Transit’s Mandated Goals Contribution to the Reduction of Greenhouse Gas Emissions Moderate short-term impact Sustained long-term positive Early and sustained positive with uncertain long-term impact – investment in transit impact – new riders being outcome – removal of fares service and amenities makes attracted to transit through a attracts new riders, some of transit more appealing than combination of social agency whom may have previously driving and results in a partnerships and investments driven. However, removal of greater number of cars being in transit including the fare revenue limits transit taken off the road. introduction of low-carbon investment while potential Additionally, investment may technologies will have a issues with overcrowding and result in earlier introduction of positive impact on GHG pass-ups could result in low- or no-carbon vehicles. emissions. current discretionary users choosing to drive a personal vehicle. Contribution to the Reduction of Traffic Congestion Long-term negative impact – Long-term positive impact – Long-term positive impact – challenges with investing in as transit becomes more increased adoption of transit transit service leads to issues attractive through use as it becomes a more of overcrowding and pass- investments, such as transit appealing alternative to ups that could result in more priority lanes, more people driving through investments vehicles on the road as adopt transit as a primary in service and infrastructure current discretionary users mode of travel, which results and by through making transit turn to driving as their in fewer vehicles on the road. use more available through primary mode of travel. social agency programs. Contribution to Improvements in the Mobility of All Residents Short-term positive impact Neutral impact – the Positive long-term impact – with uncertain long-term maintaining of transit fares partnerships with social outcome – removal of fares results in the persistence of agencies result in transit fare allows those for whom current mobility challenges products being made payment is a barrier to relating to payment being a available for free or at access transit more barrier to usage. discounted rates to frequently. However, reduced populations that have a need funding may result in future for them. service cuts that could negatively affect users’ ability to travel in their community. Fare-Free Transit for Youth to Encourage Future Transit Use One additional concept to those listed above is the use of fare-free transit for youth as a mechanism to encourage regular transit use in the future. Research indicates that past travel experiences shape future behaviour and that exposure to transit during young adulthood leads to a higher amount of transit use and lower rates of automobile ownership later in life18. Policies around fare-free youth transit are generally introduced with the understanding that short-term increases to costs to accommodate increased ridership will lead to longer-term benefits.
9 21
Within the context of Table 4, fare-free youth transit would be a blended approach of making transit more accessible to a segment of the population, but retaining fares for other users to fund transit improvements. Youth fare-free programs can be expected to warrant investment in transit at a faster rate given the size of youth populations and their greater realized benefit of freedom of movement as non-drivers. Examples of fare-free youth transit, such as the program in place in Kingston, Ontario outlined in Appendix A, demonstrate the significance of having the requisite amount of transit capacity in place in order to accommodate increases in youth ridership19. When introducing fare-free youth transit, it is important to ensure that service levels are such that the risk of pass-ups is minimized given the vulnerability of this demographic. Fare-Free Implications for Custom Services Under its mandate, BC Transit is working to improve the service it provides to its customers that are unable to access and use conventional transit services in efforts to create an equitable transit experience for all riders. Accordingly, any introduction of fare-free transit for conventional services would necessitate the removal of fares for custom services as well. Given the transit-dependency of many custom service clients, there also exists a greater potential of advocacy for increases to custom services as demand for them grows following the removal of fares. Furthermore, the removal of fares would require the revision of fare programs such as the taxi saver program, whereby registered clients receive a 50% subsidy on the purchase of $80 worth of taxi coupons. As with conventional service, the removal of fares for custom transit would result in a funding deficit that would require recovery through increases to municipal property taxes. Given the high cost to provide custom services, the percentage of costs recovered through fare revenues are considerably lower than those of conventional. However, the lost fare revenue to be recovered would still result in material increases to property taxes. Table 5 provides the estimated increases in property taxes required to fully subsidize custom transit (excluding considerations for fare programs such as the taxi saver program) and should be viewed in addition to the increases needed to subsidize conventional services presented in Table 2. Table 5: Estimated Increases to the Transit Portion of Property Taxes Required to Subsidize Fare-Free Custom Transit Property Tax System Classification Increase Victoria $1 (1%) Tier 1 – Kamloops $4 (4%) Tier 2 – Comox Valley $3 (5%) Tier 3 – Squamish $1 (1%) Further Considerations on Fare-Free Transit One readily apparent benefit of the introduction of fare-free transit would be improvements to the safety of transit operators. Disputes over fare payment are understood to be one of the primary causes of conflicts between operators and transit users, with BC Transit’s current fare strategy focused on removing subjectivity during fare validation in order to lessen the opportunity for this type of conflict to occur20. Removal of fare validation all together would reduce the potential for issues between operators and the public and create a safer working environment for operators.
10 22
Conversely, a common issue resulting from the introduction of fare-free transit is increased vandalism and damage to the interior of buses. Research on existing fare-free programs suggests that changes to ridership demographics and the decreased perceived value of transit that occur with the removal of fares can lead to increased incidents of vandalism on board, resulting in higher maintenance and repair costs21. These issues are generally addressed through increased security presence and monitoring of onboard cameras along with policies around having damage immediately repaired as a deterrent measure. Conclusion Transit agencies have the benefit of a variety of approaches and means to increasing ridership. When introducing strategies to encourage increased transit use, it is important that clear and established objectives be considered against all of the potential short- and long-term impacts. For example, removing fares may increase transit ridership in the short-term, but those increases carry an obligation to continue to invest in transit service that may not be able to be met due to reduced funding streams. Conversely, investing in transit and making it more attractive to discretionary and non-users does not address the affordability concerns of low-income users. Ultimately, a balanced approach that considers the needs and desires of all current and future transit users has the greatest potential to result in a robust and highly utilized transit system over the long-term.
11 23
Appendix A: Examples of Fare-Free Transit In order to understand the potential outcomes of fare-free transit, it is useful to reference existing programs in other regions. Accordingly, Appendix A will outline notable fare-free transit examples in Kingston, Ontario, Tallinn, Estonia and Hasselt, Belgium. Within the context of BC Transit, these initiatives demonstrate the significance of having additional sources of revenue to offset foregone fare revenues, the impact that fare-free transit has relative to service investments, and the challenges faced when attempting to maintain or improve transit in light of increasing costs. Kingston Transit High School Bus Pass Program Introduced in stages starting in 2012, the Kingston Transit High School Bus Pass program provides students in Kingston, Ontario with an annual bus pass at no cost to the student22. This initiative coincided with a significant investment in transit service in the form of a 50% increase in service hours, a 30% increase in number of buses, a realignment of the system to introduce high frequency routes and improvements to bus stop amenities. At the time of introduction, this program was valued at $250,000 based on the estimated lost fare revenue from existing youth fares. This revenue is partially recovered through financial contributions from local school districts in the amount of $60,000 and through access to surplus provincial gas tax revenues that are indexed to municipal population growth and transit ridership increases. Neither of these revenue streams are considered stable given that the school district contributions are renewed on an annual basis and are determined by the school districts’ available budget and that the additional provincial gas tax revenues are dependent on two factors that are not anticipated to continue to grow at existing rates. The High School Bus Pass program is credited with contributing a portion to the total 70% increase in ridership that has occurred since its introduction, though these increases are understood to have occurred largely as a result of the investments in and improvements to transit service and infrastructure. Tallinn, Estonia Fare-Free Transit for Residents Following a referendum, the capital of Estonia, Tallinn, introduced fare-free transit for all residents in 201323. Prior to the introduction of fare-free transit for all, 36% of passengers were exempted from paying fares based on their socio-economic status and special discounts were made available to an additional 24% of passengers. Beyond increasing the mode shift from private vehicle to transit, the purpose of this initiative was to increase the number of people who registered as residents of Tallinn in order to receive the fare-free transit benefit. Through increasing its number of registered residents, Tallinn subsequently increased its income tax revenues. This increase in tax revenue was larger than the amount of transit fare revenue lost, which created a net positive financial outcome from the fare-free transit initiative. From a transit service perspective, the initiative was accompanied by a 9.6% increase in transit capacity that was focused on increasing service frequency and on the extension of priority bus lanes. The introduction of fare-free transit along with the investments in capacity resulted in a three percent increase in transit ridership, though research suggests only 1.2% of this is attributed to the fare-free initiative. Furthermore, passenger trip analysis suggests that the majority of the new trips were from people who had previously walked or cycled, meaning that the impact in terms of furthering the mode shift from private vehicles to transit was limited.
12 24
Hasselt, Belgium Fare-Free Transit In 1997, the city of Hasselt, Belgium abolished transit fares in efforts to grow ridership and reduce the number of vehicles being driven into the city centre during commuting times. While increases in service and ridership occurred since that date, the municipality experienced a quadrupling of costs and a peak home-work mode share of only 5.1%. As a result of these factors, the decision was made to reintroduce fares for all users above the age of 18 with the hope that the restored revenue stream will enable future investments that will attract new riders24.
13 25
References
1 Province of British Columbia. (2019, January 29). BC provincial government’s 2019/20 mandate letter to BC Transit. Retrieved from: https://www.bctransit.com/documents/1529703094471.
2 Bershidsky, L. (2018, December 14). Free public transportation isn’t for everyone. Retrieved from: https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2018-12-14/luxembourg-s-free-public-transportation-isn-t-for- everyone
3 O’Sullivan, F. (2019, January 18). Paris will make public transportation free for kids. Retrieved from: https://www.citylab.com/transportation/2019/01/paris-metro-tickets-prices-kids-bus-ride-disability- fares/580759/
4 CIVITAS. (2013, August). Hasselt. Retrieved from: https://civitas.eu/content/hasselt
5 Translink. (2019, April 18). Transit Fare Discounts and Fare Infractions. Retrieved from: https://www.translink.ca/-/media/Documents/about_translink/governance_and_board/council_minutes_and_ reports/2019/april/Agenda--Mayors-Council-PUBLIC-MTG--April-25-FINAL.pdf
6 Guillen, A. (2019, June 11). Free transit available for Victoria youth 18 years and younger by fall 2019. Retrieved from: https://www.cheknews.ca/free-transit-available-for-victoria-youth-18-years-and-younger-by- fall-2019-566200/
7 Lawrence, J. (2019, August 14). Transit commission puts brakes on free bus passes for youth region-wide. Retrieved from: https://vancouverisland.ctvnews.ca/transit-commission-puts-brakes-on-free-bus-passes-for- youth-region-wide-1.4549852
8 BC Transit. (n.d.). Regional Transit System. Retrieved from: https://www.bctransit.com/about/funding-and- governance/regional
9 BC Transit. (n.d.). Victoria Regional Transit System. Retrieved from: https://www.bctransit.com/about/funding-and-governance/victoria
10 Litman, T. (2019, March 18). Transit Price Elasticities and Cross-Elasticities. Victoria, BC: Victoria Transit Policy Institute
11 Resort Municipality of Whistler (n.d.). Taking transit in Whistler. Retrieved from: https://www.whistler.ca/services/transportation/transit
12 Rosenblum, J. et al. (2019, June 9). How low-income transit riders in Boston respond to discounted fares: a randomized controlled evaluation. Cambridge, MA: Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
13 The Research Intelligence Group. (2014, December). Calgary transit: 2014 customer satisfaction and non- user report. Retrieved from: https://www.calgarytransit.com/sites/default/files/reports/2014_calgary_transit_ customer_and_non-user_satisfaction_survey_final_report_v2.pdf
14 eNRG Research Group. (2019, April). Penalty-reward analysis: key service delivery attributes transit use and attitude survey, 2018-19. Vancouver, BC.
15 Province of British Columbia. (n.d.). BC bus pass program. Retrieved from: https://www2.gov.bc.ca/gov/content/transportation/passenger-travel/buses-taxis-limos/bus-pass
14 26
16 Community Social Planning Council. (n.d.). BC Transit ticket assistance program. Retrieved from: https://www.communitycouncil.ca/initiatives/bcttap.html
17 City of Kamloops. (n.d.). KamPASS program. Retrieved from: https://www.kamloops.ca/parks- recreation/accessible-recreation/kampass-program
18 Klein, N. & Smart, M.J. (2017, March). Remembrance of cars and buses past: how prior life experiences influence travel. Journal of Planning Education and Research 38, no. 2: 139-51.
19 City of Kingston. (2011, August). City of Kingston transit redevelopment plan 2011-2015. Retrieved from: https://www.cityofkingston.ca/documents/10180/14469/Plan_TransitRedevelopmentPlan_2011- 2015.pdf/7b81c8ae-9a20-408f-8214-411625f9e776
20 BC Transit. (2015). Improving yield: future directions for passenger revenue. Victoria, BC.
21 Volinksi, J. (2012). Implementation and outcomes of fare-free transit systems. Washington, DC: The National Academies of Press.
22 City of Kingston. (2016, May 3). Kingston transit – secondary school complimentary transit pilot program. Retrieved from: https://www.cityofkingston.ca/documents/10180/13859205/COU_A1416- 16142.pdf/508daf77-fca5-4f70-8bc3-c80af1661fb3
23 Cats, O. et al. (2016, April 20). The prospects of fare-free public transport: evidence from Tallinn. Stockholm, Sweden: Centre for Transportation Studies, Department of Transport Science, Royal Institute of Technology (KTH)
24 Canters, R. (2013, April 13). Hasselt cancels free public transport after 16 years. Retrieved from: https://www.eltis.org/discover/news/hasselt-cancels-free-public-transport-after-16-years-belgium-0
15 27
STAFF REPORT
TO: Transit Select Committee MEETING: January 16, 2020
FROM: Brandon Miller FILE: 8770 20 HDF Superintendent, Fleet & Transit Service Delivery
SUBJECT: handyDART Fleet 2020
RECOMMENDATION
That the Board support BC Transit replacing the existing 15 ARBOC light duty buses with 15 Blue Bird light duty buses.
SUMMARY
BC Transit, is replacing the existing RDN handyDART fleet. Currently, the handyDART fleet is comprised of 15 light-duty, diesel, Chevrolet ARBOC buses that range in years from 2012 – 2015. The 15 new replacement buses are light-duty, gas-powered buses that are manufactured by Blue Bird. The buses are estimated to arrive in May and June of 2020.
BACKGROUND
In concurrence with the Annual Operating Agreement (AOA) between BC Transit and the RDN; the RDN leases its handyDART fleet vehicles from BC Transit. The annual lease fee for each current handyDART bus is approximately $18,500 and is amortized over 7 years. As the vehicles age and depending on their usage, the vehicles start to incur higher maintenance costs and are in need of replacing. Typically, this time period ranges from 5 – 7 years.
The fuel source for the existing handyDART fleet is diesel. However, BC Transit wants to change the fuel source for their light-duty buses. Compressed Natural Gas (CNG) or ‘green’ light-duty buses are currently not an option; therefore the new handyDART fleet will be gas- powered.
In addition to high maintenance costs, the existing handyDART fleet is comprised of low-floor buses that utilize a ramp for loading and unloading passengers with mobility aids. Pushing passengers up and down a ramp is a safety hazard for our operators. Passengers have also had difficulty due to the seating configuration. In order to load wheel chairs, ambulatory passengers at the front would have to get off the bus or move.
The new handyDART fleet utilizes a rear side lift that allows passengers with mobility aids to access the bus with much greater ease. This is a safer and more convenient option for our operators when they are loading and unloading passengers with mobility aids on and off the bus. Custom Transit systems across North America have moved toward rear side lift light duty buses. More benefits on the new handyDART fleet include:
28 Report to Transit Select Committee - January 16, 2020 handyDART Fleet 2020 Page 2
Allows for better access for passengers travelling in manual wheelchairs Better access for ambulatory passengers is obtained by separating wheelchair space from ambulatory access. (no tripping hazard presented by trying to escort mobility challenged ambulatory passengers between wheelchairs) It is easier to rear-load wheelchairs than having to turn them 180˚ when front-loading (again, reduces operator injuries) High floor buses offer a better ride due to conventional suspension design, no air bag suspension Lower purchase and maintenance costs, and increased reliability
The specifications for the new buses are still under development, however some of the main features are:
Model: Micro Bird G5 Fuel: Gasoline Wheelbase: 191” Front Door Entry: Manual Flip-out Extra Step Seating Capacity: 20 Wheelchair Capacity: 4 Rear Lift Capacity: 1,000 lb
Since BC Transit owns the buses, the RDN does not get to decide which buses to purchase however BC Transit did work with operators across the Province to determine the specification of bus shown above.
ALTERNATIVES
1. That the Board support BC Transit replacing the existing 15 ARBOC light duty buses with 15 Blue Bird light duty buses.
2. That alternate direction be provided.
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS
At the time of this report, there are no financial details for the expense of the new handyDART buses, however costs are projected to be lower then the current RDN annual lease fee of $18,500 per bus/year. Buses are leased for 7 years to the Regional District of Nanaimo and are cost-shared with BC Transit at a rate of 46.69% BC Transit, 53.31% RDN.
29 Report to Transit Select Committee - January 16, 2020 handyDART Fleet 2020 Page 3
STRATEGIC PLAN IMPLICATIONS
Transportation and Transit - Provide opportunities for residents to move effectively through and around the Region.
______Brandon Miller [email protected] December 30, 2019
Reviewed by: D. Marshall, Manager, Transit Operations D. Pearce, General Manager, P. Carlyle, Chief Administrative Officer
30
STAFF REPORT
TO: Transit Select Committee MEETING: January 16, 2020
FROM: Darren Marshall FILE: 3900 01 BYL Manager Transit Operations
SUBJECT: RDN Transit Bylaws
RECOMMENDATIONS
1. That “Southern Community Transit Service Area Amendment Bylaw No. 1230.06, 2020” be introduced, read three times, and forwarded to the Inspector of Municipalities for approval. 2. That “Northern Community Transit Service Amendment Bylaw No. 897.07, 2020” be introduced, read three times, and forwarded to the Inspector of Municipalities for approval.
SUMMARY
The proposed Southern Community Transit Service Area Amendment Bylaw No. 1230.06, 2020 (Attachment 1) is intended to update the bylaw to reflect Custom Transit Services in the Southern Community Transit Service Area.
The Northern Community Transit Service Amendment Bylaw No. 897, 1993 (Attachment 2) requires two things; a minor housekeeping amendment to include Electoral Area H in the preamble; and a clause to repeal the Regional District of Nanaimo District 69 Custom Transit and Paratransit Local Service Area Establishment Bylaw No. 908, 1993 (Attachment 3). Bylaw 908 is redundant as the Custom Transit and Paratransit services are included in the Northern Community Transit Service.
BACKGROUND
Bylaw No. 1230 (2001):
This bylaw was based on the Conventional and Custom Transit services in School District 68 and how that service is apportioned in accordance to the BC Transit Annual Operating Agreement (AOA).
As part of continuous improvement of the RDN’s Transit system a regular review and update of Transit Services Bylaws is conducted to ensure the bylaw meets changing needs and statutory requirements. The proposed Bylaw No. 1230.06, 2020 updates the apportionment for Custom Service in School District 68. The Bylaw has been adhered to since its inception and there is no change to how each Electoral Area will be allocated for their portion of the custom transit service.
31 Report to Transit Select Committee - January 16, 2020 RDN Transit Bylaws Page 2
The changes to Southern Community Transit Service Area Conversion Bylaw No. 1230, 2001 are as follows:
7. Apportionment
For Conventional Service
(1) In this Section “Annual Operating Agreement” means an Operating Agreement as defined in the British Columbia Transit Act.
(2) Each participating area shall be apportioned the costs of the service based on the percentage derived from the following formula: For Custom Service 77% x that proportion of revenue hours attributed to a participating area to the total revenue hours identified in the then current year Annual Operating Agreement Plus 23% x that proportion of revenue kilometers attributed to a participating area to the total revenue kilometers identified in the then current year Annual Operating Agreement. Plus For Custom Service The proportion of the number of rides reported for a participant to the total number of rides for all participants multiplied by the proportion that custom transit revenue hours represent of the total revenue hours for both conventional and custom service as derived from the Annual Operating Agreement for the prior year.
This Bylaw provides the framework for the Transportation Services and Finance to annually allocate Custom Transit rides and revenue hours for the prior year identified in the AOA. Bylaw No. 897.07
This service bylaw requires a minor housekeeping amendment to add Electoral Area H to the preamble. This is also an opportunity to repeal Bylaw No. 908 as this bylaw is redundant.
ALTERNATIVES 1. That “Northern Community Transit Service Amendment Bylaw No. 897.07, 2020” be introduced, read three times, and forwarded to the Inspector of Municipalities for approval. 2. That “Southern Community Transit Service Area Amendment Bylaw No. 1230.06, 2020” be introduced, read three times, and forwarded to the Inspector of Municipalities for approval. 3. That alternate direction be provided.
32 Report to Transit Select Committee - January 16, 2020 RDN Transit Bylaws Page 3
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS
There are no financial implications to the RDN resulting from the adoption of Bylaw No. 1230.06, 2020, Bylaw No. 987.07 or the repeal of Bylaw No. 908, 1993 as the RDN will allocate the Municipalities and Electoral Areas for rides and revenue hours for the prior year identified in the AOA.
STRATEGIC PLAN IMPLICATIONS
Transportation and Transit - Provide opportunities for residents to move effectively through and around the Region.
The proposed Bylaw will support the activities of the Transportation Services in the region.
______Darren Marshall [email protected] December 26, 2019
Reviewed by: T. Mayea, Legislative Coordinator J. Bradburne, Director of Finance D. Pearce, General Manager, Transportation and Emergency Services P. Carlyle, Chief Administrative Officer
Attachments 1. Southern Community Transit Service Area Amendment Bylaw No. 1230.06, 2020 2. Northern Community Transit Service Amendment Bylaw No. 897.07, 2020 3. Regional District of Nanaimo District 69 Custom Transit and Paratransit Local Service Area Establishment Bylaw No. 908, 1993
33
REGIONAL DISTRICT OF NANAIMO
BYLAW NO. 1230.06
A BYLAW TO AMEND REGIONAL DISTRICT OF NANAIMO SOUTHERN COMMUNITY TRANSIT SERVICE AREA CONVERSION BYLAW NO. 1230, 2001
WHEREAS the Board of the Regional District of Nanaimo wishes to amend “Southern Community Transit Service Area Conversion Bylaw No. 1230, 2001”;
AND WHEREAS at least 2/3 of the service participants have consented to the adoption of this bylaw in accordance with the Local Government Act;
NOW THEREFORE, the Board of the Regional District of Nanaimo, in open meeting assembled, enacts as follows:
1. Citation
This Bylaw may be cited as “Southern Community Transit Service Area Amendment Bylaw No. 1230.06, 2020”.
2. Amendment
“Southern Community Transit Service Area Conversion Bylaw No. 1230, 2001” is amended as follows:
(1) By deleting Section 7 and substituting it with the following:
“7. Apportionment (1) In this Section “Annual Operating Agreement” means an Operating Agreement as defined in the British Columbia Transit Act. (2) Each participating area shall be apportioned the costs of the service based on the percentage derived from the following formula: For Conventional service 77% x that proportion of revenue hours attributed to a participating area to the total revenue hours identified in the then current year Annual Operating Agreement. Plus 23% x that proportion of revenue kilometers attributed to a participating area to the total revenue kilometers identified in the then current year Annual Operating Agreement. Plus
34 Bylaw No. 1230.06 Page 2
For Custom service The proportion of the number of rides reported for a participant to the total number of rides for all participants multiplied by the proportion that custom transit revenue hours represent of the total revenue hours for both conventional and custom service as derived from the Annual Operating Agreement for the prior year.”
Introduced and read three times this ____ day of ______, 20__.
Received the approval of the Inspector of Municipalities this ____ day of ______, 20__.
Adopted this ____ day of ______, 20__.
CHAIR CORPORATE OFFICER
35 REGIONAL DISTRICT OF NANAIMO
BYLAW NO. 897.07
A BYLAW TO AMEND REGIONAL DISTRICT OF NANAIMO NORTHERN COMMUNITY TRANSIT SERVICE ESTABLISHMENT BYLAW NO. 897, 1993
WHEREAS the Board of the Regional District wishes to amend "Northern Community Transit Service Establishment Bylaw No. 897, 1993";
AND WHEREAS at least 2/3 of the service participants have consented to the adoption of this bylaw in accordance with the Local Government Act;
NOW THEREFORE, the Board of the Regional District of Nanaimo, in open meeting assembled, enacts as follows:
1. Citation
This Bylaw may be cited as “Northern Community Transit Service Amendment Bylaw No. 897.07, 2020".
2. Amendment
“Northern Community Transit Service Establishment Bylaw No. 897, 1993” is amended as follows:
(1) By deleting and replacing the second paragraph of the preamble with the following:
“AND WHEREAS the service area shall be comprised of the participating areas of Electoral Areas E, G and H, the City of Parksville and the Town of Qualicum Beach;”
3. Repeal
“Regional District of Nanaimo District 69 Custom Transit and Paratransit Local Service Area Establishment Bylaw No. 908, 1993”, and any amendments thereto are hereby repealed.
Introduced and read three times this ____ day of ______, 20__.
Received the approval of the Inspector of Municipalities this ____ day of ______, 20__.
Adopted this ____ day of ______, 20__.
______CHAIR CORPORATE OFFICER
36 Bylaw No. 908, 1993 Page 1
REGIONAL DISTRICT OF NANAIMO
BYLAW NO. 908
(Consolidated for convenience only up to and including .05)
A BYLAW TO ESTABLISH AND OPERATE CUSTOM TRANSIT AND PARATRANSIT AS A LOCAL SERVICE
WHEREAS pursuant to Section 790 of the Municipal Act the Lieutenant Governor in Council by regulation dated the 7th day of February, 1992 granted additional powers to the Regional District to establish and operate transit as a local service;
AND WHEREAS the Regional District intends to operate custom transit and paratransit services;
AND WHEREAS the service area shall be comprised of the participating areas of Electoral Areas 'E', 'F' , 'G' and 'H', the City of Parksville and the Town of Qualicum Beach;
AND WHEREAS pursuant to Section 795 (2) (b), the Regional Board, by resolution passed by at least 2/3 of the votes cast, permitted assent to be given by the electors in the entire proposed service area;
AND WHEREAS pursuant to Section 796 (2), the Regional Board has obtained the assent of the electorate; NOW THEREFORE the Board of Directors of the Regional District of Nanaimo enacts as follows;
1. Local Service Established
The local service established and to be operated is the provision of custom transit and paratransit services.
2. Boundaries of Service Area
The boundaries of the service area are the boundaries of the Electoral Area 'H'.
3. Participating Areas
Electoral Area 'H' including participating area for the service.
4. Cost Recovery
The costs of the local service, net of grants and other revenue, may be recovered by one or more of the following:
(a) the requisition of monies under Section 809 and 809.1 of the Municipal Act to be collected
37 Bylaw No. 908, 1993 Page 2 by a property value tax to be levied and collected under Sections 810 (1) and 810.1 (1) of the Municipal Act.
(b) the requisition of monies under Sections 809 and 809.1 of the Municipal Act to be collected by a frontage tax or parcel tax to be imposed under Sections 810 (2) and 810.1 (2) of the Municipal Act;
(c) the imposition of fees and other charges which may be fixed by Separate bylaw for the purpose of recovering these costs.
5. Maximum Amount Requisitioned
The maximum amount that may be requisitioned under Section 804 (1) (a) of the Municipal Act for the annual operating costs of the local service shall be the greater of:
(a) $190,000; or
(b) the property value tax rate of $0.86 per $1,000 that when applied to the net taxable value of land and improvements within the service area will yield the maximum amount that may be requisitioned under Section 804 (1) (a) and (b) for the local service.
6. Powers
To operate this service, the Regional District may:
(a) acquire, install, operate and maintain equipment for the purpose of measuring and checking transit operations, customer fare collections, and other data relative to the operation of custom transit and paratransit systems;
(b) acquire, own and operate custom transit and paratransit systems and enter into Transit Service Agreements and Annual Operating Agreements in respect of the provision and maintenance of public passenger transportation systems, and research or demonstration projects relating to the provision of public passenger transportation, as provided in the British Columbia Transit Act and Regulations thereto;
(c) undertake such duties and obligations as are provided in the British Columbia Transit Act and Regulations thereto.
38 Bylaw No. 908, 1993 Page 3 7. Definitions
Custom transit service is defined as an on demand transit service for qualifying handicapped persons and is provided using either Regional District owned and operated customized transit vehicles or privately operated vehicles approved for this use by the Manager of Transportation Services.
Paratransit service is a fixed route service which may include on demand off route service provided using either Regional District owned and operated transit vehicles or privately owned and operated vehicles approved for this use by the Manager of Transportation Services.
8. Citation
This bylaw may be cited as "Regional District of Nanaimo District 69 Custom Transit and Paratransit Local Service Area Establishment Bylaw No. 908, 1993".
Introduced and read three times this 14th day of September, 1993.
Reconsidered and passed at third reading as amended this 12th day of October, 1993.
Approval of the Inspector of Municipalities obtained this 21st day of October, 1993. Assent of the electors obtained this 20th day of November, 1993.
Reconsidered and adopted this 14th day of December, 1993.
CHAIRPERSON SECRETARY
39
STAFF REPORT
TO: Transit Select Committee MEETING: January 16, 2020
FROM: Darren Marshall FILE: 8770 20 DNE Manager, Transit Operations
SUBJECT: Downtown Nanaimo Exchange
RECOMMENDATION
1. That the Board not extend the agreement at 575 Fitzwilliam Street (Prideaux Exchange) beyond June 30, 2020. 2. That the Regional District of Nanaimo continue to work with the City of Nanaimo to develop a long term agreement for the Downtown Nanaimo Exchange.
SUMMARY
At the November 18th, 2019, City of Nanaimo Regular Council Meeting, Council approved the recommendation for an on-street Transit Exchange on Front Street adjacent to 1 Port Drive; and work with the Regional District of Nanaimo (RDN) to prepare a design for an on-street Transit Exchange.
As part of this plan, the RDN will work with the City of Nanaimo to review and amend any land use agreements relating to 575 Fitzwilliam Street ‘Prideaux Exchange’ and 1 Port Drive ‘Downtown Exchange’.
BACKGROUND
The RDN Transit System moved the Downtown Nanaimo Exchange from 575 Fitzwilliam Street ‘Prideaux Exchange’ to 1 Port Drive, adjacent the Port Place Centre as a temporary measure for construction on the Bastion Street Bridge (May 2019). The RDN entered into an agreement with the City of Nanaimo that extended the RDN’s stay at 1 Port Drive until June 30, 2020.
This location provides the necessary space and favorable geographical location to operate and efficient transit exchange. This site has also proven to create a savings of approximately 200 hours per month. Those cost savings have been held by BC Transit in the RDN’s reserves. In a recent City of Nanaimo study1, the consultant recommended 1 Port Drive location as a viable exchange location.
1 City of Nanaimo Port Drive Waterfront Master Plan (2018) Retrieved from https://www.nanaimo.ca/docs/default-document-library/port-drive-waterfront-master-plan.pdf
40 Report to Transit Select Committee - January 16, 2020 Downtown Nanaimo Exchange Page 2
At the Regular Board meeting, October 22, 2019, the Board passed the following motions.
That the Regional District of Nanaimo consent to permit the temporary use of 575 Fitzwilliam ‘Prideaux Exchange’ for a parking lot for use by RCMP members and staff, until the Regional District of Nanaimo resumes use of the Prideaux Exchange.
That the Regional District of Nanaimo approve the amended Licence of Occupation and Use Agreement for 1 Port Drive with the City of Nanaimo extending the agreement to June 30, 2020.
As per the City of Nanaimo’s recent motion, it is evident that the RDN will not be returning to the 575 Fitzwilliam Street (Prideaux Exchange), therefore, the RDN will no longer need to extend the contract past June 30, 2020. Additionally, the City of Nanaimo and the RDN will collaborate to establish a long term agreement for the Downtown Nanaimo Exchange.
Any resulting changes to the agreements of 1 Port Drive and 575 Fitzwilliam Nanaimo locations will be presented at a future Transit Select Committee Meeting.
ALTERNATIVES
1. That the Board support the Regional District of Nanaimo to not extend the agreement at 575 Fitzwilliam Street (Prideaux Exchange) beyond June 30, 2020.
2. That the Board support the Regional District of Nanaimo continue to work with the City of Nanaimo to develop a long term agreement for the Downtown Nanaimo Exchange.
3. That alternate direction be provided.
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS
At the writing of this report there were no financial implications. The RDN will continue to rent the 1 Port Drive location for $2500.00 per month for the duration of the agreement until June 30, 2020. 1 Port Drive rental fees have been included in the proposed 2020 budget and were included in the approved 2019 budget.
STRATEGIC PLAN IMPLICATIONS
Transportation and Transit - Provide opportunities for residents to move effectively through and around the Region.
______Darren Marshall [email protected] December 27, 2019
Reviewed by: D. Pearce, General Manager, Transportation and Emergency Services P. Carlyle, Chief Administrative Officer
41
STAFF REPORT
TO: Transit Select Committee MEETING: January 16, 2020
FROM: Darren Marshall FILE: 2240 55 NTE Manager, Transit Operations
SUBJECT: North Nanaimo Transit Exchange Development
RECOMMENDATION
That the Board support entering into a partnership with BC Transit and Ivanhoé Cambridge to develop a Project Term Sheet for an upgraded transit exchange.
SUMMARY
The Regional District of Nanaimo (RDN) and BC Transit are working with Ivanhoé Cambridge (Woodgrove Centre) to explore potential ideas for a new North Nanaimo transit exchange.
The North Nanaimo Transit Exchange upgrade began with a review of suitable locations to accommodate a northern Nanaimo transit exchange (Attachment 1) that would meet the needs of the public, suitable for transit operations, and met the needs of future transit expansions.
A Project Term Sheet (PTS) needs to be created between BC Transit, the RDN, and Ivanhoé Cambridge to move forward with a new exchange. The PTS defines the project scope, budget and schedule in a formalized agreement. A signed PTS would enable BC Transit, on behalf of the RDN, to pursue federal and provincial funding for the construction of a required infrastructure.
BACKGROUND
The current North Nanaimo Transit Exchange at Woodgrove Centre is at capacity. The transit system currently carries over 13,000 transit riders a day with over 1,000 of those riders using the Woodgrove Centre Transit Exchange. Anticipated growth forecasts transit ridership to exceed 40,000 rides a day, which could mean as many as 3,000 people a day using a future transit exchange in North Nanaimo. Watt Consulting conducted a review of the North Nanaimo area (Attachment 1) and identified Woodgrove Centre to be the most suitable transit exchange location based on the following criteria: Operational Turning Movements Ridership Impacts Requisite Size Catalyst for Area Development Overall Trip Time Alignment with Future Community Plans Garage Travel Overall Operating Cost Implications
42 Report to Transit Select Committee - January 16, 2020 North Nanaimo Transit Exchange Development Page 2
There were multiple sites highlighted in the Watt Consulting report for Woodgrove Centre however due to the mall’s tenant agreements the only site available at Woodgrove Centre is the property on and around where the current Woodgrove Transit Exchange is located.
To move forward with an acceptable exchange design in North Nanaimo, additional concept development is required. The RDN and BC Transit are entering an Infrastructure Exploration Agreement (IEA) with Ivanhoé Cambridge (Woodgrove Centre) to jointly fund a study to develop an exchange concept acceptable to all parties at the existing Woodgrove Centre exchange location. The scope of the study to be undertaken is expected to produce the following benefits: Transit exchange concept options, evaluations, and recommendation of a preferred concept; and Class D cost estimate for preferred exchange option. The IEA is expected to be finalized in January. Next step There is an opportunity to fund a significant portion of new transit infrastructure investments through the federal government’s Investing in Canada Infrastructure Program (ICIP). If the funding application to the Federal and Provincial governments is successful a Project Agreement would then be signed between the local government and BC Transit to proceed to build new infrastructure and put it into service. The Project Agreement would include detailed scope, a construction project management plan, schedule, delivery date, risk sharing, communications and funding for the project in a formalized agreement.
Once the RDN and BC Transit have agreed to an initial concept a PTS would be brought forward to the Board for approval.
ALTERNATIVES
1. That the Board support entering into a partnership with BC Transit and Ivanhoé Cambridge to develop a Project Term Sheet for an upgraded transit exchange. 2. That alternate direction be provided.
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS
For the IEA the three parties agree to share the costs of the consultants and advisors up to a maximum aggregate total of $50,000. Ivanhoé Cambridge will fund one-third of the cost of the study and BC Transit and RDN will share the rest of the costs according to the BC Transit (46.69%) and Local Government (53.31%) cost sharing formula; as shown in Table 1. Funds for a new North Nanaimo Transit exchange were carried forward from the 2019 Financial Plan to the draft 2020 financial plan.
43 Report to Transit Select Committee - January 16, 2020 North Nanaimo Transit Exchange Development Page 3
Table 1: Maximum Parties Percent Share Ivanhoe Cambridge $16,666 33.3%
Regional District of Nanaimo $17,770 35.6%
BC Transit $15,564 31.1%
Total $50,000 100%
Future costs associated with the project will be brought forward with the PTS and will depend on funding received from the Provincial and Federal Government.
It should also be noted that Ivanhoé Cambridge has not previously or currently requested annual or monthly rental fees for the current Woodgrove exchange location.
STRATEGIC PLAN IMPLICATIONS
Transportation and Transit - Work with BC Transit to expand transit service (e.g. transit hours) to connect important community hubs.
______Darren Marshall [email protected] December 20, 2019
Reviewed by: D. Pearce, General Manager, Transportation and Emergency Services P. Carlyle, Chief Administrative Officer
Attachments: 1. Exert of BC Transit North Nanaimo Transit Exchange Report
44 Attachment 1 - BC Transit North Nanaimo Transit Exchange Update
WOODGROVE CENTRE EXISTING EXCHANGE AND ALTERNATE NORTH NANANIMO EXCHANGE OPTIONS EXCHANGE NANANIMO NORTH ALTERNATE AND EXCHANGE EXISTING CENTRE WOODGROVE
North Nanaimo and Country Club 8 Transit Exchange Study 45
3.2 HIGH-LEVEL EVALUATION OF ALTERNATE SITES The following presents a high-level evaluation of the alternate sites used to narrow down sites for further focus/design. See Appendix B for the detailed description of criteria. TABLE 2. SUMMARY OF MULTI-CRITERIA EVALUATION EXCHANGE PERFORMANCE 1. Mall 2. Mall 3. “Boomerang” CRITERIA Alternate Site Alternate Site Aulds Road at 4. “Calinda” 5. “Green A – Island B - Aulds Island Hwy Alternate Thumb” Hwy Road Alternate Site Site Alternate Site Operational Turning Movements System vehicles can efficiently access the exchange. - ✓ - ✓ Requisite size Size is sufficient to meet future layover and in service bus ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ needs and operations function. Overall Trip Time Trip time for routes accessing the exchange is minimized. - ✓ ✓ Garage Travel Time Travel time between the garage facility and the exchange is ✓ minimized. - - Ridership Impacts Exchange site positively impacts ridership in terms of - system legibility/clarity, exchange ease of use and relation ✓ - to major trip generators. Catalyst for Area Redevelopment Location can help catalyze the transformation and - ✓ ✓ - - intensification of the surrounding area.
Alignment with Future Community Plans Aligns with transit and community plan recommendations. - ✓ ✓ - Overall Operating Cost Implications ✓ ✓ Estimated level of impact against existing operating costs. - -
Meets Criteria Well Somewhat Meets Criteria Does Not Meet Criteria / Attribute ✓ -
In general, the evaluation showed the following: • The Green Thumb Alternate site performed the least well due to its distance from key passenger destinations and lack of easy road connections to it. • While the Calinda Alternate site was nearby existing cooridors and the Transit Centre, this was offset by its distance from existing key destinations and future density. • Mall Alternate Site A was closer to key Woodgrove Centre destinations than these other locations but access to the site for buses in service or travelling from the garage would present similar issues to that of the existing Woodgrove Exchange given current traffic control patterns in the area and lack of a signal for the foreseeable future. • The two locations closest to Aulds Road (Mall Alternate Site B and the Boomerang site) presented the best balance between access to key destinations and access to the RDN Transit Facility.
North Nanaimo and Country Club 9 Transit Exchange Study 46
3.3 CONCLUSIONS: SITES MOVED FORWARD TO DESIGN Based on the above high-level evaluation, the following two sites were moved forward for further analysis: • 2. Woodgrove Centre Aulds Road Site (Mall Alternate Site B). • 3. “Boomerang” Aulds Road at Island Highway Alternate Site.
These scored the highest based on the following attributes: • Pedestrian access and proximity to the main trip generators at Woodgrove Centre, particularly the west side of the mall where Walmart and the movie theatre are located. • Ease of transit vehicle access to existing routes and the RDN Transit Centre. • Proximity to existing and future higher density land use, as well as proximity to key active transportation corridors.
Of the the two, the Woodgrove Centre Aulds Road site was the focus of the following design work and analysis since it offers better pedestrian connection and transit vehicle access than the Boomerang site. This is due its location on the mall property and the traffic signal at Metral Drive at Aulds Road.
However, a cost analysis of the Boomerang site was also undertaken (based on a previous design completed by MoTI) since the Woodgrove Centre Aulds Road site site is on private property (Woodgrove Centre). Therefore, the Boomerang site is a useful back up option if a site is not available on Mall property.
North Nanaimo and Country Club 10 Transit Exchange Study 47