Inter Community Bus…

Inter Community Bus Modernization Submission

Rail Advocacy in Lambton (RAIL) is a non-government organization advocating for sustainable Passenger Rail in Sarnia Lambton and Southwestern Ontario.

It goes without saying that the need for good intercity rail service in Ontario is high. Just as with urban transit, it provides connectivity and travel options for individuals, businesses, and communities, with tangible, economic, social, health and environmental benefits.

In our ongoing advocacy efforts relative to improved passenger rail service, we are continually reminded of the absence of integrated bus connections, the need for more service, and the need for government fiscal support to encourage bus operators to provide affordable, frequent service.

1. Integrated Rail/Bus Network Plan

In early 2015, the Southwestern Ontario Transportation Alliance (SWOTA) completed a report called Network Southwest Passenger Rail and Bus Action Plan. Although it focused on Southwestern Ontario, the principles and actions could be applied across the province. The report is available at www.swota.ca/network-southwest. The major highlights from that report as they pertain to modernizing intercity bus and rail service are:

1.1 Council of Deputy Ministers Intercity Bus Service Task Force (2010)

The report summarized the results of this task force on the future of the industry. The task force noted the importance of intercity bus service, especially to rural and northern communities, and admitted that the state of the industry was dismal, with declining ridership and profitability. The task force identified several factors contributing to the industry’s decline including;

• An inflexible regulatory model, with restrictions on fare/schedule/ route adjustments, entry of new carriers, and use of alternate vehicles
• “Tension” as a result of publically-funded competition from VIA Rail and urban transit agencies such as GO Transit
• The need to connect intercity bus services with other modes of transportation Fiscal options were suggested to counter the decline, including
• Partnerships with communities to provide alternative modes of service delivery
• Capital support for purchase of new buses or refurbishment of existing vehicles
• Support to cover operating losses/operating costs for specific routes or full systems
• Fuel tax and ticket tax exemptions (CN paid approximately $6.3 million in diesel fuel tax-2011)
• A federal tax credit for bus passengers, such as the federal public transit tax credit
• Partnerships between local authorities and carriers to maintain existing services and develop new ones

1.2 Significant Decline in Intercity Bus Routes 2009 - 2015

To date, in Ontario, no fiscal assistance to the industry has been provided and the private bus operators have continued to reduce or eliminate routes. The Network Southwest report shows that route-km in Southwestern Ontario decreased by about 30% between 2009 and 2015, even in the face of higher population, aging demographics, higher gas prices and more traffic congestion.

Passenger Bus and Urban Transit 2014-Canada

Statistics Canada in their Report entitled “The Daily” and released on 2016-07-25 reports as follows;

Total operating revenues for the Canadian passenger bus and urban transit industry declined 3.7% from 2013 to $11.4 billion in 2014, while total operating expenses increased to almost $13.0 billion.

In 2014 human resources accounted for 57.3% of total operating expenses, with drivers and operators representing over two thirds (68%) of full time equivalent employees. These employees operated almost 75,000 vehicles including about 64,000 motor coaches, school buses and transit buses.

The industry consumed 968.8 million litres of diesel fuel and 816.1 million kilowatts of electricity to fuel this equipment. Vehicle energy expenses accounted for 9.5% of total operating expenses in 2014.

Urban Transit the largest industry component

About 90 urban transit operators generated around two thirds (7.5 billion) of total operating revenue in Canada in 2014, with operators in Quebec and Ontario accounting for three-quarters of this revenue.

Most (54.4%) urban transit revenue was earned through passenger fares in 2014. However, the urban transit industry received 79 cents in operating subsidies for every dollar earned. The other one third ($3.9 billion) of total industry operating revenue was generated by over 950 passenger bus companies operating in Canada.

Compared with 2013, operating revenue increased for school and employee bus (+7.1%), charter bus, and sightseeing (+2.5%) and other transit and shuttles services (+3.3%) companies in 2014. Conversely, operating revenues earned by interurban and rural companies declined by 1.7%.

Over the last 10 years, revenue generated by all types of passenger bus and urban transit services has grown steadily, except revenue from scheduled intercity bus service, which has been relatively flat since the economic downturn of 2008. In Canada passengers travel mostly by private motor vehicle. According to Travel Survey of Residents of Canada, just over 2% of domestic trips (more than 40 kilometers one way) were by passenger bus service in 2014.

According to Transport Canada research, while passenger bus service represents the most extensive public transport network in Canada, it is characterized by a low and declining frequency, particularly outside of major service corridors.

A Growing Success Story in Southwestern Ontario

“Ride Norfolk”, is a unique single tier county transit system operating wholly within the boundaries of Norfolk County in Southwestern Ontario. This service began in October 2011.

Working in partnership with Ontario Trillium Foundation, Norfolk District Business Development Corporation, Haldimand Norfolk REACH, The Children’s Aid Society of Haldimand & Norfolk, and the Workforce Planning Board of Grand Erie, and Sharp Bus Lines of Simcoe, has continued to flourish since its inception in October 2011.

Ridership in 2013 numbered 3800 passengers, and in 2015 increased to 7200 passengers, which accounts for an almost 40% increase.

The service utilizes 14 seat passenger vans, with two handicap accessible seats in each vehicle.

“Regular service began Oct. 11/11. An example of services provided is as follows;

The shuttle will make three round trips each between Simcoe and Delhi and Simcoe and Waterford on Mondays.

The shuttle will make four round trips a day between Simcoe and Port Rowan on Tuesdays and Thursdays. Each trip will feature pickups and drop-offs in St. Williams.

The shuttle will make four round trips a day Wednesdays and Fridays between Delhi and Simcoe and Simcoe and Port Dover.

A one-way trip into and out of Simcoe will cost $6. Meanwhile, passengers taking a ride within one of the participating communities will pay $2.” (Simcoe Reformer September 21, 2011)

A relatively new operation called the “South Coast Shuttle” serving Simcoe-Port Dover-Long Point-Turkey Point and return on weekends, provides scheduled access to the many new wineries and tourist related businesses in the above noted locations along the north shore of Lake Erie. This service has proven to be highly successful in the first year of operation, and consideration is being given to a possible expansion.

This service is presently restricted by current regulations that prohibit the operation of services that cross municipal boundaries, (24 boundaries within Norfolk and Brant counties). Conversely, this success story is a prime example of what could be accomplished if municipalities were allowed to collaborate on services that do cross municipal boundaries, such as rail and regional inter-city bus services through the use of a shared transportation hub.

In the Ride Norfolk case, such relief from the present restrictive legislation would allow service to be integrated with the forthcoming GO Transit service ex Brantford to Toronto, existing VIA Rail connections to all of its provincial and inter-provincial destinations, as well as connections with Brant Transit. Additional access to other destinations in Brant county and beyond to additional destinations east and west of Simcoe-Brantford, could ultimately evolve from such collaboration.

An operation such as this would be an ideal fit in Sarnia – Lambton-Chatham-Kent as indicated in section 1.3 “Components of Integrated Rail and Bus Plan” of this document see bullet #4.

In summary, while Statistics Canada figures paint a dark picture of intercity passenger bus service, the Ride Norfolk experience seems to be an instance wherein the creation of favourable legislation would be a golden opportunity to this single tier operation that has proven to be successful despite bureaucratic restrictions.

1.3 Components of Integrated Rail and Bus Plan

The USA has faced similar problems to Ontario with declining intercity public mobility. The best practice solution has been to encourage development of a rail-bus integrated network with three components:

• High Performance Rail (moderate speeds, high service frequency) - although this is a key component of the plan, it will not be discussed in this submission
• Bus Feeders – service that is integrated (schedules, fares, tickets) with rail, as well as serving as intercity bus routes or urban transit routes in their own right. Interlining of tickets and fares would be required to support an integrated service and assistance to migrate to electronic systems would be needed to facilitate interlining.
• Mobility Hubs – many states used financial incentives to encourage the relocation of both intercity bus and urban transit to modified improved rail stations known as mobility hubs. These facilities have led to ridership gains for all 3 modes of transportation. Some hubs have recently been constructed in Ontario (Guelph, Kitchener – pending). With the advent of additional VIA Rail service to Sarnia Lambton, serious consideration should be given to the facilitation of such a mobility hub here in Sarnia. The Guelph and Kitchener hubs are close to the core of the city and therefore a convenient location to create them.
• Sarnia Transit could become involved with other stakeholders in the county to create a connection from the smaller communities in Lambton to a central hub in Sarnia which could be used for regional carriers to connect with other communities outside of Lambton. Routes may include service along the St. Clair River with a connection in Wallaceburg with Chatham’s bus service. Service to the east could be accomplished along the 402 with stops in strategic locations close to the highway. As stated in the Provincial paper, these routes could be served with smaller sized vehicles and independent services. These services can be coordinated with Transit services and train service to provide integrated rail/bus options within and outside of the community via the hub.

1.4 Successful USA Role Models

The Network Southwest report documents 3 examples. The intercity bus program is best described in the Michigan example: In addition to the trains, state-assisted, privately-operated intercity buses serve as components of the nationwide Amtrak Thruway bus feeder network. Funding for the buses, which serve nearly 150 Michigan communities and connect directly with three rail routes, have been provided through a variety of low-cost Michigan Department of Transportation programs. These include the Bus Loan, Terminal Development, Intercity Services and Intercity Bus Capital Equipment programs. Under the last, the state acquires new buses under a lease agreement that requires private carriers to provide daily service. This program has helped launch new services and has preserved existing routes.

The USA approach involves integrating stand-alone local and intercity bus routes into the Amtrak Thruway feeder system in aspects such as timetabling, fare integration, printed and online information and even station signage. Such integration would require integration of service schedules and interlining for fares.

While the Amtrak Thruway network appears to be a homogeneous operation, it is not. It is composed of two types of service, defined as “dedicated” and “coordinated”. The dedicated services are operated totally in conjunction with the rail service and are available only to those making combined rail and bus journeys. These routes have been specifically created to function as rail feeders and nothing else. Buses feed the train stations as well as replace them during off peak hours. GO Transit has proven this to be a successful model and method to increasing ridership and to supporting rail service.

Comparable dedicated services are also current in California (California Department of Transportation-CALTRANS) and Oregon (Pacific Coast Thruway Bus).

In the state of Michigan, Trinity Transportation facilitates integrated ticketing, and scheduling with AMTRAK, and provides service to connecting east and west rail destinations at Toledo Ohio. Indian Trails Bus Lines also provides non subsidized routes within the state of Michigan, and to some degree connects with AMTRAK services at various rail stations.

Inter-city bus service also creates more demand for transit and rail services and is therefore mutually supportive.

There is a relative fact that bears mention here and that is the existence of the Paul M. Tellier International Rail Tunnel at Sarnia ON. If this international rail tunnel was to be utilized to its full capacity with the addition of integrated ticketing, and scheduling of feeder bus lines and passenger rail connections with Amtrak, there would be a seamless connection to Chicago, the US Midwest and beyond. This connection would originate to and from the Montreal-Toronto and intermediate urban markets and could be a facet that opens untold opportunities in international markets.

In contrast, the coordinated Thruway services are routes operated by municipal agencies or through state-supported programs primarily as local or intercity services in their own right; they do double duty as coordinated components of the rail service. This has been accomplished through scheduling, fare integration and physical connectivity at the rail stations.

2. Conclusion

Coordinated integration of passenger rail, connecting feeder bus service, and urban transit has the potential to be a transportation game changer in Ontario, resulting in higher ridership for all three modes of transportation and tangible economic, social, health and environmental benefits.

To be effective, the bus regulatory regime needs to be modernized to:

• Increase flexibility to make fare/schedule/route adjustments, and to bring on new vehicles
• Allow new carriers to enter the market on new and underserved routes
• Allow municipalities to collaborate on services that cross municipal boundaries, such as rail and regional inter-city bus services through the use of a shared hub
• Encourage intermodal rail/bus/transit travel by facilitating connecting schedules and ensuring regular service on a core network of feeder routes
• Provide government fiscal support to both private and public bus operators, as per examples earlier in this submission

Important Considerations:

• Consider Sarnia becoming the site of a Mobility Hub to serve local and outlying communities in Southwestern Ontario as well as potential International connections.

This consideration being most valid in light of the promised additional VIA Rail services slated for Sarnia in the near future. As indicated above, a new hub in Sarnia, potentially at the east end of the City could be planned with space to accommodate regional services and integrate with other modes such as Transit, cycling, pedestrian and rail service.

• Be most aware of the fact that today’s youth does not attach the same importance of owning an automobile as their parents and grand-parents did, nor are they quick to apply for a driver’s license (Michael Syvak, U of Michigan, 2011). Today’s young adults put more stock in the availability of frequent, affordable, public transit whether it be urban or intercommunity service, one that provides an onboard ‘office’ to work and maintains connectivity as they travel. This would be one of the advantages of an intercity bus service which could bring students from outlying areas into Sarnia or for young Sarnians to travel to programs unavailable here as well as for rural residents who need access to hospital or other services and employment within Sarnia and beyond

We thank you for the opportunity to make this submission and would be happy to answer any questions.

J. H. Houston
President
Rail Advocacy In Lambton (R.A.I.L.)

In collaboration with staff from:
City of Sarnia
County of Lambton
Sarnia-Lambton Economic Partnership
Sarnia, ON – August 24, 2016

[Original Comment ID: 194599]