Cochrane s Transit Alternatives Analysis

Transcription

1 Cochrane s Final Report Suite Sunridge Way, NE Calgary, AB T1Y 0A5 T: John Steiner jsteiner@urbansystems.ca urbansystems.ca

2 Page i Table of Contents 1.0 Introduction Background Purpose & Process Overview A Long-term Vision Town Plans and Policies The Long-term Plan Factors to Achieve Initial Success Local Influences Community Survey Market Specific Discussions Industry Experience Comparable Levels of Service Different Types of Services Markets Keys to Success Opportunities for Building from Existing Services Southland Regional Bus Service Rocky View Regional HandiBus Society for Cochrane Optional Bus Services to Consider Option 1 Core Area Dial-A-Bus Services (Local) Option 2 Established Area Dial-A-Bus Services (Local) Option 3 Regional LRT Focused Service (Regional) Comparative Assessment Community Feedback Summary C:\John\2009\Project Temp\Cochrane \Report\ _Draft Final Report_2013-Mar-21.docx

3 Page Introduction 1.1 Background has been a topic of discussion in Cochrane for many years. Not only has it been positioned as an alternative form of transportation for youth, seniors, work travel and people with disabilities, transit has been characterized as the foundation for many aspects of the community as reflected in several community plans and strategies. Over the last two years, transit has been considered in greater detail and preliminary plans have been developed to provide local transit services within the Town as well as services to connect with the Crowfoot LRT Station in Calgary (see sequence of recent activities below in Figure 1.1). The initial Feasibility Study developed for the Town included two phases of work. The first phase (complete in July 2010) explored the need for public transit and a recommended approach for introducing services. Demands were projected based on a review of potential markets and a service planning concept was recommended for further design, costing and review in Phase 2. The short-term and mid-term transit service concepts were developed in Phase 2 of the Feasibility Study for Council to consider. The recommended concept included both local and regional transit services as well as the need for local transit facilities to support the operation, storage and maintenance of vehicles. Shortterm services and supporting structures were to be in place by September Figure 1.1 Historical Context of Discussion C:\John\2009\Project Temp\Cochrane \Report\ _Draft Final Report_2013-Mar-21.docx

4 Page 2 After hearing from the public, it was determined that further consultation was required before making decisions on public transit in Cochrane. As such, Council directed staff to design, promote and implement a Public Engagement campaign on transit which was subsequently identified as Let s Talk Cochrane. The principle effort was designed to collect feedback on the transit proposal, gather statistically significant data and to obtain objective perspectives on the recommended concept plan and other commitments. While many residents were excited about the potential for transit to serve local and/or regional travel needs, most were concerned about the costs and risks to the community. In fact, the perspectives provided by residents ranged anywhere from Cochrane not needing transit to local and regional transit is required to serve the needs of a growing urban community. The fundamental response to the initial proposal indicated that a majority of residents were concerned about the overall cost and that the initial proposal to introduce transit was considered to be too much, too quick. The engagement process found that resident concerns and therefore any proposal for the introduction of transit to Cochrane would need to: Minimize costs to the community with the introduction of transit. Manage the Town s resources wisely by being more selective on the most appropriate first step. Build transit system and ridership incrementally based on experience once transit service is introduced locally and regionally; Focus the design of service on priority travel markets that will build success from the outset in terms of cost recovery as well as supporting local needs and not trying to do everything. (e.g. seniors (core area), students (downtown area & post secondary) and work-based (between Cochrane and Calgary)). Consider alternative transit services to fixed-route, fixed-schedule designed for low density, low demand areas of the Town such as shuttle and flexible transit alternatives. Examine various delivery models to maximize benefit and minimize exposure that could exceed the capacity of the Town. C:\John\2009\Project Temp\Cochrane \Report\ _Draft Final Report_2013-Mar-21.docx

5 Page Purpose & Process Overview This phase is a follow-up to the Public Engagement efforts designed to advance the development and review of transit options for Cochrane. In fact, the purpose of this phase is to identify a more manageable transit concept for the Town to consider as a first step to implement transit by: Working with the community to identify and focus in on short-term aspirations and expectations for a transit service; Developing a reasonable set of alternatives that describe the potential services, facilities, management and delivery responsibilities; Evaluating and identifying a preferred option based on locally defined measures of success for Council to consider in future budget discussions. The is separated into a three phase process designed to develop and evaluate a more manageable range of concepts for the Town to consider. Phase 1 Taking Stock begins where the community left off. This phase begins with a summary of what the Town heard through the public engagement process and what it means for the development of transit alternatives. The principles and key measures of success for a first step toward transit are to be described based on input from the community and priority markets that may be served in the short-term. During this stage of review, the amount and types of transit services in other communities will be compared for the purpose of gauging what s a reasonable and expected investment for Cochrane as a first step toward implementing transit. Phase 2 Considering the will include the identification and development of alternative transit services. Various combinations of manageable scale local and/or regional service concepts will be identified along with all the support facility and resources requirements. The preliminary concepts will be screened with input and feedback from the community and a short-list of options will be evaluated and compared. The final Phase 3 Potential for Implementation will include a summary of shortlisted optional concepts for Council to consider. The service design, support C:\John\2009\Project Temp\Cochrane \Report\ _Draft Final Report_2013-Mar-21.docx

6 Page 4 facilities, resource needs, operations and maintenance requirements along with costs and revenues will be summarized for each concept. An implementation strategy will be outlined to advance each concept and any risks will be highlighted. The results will provide Council with the necessary information to understand a more appropriate first step toward transit in the community in which to consider in future strategy and budget deliberations. The involves various decision-makers and stakeholders from the community. The PUBLIC will continue to be involved in this stage of option development and evaluation consistent with the more recent dialogue of Let s Talk Cochrane. A Working Group consisting of volunteers from various community interests such as neighbourhoods, seniors, businesses, and commuters is established to provide input and guidance to the. An Open House will be held to provide the community with clearer and more manageable scale transit service concepts as well as a comparative evaluation of the options for input and feedback. At the same time, the Let s Talk Cochrane website will be used to share information with the community and to gain input to the discussion. STAFF will provide background information and guidance throughout the study process. An overall Project Leader is established as the point-person and Town s representative to ensure ongoing communication with key public, agency and Council stakeholders. A Steering Committee is established to provide input and guidance to the technical work as well and support material as required. Meetings will also be held with other public sector AGENCIES such as the Calgary Regional Partnership as well as transit operators as required to share information and to gain feedback. Meetings with private stakeholders that operate transit/transportation services within the Town will also be held during the study process. Ultimately, Council is responsible for accepting the findings of the. Meetings with Council are planned early in the study process to discuss measures of success for a first step toward transit and to listen to other concerns. Meetings will also be held with Council to review interim findings and to receive a final document. C:\John\2009\Project Temp\Cochrane \Report\ _Draft Final Report_2013-Mar-21.docx

7 Page A Long-term Vision 2.1 Town Plans and Policies The Town of Cochrane is guided by plans and polices that influence directions and decisions. In this regard, the commitment to transit appears to have been part of the discussion in the community for many years. Further, the role and importance of transit goes well beyond transportation as an alternative mode for getting around the community and providing connections externally. Starting with the Cochrane Sustainability Plan (2009), the community has identified important roles for transit in the long-term. The Sustainability Plan commits toward reduced greenhouse gases by 30% from 2009 levels. While the Plan commits to the need for diverse options for getting around the community, the commitment is that 50% of the population would be located within 400m or a 5 minute walking distance to transit. The Cochrane Social Master Plan (2009) is one of many master plans for Cochrane that outlines five priority areas to support community aspirations to for children, youth, seniors and the First Nations community. The Plan highlights the need for affordable transportation choice in order to access quality care services for youth and seniors and to provide connections to areas within and outside Cochrane. The Town s Municipal Development Plan (2008) is a comprehensive, longrange policy document to guide land use planning decisions. Many of the principles of the Plan and supporting goals around growth management, social and cultural well-being, environmental stewardship and economic vitality rely on transportation alternatives such as transit for getting people around the community. The Parks, Recreation and Cultural Facilities Plan (2008) provides guidance on the future upgrading and development of parks, recreation and cultural facilities within Cochrane. The plan outlines the need to ensure that open space and community facilities are supported with strong linkages by alternative modes, such as walking and cycling facilities as well as attractive transit services. C:\John\2009\Project Temp\Cochrane \Report\ _Draft Final Report_2013-Mar-21.docx

8 Page 6 The Transportation Plan (2009) was largely developed to study the impacts of planned growth and development on the roadway network of Cochrane. At the time of the plan, the Town and Capital Region Partnerships were exploring both local and regional transit services. 2.2 The Long-term Plan The Feasibility Study highlighted many of the foundational aspirations for transit in the Town of Cochrane. As previously indicated, the principle goals developed as part of the process acknowledge the interrelationships and economic, social and environmental benefits of transit for the community. A well developed transit system will support the economic goals of Cochrane by providing everything from access to an expanded labour force through to supporting one-car families that wish to live in Cochrane. A mature transit system where ridership is high will reduce vehicle travel and reduce traffic delays and congestion in the long-term. The Feasibility Study also identified the social benefits of a mature transit system that can help aging populations maintain independence and to support people of all age groups and income levels with an attractive transportation alternative. Finally, the environmental benefits of an established transit service across a community will reduce greenhouse gases, support greater density and mixture of land uses and limit other environmental impacts such as on watercourses and wildlife. In an effort to achieve these broader social, environmental and economic goals, the initial transit proposal for Cochrane may now best be characterised as a longterm vision for a well developed local and regional transit system. The principle features of this vision is illustrated in Figure 2.1 and briefly highlighted below. C:\John\2009\Project Temp\Cochrane \Report\ _Draft Final Report_2013-Mar-21.docx

9 Page 7 Figure 2.1 Original Feasibility Study Proposal Local Services 3 routes serving downtown, Sunset/Riverview, Cochrane Heights/Riverview & Bow Ridge Estates during the weekday AM & PM Peak periods only. This service would include approximately 8,300 hours of service annually served by 4 buses at an annual cost of approximately $850,000 (without a 30% cost recovery). Regional Service 1 express bus service between Cochrane and Crowfoot LRT operating at 30 minute frequencies during the weekday morning and afternoon peak periods. This service would include approximately 6,000 service hours with 3 buses and cost approximately $600,000 per year (without a 75% cost recovery). Storage and Maintenance facility for buses at a capital cost of approximately $17.1M and annual operating cost of as much as $450,000 per year. Off-street Terminal to operate buses where the annual operating cost was estimated to be approximately $70,000 per year. Park-and-ride facility for passengers to access the regional service directly without a transfer from a local service. Responsibilities for management, operations, vehicles, finances, marketing, scheduling and planning to include principally in-house resources as well as the potential for outsourcing delivery, maintenance and storage. Fares of approximately $3 per ride for a local trip, $5 for a regional trip and $7 for a regional trip that includes Calgary system. C:\John\2009\Project Temp\Cochrane \Report\ _Draft Final Report_2013-Mar-21.docx

10 Page Factors to Achieve Initial Success Admittedly, there are many approaches to planning and delivering transit service in a community. Most plans developed by communities begin with the long-term in mind and work back to a reasonable implementation strategy that may be defined for 5 and 10 year periods. These plans are often based on the high level aspirations and goals, and define long-term potential for significantly altering the future of a community over 20 or more years. The initial proposal for transit that included both local and regional services as well as significant capital requirements is now being considered a mid- to long-term possibility for the Cochrane, but not a reasonable first step to introduce transit to the community. In order to ensure that the first step to introducing transit to Cochrane is manageable and realistic, it must be focused. It very likely can not be expected to serve all areas of Cochrane. Further, it will not be designed to serve all community groups youth, seniors, workers, etc. or more than a few types of travel. Additionally, an introductory service will very likely only operate during short periods of the day to serve the target market(s). This section examines various factors to consider in designing a focused service for specific markets within Cochrane or regionally. This discussion and overview also incorporates recent input and guidance from the community engagement process and surveys in the spring of Community Survey Industry Experience Market Specific Discussion Local Influences C:\John\2009\Project Temp\Cochrane \Report\ _Draft Final Report_2013-Mar-21.docx

11 Page Local Influences Designing a first step for public transit service in Cochrane must be focused on current day circumstances and conditions. The following discussion highlights those features of Cochrane that should most influence priorities for a local and/or regional service. Local population and employment. There are approximately 19,000 people and 6,500 jobs in Cochrane today. As illustrated below, over 11,000 people (60%) live in the core areas of Cochrane such as West Valley, West Terrace, West Point, Bow Ridge, Bow Meadows, Glenbow, East End, Riverview and Cochrane Heights. Additionally, approximately 3,700 jobs (over 55% of the jobs in Cochrane) are also located in the core areas of Downtown and the industrial lands. It should also be mentioned that almost 30% of all employment in Cochrane are home-based businesses. Outside these core areas, transit markets for residential and work-based travel within Cochrane would be modest and a challenging first step for transit. C:\John\2009\Project Temp\Cochrane \Report\ _Draft Final Report_2013-Mar-21.docx

12 Page 10 Commercial and mixed-use areas. For some residents, transit could serve social and shopping based trips, particularly for seniors and youth in the core areas of the Town. Existing zoning and land use patterns illustrated below highlight the most prominent locations for commercial and mixed use areas of Cochrane where transit services could be designed to support local needs. The area bounded by Highway 22 in the west, Highway 1A in the north and the Bow River to the south and east provides the greatest mixture of uses that will promote higher twoway travel demands. This core area should be a higher priority than the outlying neighbourhoods of Cochrane for the introduction of transit. C:\John\2009\Project Temp\Cochrane \Report\ _Draft Final Report_2013-Mar-21.docx

13 Page 11 Population densities and the type of transit services. In addition to the scale and mixture of land uses, the density of land uses within the community can influence the amount of travel coming from a given area. In this regard, population densities can influence the potential scale of the transit market in Cochrane and the types of transit service that may be considered most appropriate to current day conditions. Paratransit services (such as demand responsive and flexible routing) would be suited to areas where the potential markets are small and/or population densities are less than 30 people per hectare. Fixed route community shuttles and conventional bus services are generally suited to areas where populations are contiguous and densities are less than 60 people per hectare. Figure 3.1 below indicates that population densities in Cochrane are generally less than 50 people per hectare with the exception of the downtown area. These density patterns indicate that most neighbourhoods have a modest transit market potential that may be best served by either a paratransit or community shuttle type transit service. Figure Population Densities C:\John\2009\Project Temp\Cochrane \Report\ _Draft Final Report_2013-Mar-21.docx

14 Page 12 Key activity nodes. In many small communities with a transit system, the customer base is principally made up of seniors, youth and some work-based travel where commuting is prominent. Within the Town of Cochrane, seniors housing and related facilities, secondary schools and activity centres will typically represent the key generators for transit. As illustrated below, the core areas of the community would be the greatest market for a locally focused transit service designed to support seniors and youth populations. Regional travel patterns. Residents identified the need to connect with Calgary by transit for work, school and shopping trips. Although somewhat dated, the City of Calgary s transportation model may be used to highlight the most popular destinations for regional travel to Calgary (as well as the reverse peak) and the relative scale of the markets in which to consider and design a service. As illustrated, the AM reverse peak travel to Cochrane is higher than the peak directional C:\John\2009\Project Temp\Cochrane \Report\ _Draft Final Report_2013-Mar-21.docx

15 Page 13 travel to Calgary. For those residents traveling into Calgary in the morning peak period, approximately 30% of all trips during the AM peak period are to downtown Calgary. The remaining trips are going to destinations across the City to places such as the Northeast Industrial area, Manchester Industrial area and the University. For transit to be a realistic alternative, transit service between Cochrane and these areas in Calgary must be seamless and attractive typically only provided by LRT services or through a single transfer. Roadway configuration and classification. An attractive and efficient transit service in a community typically relies on a grid street system that allows for a hierarchy of direct cross-town and neighbourhood services, as well as easy connections between services and for passengers walking to stops. The natural barriers river, topography, railway and highway system have contributed to Cochrane s network of curvilinear streets and disconnected neighbourhoods. Admittedly, the street design is a challenge operationally as well as for designing attractive transit services. The curvilinear street system and discontinuous land uses can lead to longer, less direct routes with limited development to justify frequent service levels. In this regard, the core areas of Cochrane are better suited to transit in the short-term rather than serving some of the outlying areas of Glen Eagles, Sunset Ridge as well as areas south of the River since they are somewhat disconnected to other areas of the community. C:\John\2009\Project Temp\Cochrane \Report\ _Draft Final Report_2013-Mar-21.docx

16 Page Community Survey The Town s community engagement process during the spring and summer of 2012 provides tremendous feedback and insight into the community s response to the recommendations contained in the Feasibility Study. The survey results also help to identify the priority markets for transit if the Town wishes to introduce public transit in the near-term. As part of the community engagement efforts, Ipsos Reid conducted a survey of residents to ask transit related questions among other general information and levels of satisfaction. This statistically relevant information provided insight into the community s overall level of interest in transit as well as specific concerns about transit in the short-term. The key results from the survey and documents C:\John\2009\Project Temp\Cochrane \Report\ _Draft Final Report_2013-Mar-21.docx

17 Page 15 prepared by Ipsos Reid that provide the necessary feedback needed to shape and identify priorities for transit are briefly summarized below. 70% of survey respondents agree that there is a need for public transit in Cochrane and that it is an important part of the community s future. As a growing urban area, Cochrane of today is made up of a range of people with differing needs. As is typical of many large and small communities, most people in the Town will never use transit and that should not be the expectation. However, as people age within the community, more and more single-car families reside in Cochrane and work in Calgary, and young people growing up in Cochrane want to access services and community facilities within the Town and beyond, transportation alternatives such as transit help to maintain mobility and the overall attractiveness of the community. Approximately 60% of survey participants expressed a need for strong intermunicipal transit with Calgary compared to approximately 48% for local transit service. On the flip side and not unexpected, 40% to slightly more than 50% indicated that neither a local or regional transit service was important. Almost 80% of Cochranites are concerned about the overall cost of transit. The initial transit proposal included both significant operating and C:\John\2009\Project Temp\Cochrane \Report\ _Draft Final Report_2013-Mar-21.docx

18 Page 16 capital costs that were identified at a conceptual level of detail for the purpose of comparing options and forecasting potential costs to the Town (a standard practice for a feasibility study). Residents of the community were very concerned with magnitude of the costs contained in the initial proposal and with transit in general. Residents identified the most prominent benefits of transit to be for travel to Calgary, providing transportation to those who can t afford to drive, going to work, and accessibility for youth and seniors. These responses demonstrate the potential range of transit markets that need to be considered in the design and prioritize as a first step to introducing transit in Cochrane. 3.3 Market Specific Discussions The survey of residents on the overall importance of transit and priorities between local and regional markets was explored further with the Working Group. After some discussion about local conditions and perceived need, the Working Group considered highest priority markets that would have the greatest chance of success as a first step to introducing public transit to Cochrane. The following summarizes the results of those discussions that may be used to augment other facts on local transit markets. C:\John\2009\Project Temp\Cochrane \Report\ _Draft Final Report_2013-Mar-21.docx

19 Page 17 Priority trip types to serve in the short-term? The Working Group indicated that a transit service designed to serve work, post secondary and social/recreational travel would have the greatest chance of success in the short-term. In all cases, a regional service connection to and from Calgary and Crowfoot LRT would support those markets, where social/recreational travel could be served by a local transit service. Based on experience in other communities, social and recreational travel is not typically a large market segment for transit. Trip Type Post Secondary Secondary School High Medium Low Shopping Social/Recreational Work Priority community groups to serve in the short-term. When asked about different groups to prioritize, the Working Group indicated that a service designed for seniors and youth would have the greatest chance of success (followed by adults and people with disabilities). While these priority groups are often what make up the majority of transit customers in small communities, these markets would largely point toward prioritizing a local transit service within Cochrane. Group Adults Children Disabled High Medium Low Low Income Adults Seniors Tourism Youth C:\John\2009\Project Temp\Cochrane \Report\ _Draft Final Report_2013-Mar-21.docx

20 Page 18 Priority areas (local and regional) to serve in the short-term. Ultimately, the transit service must be designed both for the customer base and the geographic markets. In particular, the Working Group identified some of the key local and regional trip generators that would have the greatest chance of success if they were served by transit. Regionally, downtown Calgary, the LRT and post-secondary generators were identified as the highest priority markets. While Southland currently serves the downtown area, connections to LRT and post-secondary institutions are not adequately served today. Locally, the Working Group indicated that a service designed in and around the downtown area as well as Spray Lakes would have the greatest chance of success in the short-term. Other residential areas in and around the core area were also identified as a high priority as well as those in the outlying areas such as Sunset Ridge and Glen Eagles. As previously indicated, the land use patterns (scale, density and mixture) make it challenging to serve the outlying area with transit. Bow Ridge/Meadows Cochrane Heights Downtown East End GlenEagles Heritage Hills Local Reg. Airport Reg. LRT Reg. Other Reg. Post Secondary Reg. Shopping Reg. YYC Downtown River Heights/Riversong Spray Lakes Rec. Sunset West Pointe West Ridge/Fireside TRIP GENERATORS High Medium Low 3.4 Industry Experience Experience elsewhere may be used to augment and inform local conversations about short-term priorities in Cochrane. This section of the interim report describes the governing factors that may influence how much service, the types of service and the customer markets that may have the greatest chance of success in Cochrane in the short-term. C:\John\2009\Project Temp\Cochrane \Report\ _Draft Final Report_2013-Mar-21.docx

21 Page COMPARABLE LEVELS OF TRANSIT SERVICE Mid- and small-size communities throughout Canada have taken different approaches to providing transit. Some communities have chosen to invest in local services only and others at the fringe of larger urban centres have developed a regional service. In a few cases, communities have developed a local and regional service as a first step toward introducing transit. Within Alberta, the types of transit service and level of investment in suburban communities such as Airdrie, Fort Saskatchewan, Spruce Grove as well as Leduc County and City may be considered in developing a first step for Cochrane. In each case, these other communities have had transit services operating for anywhere from two to approximately ten years. Table 3.4 below provides some comparable data between the initial proposal for transit in Cochrane and what s currently in place in other communities. Table 3.4 Service in Comparable Alberta Communities As previously described, the initial transit proposal for Cochrane included approximately 14,300 hours for both local and regional services a standard measure of how much service is required which in turn implies an associated annual cost. The peak only regional service to Crowfoot LRT accounted for approximately 6,000 service hours, and 8,300 hours for a local bus service. Assuming a typical cost per service hour of approximately $100/hour (operating and vehicle capital), the gross cost (not including farebox recovery or grants to for buses) would be approximately $1.4 million per year for the service alone. In comparison, Fort Saskatchewan, Spruce Grove and Leduc County/City have all chosen to deliver and invest in anywhere from 4,000 to 7,000 hours annually C:\John\2009\Project Temp\Cochrane \Report\ _Draft Final Report_2013-Mar-21.docx

22 Page 20 in a regional transit service to Edmonton. These services are delivered through an annual contract with Edmonton and provide peak period connections to and from the LRT system which uses a separate fare for customers. As a much larger and more concentrated area, the Town of Airdrie provides over 22,900 hours of local and regional service to connect passengers with downtown Calgary. Airdrie is the only community of those compared that has chosen to operate its own service. It is worth noting that Southland provides approximately 3,000 hours of service annually between Cochrane and downtown Calgary each year (not including outof-service travel time) DIFFERENT TYPES OF SERVICES There are also various types of transit services to consider for Cochrane. A regional transit connection is best served by an express bus service between the core area of Cochrane and the Crowfoot LRT or downtown Calgary. As envisioned in the initial proposal, this service could circulate locally and connect to a park-and-ride lot at the periphery of Cochrane in order to capture the commuter market for work and post-secondary school trips. Locally within Cochrane, there are a few more types of transit services to consider that are influenced by land use patterns as well as the scale of the potential transit market. With the exception of the downtown area, much of Cochrane is low density with a limited mixture of land uses. Even in the core areas, housing or population densities do not exceed this level. Consideration may be given to a community bus service and/or a form of Paratransit (flexible) service to support local transit alternatives within Cochrane as highlighted below. a. Community Bus could operate with a fixed-route and fixed-schedule service during peaks and/or throughout the day. Although Community Bus is similar to most other conventional services, a smaller size bus better suits the anticipated ridership and allows transit to operate within communities with less impact than a 40 foot conventional bus. As suggested, community buses would operate on a defined route and schedule serving accessible transit stops in specific areas of the community. Although ridership and cost recovery expectations will typically determine an appropriate frequency and period of operation, a service frequency of more than 30 minutes is generally not attractive to most transit customers. As such, some areas of the community may not be able to support an attractive conventional community bus service. b. Paratransit (Flexible) services are an alternative to Community Bus and other conventional transit services in Cochrane. For discussion purposes, there are three common forms of paratransit service that provide different C:\John\2009\Project Temp\Cochrane \Report\ _Draft Final Report_2013-Mar-21.docx

23 Page 21 levels of flexibility for the customer and operate in low demand areas as briefly outlined below. o Flex-route (on demand) transit provides a similar fixed-route and schedule service to that of conventional routes. Although the majority of customers are getting on and off the service at the standard stop locations on the route, flex-route transit can deviate to pick-up or drop-off a passenger at the advanced request of the customer. Customers may call in advance (typically more than an hour) to request a pick-up at a different location along the route or request a drop-off when they board the bus. A flex-route is scheduled with extra time to accommodate route deviations, but restrictions on the number of route deviations are needed in order to maintain a schedule (such as the distance from the route, number of requests, etc.). This type of flexible service is designed to enhance accessibility to otherwise low ridership routes without adding significant cost to do so. In order to support a flex-route service, a dispatch is required to confirm route deviations. A flex-route service could support anywhere from 20 to 50 trips per hour. o Dial-a-ride (service on demand) transit provides an attractive alternative to a fixed-route, fixed-schedule service in low transit demand areas or during off-peak periods such as evenings or weekends in midsize communities. Unlike conventional services, dial-a-ride operates only in response to customer requests for service. Although a door-todoor service could be an extensive form of dial-a-ride service, most dial-a-ride services will pick-up passengers at designated transit stops in the community and drop-off customers anywhere along a given route at their request. Customers must make advanced reservations (typically up to 60 minutes before making a trip) to request a pick-up at a specific transit stop. Depending on the number and location of passengers picked-up, drivers need not follow a predefined route. Rather, drivers may choose the most direct route between the pick-up and drop-off request points. If no requests are made, no transit service is provided in that area. This reduces vehicle operating costs and reduces the undesirable outcome of empty buses running through the community. A dial-a-ride service could accommodate 5 to 20 trips per hour. Dial-a-ride services operate in many communities across Canada. Within Alberta, communities such as St. Albert and Medicine Hat provide dial-a-ride services during evening and weekend periods utilizing the same transit stops that serve the conventional service during the weekday. In this regard, dial-a-ride service can become the structure of a community shuttle or conventional service once demands grow. C:\John\2009\Project Temp\Cochrane \Report\ _Draft Final Report_2013-Mar-21.docx

24 Page 22 In very low demand areas, a dial-a-ride service may be extended to a door-to-door service for people with disabilities. The longer route deviations and passenger boarding/alighting times means that the service could likely only accommodate approximately 5 passengers per hour. o Vanpools offer a transportation alternative to commuters that travel to the same destinations at the same time each day. Although the service can be funded through a transit agency or another organization, each person pays a monthly fare. The cost is typically calculated based on the travel distance and the cost of operating the van. Typical conditions for a vanpool service include trips of approximately 25km, regular commute to work or post secondary trips made 5 days each week, common travel times and destinations that serve a large number of people (e.g. downtown, hospitals, universities, etc.). Although a van may be typically used, the vehicle size purchased by the organization will determine the number of participants required and cost to use the service. Before designing and implementing paratransit services, operational policy decisions need to be addressed including, but not limited to: o Number of fixed stops/time points o Extent of deviation allowed o Advanced reservation requirements o Fare policies o Eligibility policies o Productivity thresholds o Specialized marketing o Communications and technology requirements TRANSIT MARKETS The Phase 1 Feasibility Study explored the magnitude of various transit markets for Cochrane. Commuters and post-secondary school trips from Cochrane represent the highest number of potential customers for transit. While some of these trips are already served by Southland to downtown, other destinations within the City of Calgary are not currently supported by public transit. These regional markets would likely require the expansion of peak period services to access other destinations and perhaps extend the periods of operation. While local services could support seniors and youth during the daytime and early evening periods, the overall scale of the market for transit is relatively low. As previously described, a modified introductory service for these groups locally C:\John\2009\Project Temp\Cochrane \Report\ _Draft Final Report_2013-Mar-21.docx

25 Page 23 would ideally be concentrated in the core areas of Cochrane during these periods of the day. 3.5 Keys to Success As part of the, the Town of Cochrane wants to consider a strategy to introduce transit to serve current needs and expectations. Through the community surveys and discussions with staff, Council and the Working Group, potential short-term measures of success are highlighted and compared with some of the mid-term and long-term measures that have been contained in previous work. These short-term measures of success summarized in Table 3.5 outline the fundamental features that shape short-term service concepts to be developed and examined in this review. C:\John\2009\Project Temp\Cochrane \Report\ _Draft Final Report_2013-Mar-21.docx

26 Page 24 Figure Keys to Measuring Success of for Cochranites Short-term Minimize cost to community (relatively consistent with others) Focus on priority transit markets Initial service must be attractive Access to expanded labour force Additional employment opportunities Promotes independence Affordabile transportation alternative Minimize risk and exposure for Town Available resources must fit within other priorities for Cochrane Mid-term Attractive transportation alternative for community Expand customer base Support growth as full service community Shape land use patterns Connect more communities Long-term Greenhouse gas reduction Increased productivity Reduce motor vehicle collisions Reduce traffic congestion Reduce infrastructure costs Health and wellness Cleaner water systems Wildlife presevation Change culture The review of current conditions in Cochrane, feedback from the engagement process and experience in similar size communities all suggest that an introductory level transit service for Cochrane should be designed with the following general parameters in mind: An appropriate scale of service. Based on the practice of similar size communities and the response to the initial proposal for transit in Cochrane, a reasonable first step toward introducing transit to Cochrane may cost approximately $40 per household annually and provide anywhere from approximately 4,000 to 7,000 service hours depending on the mix of local and regional services as well as potential farebox recovery. Minimize capital investments and longer term risk. Other capital costs to support a transit service beyond the vehicle may be limited to essential facilities such as accessible bus stops and park-and-ride facilities if a regional service is provided. Based on the community desire to limit risk and the need for other facilities, vehicle storage and maintenance would be provided through a contracted service and the provision of a transit C:\John\2009\Project Temp\Cochrane \Report\ _Draft Final Report_2013-Mar-21.docx

27 Page 25 exchange for buses would be deferred until on-street facilities could no longer support passenger and vehicle needs. Managed resource requirements. Beyond the governance and management responsibilities for transit, the Town of Cochrane would be best served by outsourcing the scheduling and delivery of transit services. Build from what exists today. Southland currently provides a privately operated service of approximately 3,000 hours annually for peak period trips to downtown Calgary (not including out-of-service travel time). No reverse peak period service exists that would support work-based travel to Cochrane. Any additional regional transit service should build from this as the base to strengthen ridership with the current market to downtown and augment this service with connections to Calgary s Crowfoot LRT Station. C:\John\2009\Project Temp\Cochrane \Report\ _Draft Final Report_2013-Mar-21.docx

28 Page Opportunities for There are several groups of people, types of travel, and destinations where transit could provide an enhanced level of mobility for Cochranites. Through public workshops leading up to the phase and discussions among the Working Group, the potential markets of customers in need of transit were identified and formed the foundation for designing public transit options for Cochrane. For travel within Town, the principle customer markets that would use and benefit from transit include seniors, youth, modest income residents as well as people with mobility challenges. In many cases, these people are captive to transit for their mobility and independence to get around the community and to access services. In an effort to accommodate people of varying social, physical and economic circumstances that may not have access to a car, residents identified the role of transit as a basic social service for a diverse and vibrant community. Regionally focused transit allows people to live in Cochrane and commute to work and/or go to school in Calgary. A regional service would also provide access to other labour markets for businesses located in Cochrane. While a regional transit service could support mobility for lower income workers, it also supports one-car households, reducing household costs and by encouraging sustainable transportation choices. This section of the report examines alternative local and regional transit service concepts that may be considered in Cochrane. Recognizing that this would be a first step to introduce public transit to the community, existing private and nonprofit transit services described in this section of the report are considered a valuable part of the transit service package available to Cochrane residents. 4.1 Building from Existing Services The introduction of transit to Cochrane is expected by most residents to be a modest and yet targeted first step. In this regard, existing local and regional services provided by Southland and HandiBus are expected to continue to service their unique markets as briefly highlighted below SOUTHLAND REGIONAL BUS SERVICE Southland Transportation Ltd. operates daily peak hour coach bus service between Cochrane and Calgary. Southland coaches provide customers with reserved seats, on-board washrooms, and free WiFi. Southland Transportation is a subsidiary of Pacific Western Transportation, which provides a variety of coach, public transit and school bus services in British Columbia, Alberta, and Ontario. Pacific Western and their subsidiary companies are contracted to operate Prince C:\John\2009\Project Temp\Cochrane \Report\ _Draft Final Report_2013-Mar-21.docx

29 Page 27 George, St Albert, and Wood Buffalo Fort McMurray, among other systems. Southland provides limited peak-direction commuter service between Cochrane and Calgary on weekdays. As shown below, three inbound AM peak trips, each serving a different routing, are provided between the Town and Downtown Calgary, connecting the two communities via either Highway 1A or Highway 1. Inbound trips leave Cochrane between 5:45 and 6:30 AM and arrive in Downtown Calgary between 7:00 and 7:20 AM. Three outbound PM peak trips return from Calgary to Cochrane along the same routing; outbound/return trips leave Calgary between 4:00 and 4:45 PM and arrive in Cochrane between 5:15 PM and 7:00 PM. Travel between the last stop serviced in Cochrane and Downtown Calgary takes approximately 40 to 45 minutes. Reverse-peak direction service (i.e. Downtown Calgary Cochrane service in the AM peak or Cochrane Downtown Calgary service in the PM peak) is not provided. C:\John\2009\Project Temp\Cochrane \Report\ _Draft Final Report_2013-Mar-21.docx

30 Page 28 Southland is estimated to provide about 3,000 service hours annually for the people of Cochrane to commute to and from Calgary on weekdays. The gaps and opportunities for regional services that remain for Cochrane are threefold: 1. Reverse-peak direction regional transit services from Calgary to Cochrane in the AM peak and from Cochrane to Calgary in the PM peak; 2. service connections to the Northwest LRT (Crowfoot Station); and, 3. Midday services to support trips to and from Calgary ROCKY VIEW REGIONAL HANDIBUS SOCIETY The Rocky View Regional HandiBus Society operates a principally door-to-door shared ride service to support people with disabilities. In some cases, service is offered to people that could otherwise take a public transit bus if it were available as a secondary priority. Local and regional service is provided in and around Cochrane (in conjunction with Big Hill Senior Citizens Activity Society), Crossfield, Balzac/Sharp Hill/Butte Hill, Chestermere, Conrich, and Northeast and Southeast Rocky View. Additionally, connections to Calgary are available. HandiBus operates on weekdays between 7:00 AM and 4:30 PM. Customers must register before riding the handibus and in some cases medical certification may be required. As the service generally operates on a door-to-door basis, prebooking is required. Riders are requested to book their trip at least 24 hours in advance (same-day bookings are provided on a space-available basis only). One attendant may accompany each rider at no cost if riders require assistance; however, prior notice must be given with booking. Although HandiBus service is both providing a regional service and supporting travel around Cochrane, they are generally stretched to meet the growing needs of people with disabilities and those needing assistance getting to and from medical appointments in other areas of the region. Expanding a door-to-door service designed to support people with disabilities within Cochrane would be an C:\John\2009\Project Temp\Cochrane \Report\ _Draft Final Report_2013-Mar-21.docx

31 Page 29 expensive public transit strategy. However, the gaps in local transportation alternatives remain. The mobility of some seniors, people with mobility challenges as well as low income residents is limited without a public transit alternative. Local fixed route or paratransit alternatives are needed to support those captive riders with a basic lifeline local transportation alternative. 4.2 for Cochrane In an effort to address the noted gaps in the existing Southland and Handibus services, three alternative transit services have been identified that support the keys to success described in Section 3.5 of this report. This section of the report describes two local transit service alternatives and one regional transit service alternative shortlisted for Cochrane based on discussions with the Working Group. Consistent with the desire to minimize risk for the Town and recognizing the modest scale of all three transit alternatives, it is expected that the Town would outsource the operation of the transit service as well as the maintenance and storage of transit vehicles. These would be contracted to a third party with the experience and reputation of providing the necessary local or regional services described in this section of the report. The Town would be responsible for governance, funding, and management activities. It is still fully expected that the Town could access Green Trip funding from the Province through current agreements to acquire the fleet required to provide either the local or regional service options described below OPTIONAL BUS SERVICES TO CONSIDER There are many forms of bus transit to serve each target market identified in Cochrane. Regional travel is typically served by an express bus service that would pick-up customers in the Cochrane area after circulating through the community and provide a direct trip to a destination in Calgary. Regional transit service can be provided using coach type vehicles or other buses that would support 50 or more customers on a given trip. A local service in Cochrane may be provided using fixed-route, fixed schedule bus service using a large bus or smaller community shuttle vehicle that can carry 20 to 25 passengers. In areas of very low ridership, more demand responsive services (also known as paratransit) are typically offered using anything from an accessible van to a small bus. Demand responsive service describes a wide range of alternatives to conventional transit service. Generally, these services involve smaller vehicles, which operate either on flexible routes and with flexible schedules, or on a demand-responsive basis. C:\John\2009\Project Temp\Cochrane \Report\ _Draft Final Report_2013-Mar-21.docx

32 Page 30 In rural and low density areas, bus drivers may have the flexibility to respond to passenger drop-off requests with a couple route deviations on a given trip. In other low demand urban areas and periods of operation (midday, evenings and weekends), dial-a-bus and transcab services have been provided in many communities such as Red Deer, Brantford, St. Albert and Medicine Hat. In some cases, these and other dial-a-bus transit systems have adapted to a more conventional community shuttle service to support increased demands during weekday periods. However, most still provide a dial-a-bus service during evenings and weekday periods. Based on the experience of other communities, a midday and late day service in Cochrane for seniors, youth and people with mobility challenges would be best served by a dial-a-bus service. Recognizing that most residents will not be immediately familiar with dial-a-bus service, a marketing and communications campaign will be required during the introductory periods. The following discussion highlights some of the key features and attributes to be aware of when considering dial-a-bus service. a. What is dial-a-bus? Dial-a-bus services have been operating in Canada for over 40 years. Over the last two decades, dial-a-bus services have remained in several cities to support lower market areas and periods of the day such as is the case in Red Deer and St. Albert. Dial-a-bus services are ideally placed in communities to serve off-peak and low ridership areas. Typically, dial-a-bus service will operate during C:\John\2009\Project Temp\Cochrane \Report\ _Draft Final Report_2013-Mar-21.docx

33 Page 31 midday, evening and/or weekend periods. As a form of demandresponsive service, service is typically provided using mini-buses which depart and arrive at major destinations such as the downtown at scheduled times only if requested. Customers will either simply board the bus at the main stop in downtown or request a pick-up at a transit stop along a defined network of roads. Depending on the request for pick-up and drop-off, drivers do not follow a set route. Rather, drivers take the most direct path between pick-ups and drop-offs either within the zone being served or to the transit hub in the downtown area. Dial-a-bus services can be modified based on customer feedback and can be converted to fixed routes if the ridership exceeds the capacity of the bus and trip when trip request times can not be met. b. How it works? As suggested, a bus will only leave the downtown transit hub if a trip is requested. For those passengers that board the bus in the downtown, they simply let the bus driver know the stop number or approximately location that they are going along a given route. Passengers may be able to request a drop-off at a non-stop location as long as the driver has sufficient time and that the bus does not leave designated roadways. Passengers that call for pick-up outside the transit hub would call dispatch at least 30 to 60 minutes in advance to confirm location (bus stop number) and approximate time for pick-up based on other trips that have been booked. Once passengers board the bus, they can request a drop-off at any stop within the specific transit zone or at the downtown transit hub. c. Who s most likely to use dial-a-bus service? Dial-a-bus requires customers to plan ahead for their trip and take steps to call for the service. As such, dial-a-bus is typically recognized as a base level service for low ridership areas and periods of the day. The figure below highlights those customers and trip purposes that are most likely to make use of dial-a-bus. Seniors, youth, low income people and people with mobility challenges are all markets not currently served by any existing transportation option. Many of these residents would be captive to a transit service for getting around the community. C:\John\2009\Project Temp\Cochrane \Report\ _Draft Final Report_2013-Mar-21.docx

34 Page 32 Trip Purpose Work School Youth <18 yrs Adult 16-64yrs Elderly 65+yrs Persons with disabilities Low income persons Low Potential Medical High Mod High Potential Shopping Groceries Low Shopping Other High Low Social d. What are the most significant challenges with dial-a-bus? Despite operating in many communities throughout Alberta, Ontario and Quebec, dial-a-bus has its unique challenges that are slightly different than conventional fixed-route, fixed-scheduled services. When considering dial-a-bus, some of the more notable challenges to be aware of and expect include, but are not limited to: The success of dial-a-bus can be one of its biggest challenges. Once ridership exceeds passengers per hour, the Town will need to operate a fixed-route, fixed-schedule service. In some communities such as St. Albert, dial-a-bus has been converted to a fixed route service during the weekday period. Evening and weekend dial-a-bus service still remain. The unique attributes of dial-a-bus require more communications and marketing, especially at the onset of this service. Cochrane may assume the responsibility of customer information and communications. While a dial-a-bus service would support people with physical and/or cognitive disabilities, it would not serve people with significant disabilities and would not be suitable for medical C:\John\2009\Project Temp\Cochrane \Report\ _Draft Final Report_2013-Mar-21.docx

35 Page 33 treatment trips where a door-to-door service such as HandiBus would be more effective. Although there are many unique attributes to dial-a-bus that make it different from a conventional bus service, the most prominent challenge for those governing and managing any local transit service is community support and engagement. After all, transit is a customer focused business that will not always meet the needs and expectations of riders and the community. In this regard, local fixed-route, fixed-schedule services in low ridership areas face the same challenges as dial-a-bus. Well beyond the introductory stages of a local bus service, the discussion among residents in Cochrane will evolve from being for or against transit to providing input and comment on the lack of adequate service to meet growing needs of the community. This requires ongoing management and communication as well as resilience from Council to accept realities of providing new services to the community. The delivery of a local conventional or dial-a-bus service can make a significant difference to the customer experience. In many low transit demand areas, drivers will get to know customers and their interaction will likely contribute the most to a positive experience that will maintain ridership. As such, the service provider whether outsourced or provided internally must have a track record of providing great service and driver training to ensure an excellent customer experience OPTION 1 CORE AREA DIAL-A-BUS SERVICES (LOCAL) In an effort to provide an attractive level of service, the core area dial-a-bus would be designed to serve a majority of residents, seniors facilities, commercial areas and other community facilities in Cochrane. The key features of the first local transit alternative are illustrated and briefly described below. Service Area: Three diala-bus zones would be established to serve people in three principle areas o Downtown/ East End/ Cochrane Heights o Downtown/ C:\John\2009\Project Temp\Cochrane \Report\ _Draft Final Report_2013-Mar-21.docx

36 Page 34 Riverview/ Industrial o Glenbow/ West Valley/ West Terrace Service Coverage: Service would be provided to designated, numbered stops located on select roadways throughout each of the three zones. Periods & Frequency of Service: A core area diala-bus would operate at 30 minute frequencies between the hours of 9am and 5pm. In other words, the bus would leave the downtown terminal every half hour as requested to drop-off or pick-up passengers. Support Facilities: Accessible transit stops with shelters and other amenities would be provided along each of the respective routes. Numbers would be assigned to each stop to note the route and stop reference to coordinate pick-up OPTION 2 ESTABLISHED AREA DIAL-A-BUS SERVICES (LOCAL) Providing greater service coverage than what was provided by Option 1 at a similar cost, means reducing frequency of the proposed dial-a-bus service. The established area dial-a-bus would be designed to serve a large majority of residents, seniors facilities, commercial areas and other community facilities in Cochrane. The key features of this second optional transit service are illustrated and briefly described below. C:\John\2009\Project Temp\Cochrane \Report\ _Draft Final Report_2013-Mar-21.docx

37 Page 35 Service Area: Three dial-a-bus zones would be established to serve people in three areas across the community. Downtown/ Riverview/ Industrial/ Glen Eagles Downtown/ Heritage Hill /Cochrane Heights/ Sunset Ridge Downtown/ East End/ Glenbow/ West Point/ Terrace Valley/ Bow Ridge & Meadows Service Coverage: A dial-a-bus would serve designated, numbered stops located on more roadways throughout each of the three larger zones. It is C:\John\2009\Project Temp\Cochrane \Report\ _Draft Final Report_2013-Mar-21.docx

38 Page 36 anticipated that the majority of all residents in Cochrane would be within 200m of a transit stop. Periods & Frequency of Service: A core area dial-a-bus would operate at 60 minute frequencies between the hours of 9am and 5pm weekdays only. In other words, the bus would leave the downtown terminal every hour as requested to drop-off or pick-up passengers. Support Facilities: Accessible transit stops with shelters and other amenities would be provided along each of the respective routes. Numbers would be assigned to each stop to note the route and stop reference to coordinate pick-up OPTION 3 REGIONAL LRT FOCUSED SERVICE (REGIONAL) A regional service that does not duplicate Southland s service to downtown would serve commuters traveling between Cochrane and Crowfoot LRT. Service Area: Under the assumption that Southland continues to serve commuters going to downtown Calgary, a two way service between Cochrane and the Crowfoot LRT would be designed to serve commuters to other destinations during later morning and early afternoon periods of the day. Service Coverage: Similar to the existing Southland service, a two way service to and from LRT would circulate through some residential and employment areas of Cochrane for pick-up and drop-off. C:\John\2009\Project Temp\Cochrane \Report\ _Draft Final Report_2013-Mar-21.docx

39 Page 37 Periods & Frequency of Service: A regional service would provide two-way trips to and from the LRT between 6:00am and 6:00pm. Bus service would operate at 90 minute frequencies. Support Facilities: Accessible transit stops with shelters and other amenities would be provided along the route within Cochrane. A conveniently located parkand-ride would be provided to allow for pick-up and drop-off of passengers or simply a transfer to the bus rather than driving to LRT. 4.3 Comparative Assessment The markets, service, fleet and infrastructure characteristics of each concept along with the annual operating costs are summarized below in Table 4.1. The gross annual costs for each of the service concepts are based on typical experience with a modest scale transit system that assumes the outsourcing of operating, storage and maintenance of vehicles. Additional responsibilities of the Town include matters related to governance, financing, contract management and communications as well as the provision of fleet and support infrastructure. C:\John\2009\Project Temp\Cochrane \Report\ _Draft Final Report_2013-Mar-21.docx

40 Page 38 Table 4.1 Comparative Assessment of KEY CRITERIA 1 Local Core Area Dial-a-bus 2 Local Established Area Dial-a-bus 3 Regional LRT Focused Services 1. Target Markets Served Local Seniors, youth, people with disabilities Local Seniors, youth, people with disabilities Regional connection to /from LRT Expanded work & student trips to Calgary & work & student trips to Cochrane 2. Service Characteristics 9am-5pm Weekday only 7,000 service hours/yr 9am-5pm Weekday only 7,000 service hours/yr Peak and midday weekday service Reverse service to Cochrane 3,300 service hours/yr 3. Vehicles/ Infrastructure 3 small buses (20+ seats) Accessible stops Outsource operation & maintenance 3 small buses (20+ seats) Accessible stops Outsource operation & maintenance 1 coach bus (50 seats) Park-and-ride Accessible stops Outsource operation & maintenance 4. Annual Operating Cost Gross Operating Cost Less Farebox Recovery Net Cost Average cost/household* % change in taxes $ 490,000/yr $ 98,000/yr $ 392,000/yr $ 35/yr 1.9% $ 490,000/yr $ 98,000/yr $ 392,000/yr $ 35/yr 1.9% $ 270,000/yr $ 66,700/yr $ 200,000/yr $ 18/yr 0.9% These results indicate that a local service could cost approximately $490,000 per year to operate and a regional service could cost approximately $270,000 annually. Assuming a modest farebox cost recovery for both services 20% for local and 25% for regional both options could cost anywhere from $18 to $35 per household annually. It is estimated that this would result in a 1% to 2% tax increase as a new service provided by Cochrane. While there are no storage and maintenance facility costs anticipated with outsourcing this service and a transit terminal would not be required in the shortterm, provisions for park-and-ride, accessible transit stops and other administrative costs would be incurred with any of the local and regional options. C:\John\2009\Project Temp\Cochrane \Report\ _Draft Final Report_2013-Mar-21.docx

41 Page Community Feedback The Town of Cochrane hosted a Public Open House on March 6, 2013 at the RancheHouse from 4pm to 8pm to review the optional concepts for introducing transit in the community. Approximately 40 residents from across the community attended to view the information, ask questions and provide feedback on the proposed options previously described. Following the Open House, the display boards were placed on the Town s website and Let s Talk Cochrane website. Visitors to the Open House and website were asked to complete a questionnaire on the transit service alternatives. To date, the Town has received over 100 responses to the survey. It should be noted that this is not a random or a statistically valid sample of the community, but does provide insight to any general preferences for those that did respond to the survey. Which option do residents prefer? The purpose of the was to identify a more reasonable first step to introduce transit to Cochrane. Although survey respondents were asked to rank order which option they prefer, approximately one third indicated that they did not prefer any of the options. Not unexpectedly, approximately 35% of the respondents do not support the introduction of transit to Cochrane. Of those that ranked the options presented, approximately 30% prefer the regional service between Cochrane and LRT (Option 3) and 70% prefer a local service within Cochrane. Of those interested in a local dial-a-bus service, a slight majority of these people preferred the frequency of service offered in Option 1 as opposed to the greater service coverage offered in Option 2. The issue of service inequity was frequently cited through discussions with residents that typically preferred local service to the broader area of Cochrane (Option 2). The relative magnitude of community preferences for local and regional transit services is similar to the results of the IPSOS Reid survey of residents in the spring of 2012 (described in Section 3.2). A statistically representative sample of Cochranites surveyed indicated that 60% of residents preferred a regional service and 50% of residents felt that a local service was important. C:\John\2009\Project Temp\Cochrane \Report\ _Draft Final Report_2013-Mar-21.docx

42 Page 40 Would People Use the Service? In an effort to get a sense of preference based on likelihood to use the service, respondents were asked to indicate how likely they were to use the service themselves. Table 4.2 below summarizes the responses to each of the service concepts. Table 4.2 Likelihood of Using Service As indicated, approximately 25% of the respondents are likely to use local service concepts (either Option 1 or 2) and almost 25% were likely to use the regional service Concept (Option 3). When asked about midday service, approximately 25% of respondents were very likely to use this service. C:\John\2009\Project Temp\Cochrane \Report\ _Draft Final Report_2013-Mar-21.docx

43 Page Summary The initial Feasibility Study prepared for the Town of Cochrane provides a vision of what transit may be in the longterm. The local and regional service concepts presented in the were designed to identify and evaluate more manageable options for the Town of Cochrane to consider as a first step to implement public transit. All of those options build on what s there today rather than try to replace the specialized service First Step? Today Southland & Handi Bus Local & Regional Services Long-term provided by HandiBus and Southland services to downtown. The principles used to guide the discussion and development of optional concepts were established at the outset as outlined below: Minimize costs to the community; Manage resources wisely; Build transit system and ridership incrementally; Focus on priority travel markets that could include seniors, students and/or commercial and employment areas. Consider alternative services (shuttle, demand responsive, etc.); Community Input and Feedback The transit service alternatives presented in this report were developed through input and feedback from the initial Feasibility Study and further discussion with staff and a Working Group established for this. Both local and regional service alternatives identified through this process serve distinctly different markets. The regional service option supports commuter travel to work and school in areas other than downtown Calgary with a stop at Crowfoot LRT and provides reverse peak service to Cochrane which is not available today through Southland. The local service concepts provide support to seniors, youth, modest income residents and people with mobility challenges that are still able to use conventional transit service. While the likelihood of using a regional service to and from Crowfoot LRT received slightly more support from the survey responses at the open house and C:\John\2009\Project Temp\Cochrane \Report\ _Draft Final Report_2013-Mar-21.docx

44 Page 42 experience from other communities, respondents indicated a slight preference for local service when asked about ranking local and regional service concepts. In the end, the results demonstrate a split in prioritizing local and regional transit service concepts within the community. Anecdotal feedback from those on the Working Committee and residents that attended the open house provided some insight to the reasons for supporting regional and/or local service. In general, those that supported and even prioritized local service concepts did so as a social service for the community. Many acknowledge that not all residents have access to a car to drive or be driven and that a local transit service would support those in need of getting around the community for appointments, part-time work, accessing community facilities as well as for shopping. Conversely, those that supported regional service to and from LRT did so because they are more likely to use the service and believe that the markets for commuters to work and school in the Calgary area are significant. Additionally, many pointed to the importance of a reverse peak period transit service from LRT to Cochrane to support the economy and access to labour markets for Cochrane businesses. In this regard, both service alternatives would work for Cochranites for very different reasons. Recognizing that both the regional and local service options are designed to serve markets in need and have good support from portions of the community (although admittedly not all), the Town can not afford to nor should it implement both transit alternatives all at once. This would not be consistent with the feedback provided by the community following the initial Feasibility Study and the foundational keys to success described in Section 3.5. External Considerations During the process, the Calgary Regional Partnership (CRP) advanced discussions on governance, funding and operation of intermunicipal transit services. Although there are many steps and stages of agreement and public engagement that need to still be advanced, the CRP may C:\John\2009\Project Temp\Cochrane \Report\ _Draft Final Report_2013-Mar-21.docx

45 Page 43 choose to operate some form of regional service between Calgary and other communities. Even once all regional transit governance and funding matters are addressed and supported by CRP Board members, this regional service may be introduced incrementally to Cochrane. In this regard, a regional service delivery model could potentially take advantage of the service scheduling to other parts of the region. This allows for limited service investments to each community while still contracting out sufficient blocks of services hours and fleet requirements. If Cochrane were to initiate a regional transit service, the governance, management and fleet assets could be easily transferred to the CRP. Recommendations Recognizing that there is some form of regional bus service today (offered by Southland), that residents generally favoured the introduction of local service and that the CRP is still exploring governance and funding matters for regional public transit service, it is recommended that the Town of Cochrane prioritize the introduction of local bus services Option 2 Established Areas Dial-abus. The Town would be responsible for the governance and contract management as well as the provision of fleet and support facilities. Delivery of this local service drivers, dispatch, customer information, as well as vehicle storage and maintenance would be outsourced to an experienced transit service provider. A local dial-a-bus service in the established areas of Cochrane would consist of three routes operating on an as-requested basis as highlighted below. Service Area: Three dial-a-bus zones would be established to serve people in three areas across the community. 1. Downtown/ Riverview/ Industrial/ Glen Eagles 2. Downtown/ Heritage Hill /Cochrane Heights/ Sunset Ridge 3. Downtown/ East End/ Glenbow/ West Point/ Terrace Valley/ Bow Ridge & Meadows Service Coverage: A dial-a-bus would serve designated, numbered stops located on more roadways throughout each of the three larger zones. It is anticipated that a majority of all residents in Cochrane would be within 200m of a transit stop. C:\John\2009\Project Temp\Cochrane \Report\ _Draft Final Report_2013-Mar-21.docx

46 Page 44 Periods & Frequency of Service: A core area dial-a-bus would operate at 60 minute frequencies between the hours of 9am and 5pm weekdays only. In other words, the bus would leave the downtown terminal every hour as requested to drop-off or pick-up passengers. Support Facilities: Accessible transit stops with shelters and other amenities would be provided along each of the respective routes. Numbers would be assigned to each stop to note the route and stop reference to coordinate pick-up. Responsibilities Operating roles and responsibilities generally fall into matters of governance, management, and delivery. Table 5.1 below provides a brief overview of the potential roles and responsibilities for the Town of Cochrane and a contractor in the provision of a local dial-a-bus service. C:\John\2009\Project Temp\Cochrane \Report\ _Draft Final Report_2013-Mar-21.docx