Regional transit governance: Request for decisions presentation
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×
 

Like this? Share it with your network

Share

Regional transit governance: Request for decisions presentation

on

  • 515 views

The Request for Decision (RFD) on the regional transit governance for Calgary Regional Partnership.

The Request for Decision (RFD) on the regional transit governance for Calgary Regional Partnership.

Statistics

Views

Total Views
515
Views on SlideShare
221
Embed Views
294

Actions

Likes
0
Downloads
0
Comments
0

5 Embeds 294

http://calgaryregion.ca 274
http://www.calgaryregion.ca 11
http://54.200.104.20 7
http://www.calgaryregion.net 1
https://twitter.com 1

Accessibility

Categories

Upload Details

Uploaded via as Microsoft PowerPoint

Usage Rights

© All Rights Reserved

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Processing…
Post Comment
Edit your comment

Regional transit governance: Request for decisions presentation Presentation Transcript

  • 1. Regional Transit Governance Scenario 2 RFD- May 24, 2013
  • 2. CRP Mandate-CMP Calgary Metropolitan Plan (June 2012): (CRP Principles, p.3) 1. Protecting the natural environment and watershed 2. Fostering the Region’s economic vitality 3. Accommodating growth in more compact settlement patterns 4. Integrating efficient regional infrastructure systems (water, transit, roads) 5. Supported through a regional governance approach.
  • 3. Provincial Land Use Framework (2008): (p. 43-44) Each metropolitan plan should consider and address: 1. A vision of the region’s pattern of development 2. A transportation and utility plan 3. A long-range regional perspective on the plans developed for key infrastructure, such as water and sewer systems, roads and transit 4. Complementary policies between municipalities 5. Support for higher density infill development across the region 6. Future growth areas . . . an environmentally and fiscally sound infrastructure plan
  • 4. Regional Transit Governance Mandate • Identified as a work-plan priority in Moving Forward Together: • CRP’s 3 year (2012-2015) Strategic Action plan and Budget, approved in November 2011 and included as part of the CRP’s approved 201213 operating budget. • 1 of 7 work plan priorities • Supportive of CMP principles 2,3,4,5 • Objective- to research regional transit governance models best suited to what we are trying to achieve in regional transit implementation
  • 5. Four Motions May 2012, the CRP Regional Transportation and Complete Mobility Steering Committee recognized the challenges of implementing regional transit by individual municipalities and passed 4 motions: 1. Motion by Mayor McBride to direct CRP administration to report back to the CRP Regional Transportation and Complete Mobility Steering Committee on governance model options. 2. Motion by Councillor Fluter to direct CRP administration to report back to the CRP Regional Transportation and Complete Mobility Steering Committee on a framework for CRP to own and operate regional transit assets and/or coordinate the service 3. Motion by Councillor Ridley to direct CRP administration to explore developing a regional study on connectivity between municipalities. 4. Motion by Counsellor Fluter to direct CRP administration to develop a framework for a regional feasibility study.
  • 6. Work Plan Approved • Work plan was approved by Steering Committee • 4 motions within the context of 2 scenarios • Continue to explore regional transit governance models-Scenario 1 • Direct CRP to develop a framework for the CRP to own and operate regional transit assets-Scenario 2 • Needed to know that one scenario is more effective than the other from the ground level up • If the results of the analysis did not clearly favor scenario 2 then we would not recommend it
  • 7. Steering Committee’s Expectations • Underlying analysis • would be more specific than just a “conceptual debate” between scenario 1 and 2 • allow for the comparison of specific performance metrics, approx. route locations, consistent overall service hours, buses and approach to designing routes and schedules • Conceptualization of services NOT to be so specific as to be taken as prescribed solution in each instance and municipality • KEY: analysis would be indicative of the benefits of each of the 2 service delivery approaches for the steering committee to understand the scenarios and their merits in order to make a considered decision-which scenario is best for Region going forward
  • 8. Strategy: 2 Phases • The analysis will be conducted in 2 phases: • Phase 1 application of a regional lens to both scenarios from a service planning/delivery perspective • Determined the advantages and disadvantages of each approach and whether scenario 2 is worth developing further in phase 2 • Phase 2 will either continue to explore regional transit governance models under scenario 1 • Or further development of scenario 2 by exploring regional governance models best suited to scenario 2.
  • 9. Key Strategies • Application of regional lens enabled economies of scale to both scenarios-applied same strategies to both cases • Met with all municipalities without feasibility studies-determine needs? • Can we plan the service differently in scenario 2? • Truncate incoming services to Calgary at nearest LRT Stn. • Airdrie ICE service very successful going to Calgary-not so coming back • Reduce peak hour window to capture most riders-7:00 AM-9:00 AM • Add new destinations-airport, Cross Iron Mills(regional attraction) • Service changes were compared to the base case • No additional service hours were added: used pool of hours in base
  • 10. Planning Process for Scenarios • • • Current feasibility studies Current Airdrie Transit Service Hours Green Trip
  • 11. Information for the technical analysis? • Feasibility studies conducted by Calgary Transit staff for Okotoks, Cochrane and Chestermere • Service plan for the Airdrie ICE service and from feedback with staff • Annual service hours proposed or in service for the above services • Proposed schedules, run times and destinations as proposed by the feasibility studies • GreenTRIP applications
  • 12. Base Resources Communities Annual Service Hours Buses Spare Buses Airdire 7028 4 1 Chestermere 6510 3 1 Cochrane 6225 3 1 Okotoks 9630 3 1 Totals 29,393 13 4 There are no surprises here as these numbers have all come from plans and Calgary Transit completed feasibility studies and from GreenTRIP.
  • 13. Calgary Transit- Routeahead • Very high level strategies • CT work with region to integrate services • Provide assistance on service planning/design functions • Completed feasibility studies for Okotoks, Cochrane and Chestermere • Provide space at LRT stations for regional buses • Plan recognizes Calgary International Airport as a key destination as scenario 2 has: • looking to build on success of route 300 BRT from City Centre/Airport
  • 14. Scenario 1 Results Summary • Under Scenario 1, efficiencies generated significant potential savings for municipalities, which they could use toward: • Adding more destinations to their planned routes (more diverse pickups and drop-off locations); and/or • Providing a mid-day service that is designed for students, shoppers, visitors to Calgary, and part-time workers; and/or • Redirecting those savings into MORE commuter service and/or MORE local service in their municipality; and/or • Redirecting the savings to other, non-transit purposes.
  • 15. Scenario 2 Results Summary • Under Scenario 2, in which the CRP owns and operates service, same efficiencies as scenario 1 were replicated-started with clean slate • Scenario 2 analysis also: • Added more destinations, such as the airport and Cross-Iron Mills • Brought more CRP municipalities into the fold such as Black Diamond, Turner Valley, Nanton, High River, Irricana and Strathmore • Realized possible capital funding savings in terms of vehicle purchases etc… • Mid-day service for students, shoppers, visitors to Calgary, and part-time workers; and/or • Added weekend service trips between Cochrane and Banff/Canmore • Included all of the above: peak hour service, midday, new destinations and new communities using the same base resources • Administrative savings • Report recognizes that the proposed services are “conceptual” to illustrate point-more research would have to be conducted to determine actuals
  • 16. Addressing Regional Connectivity Motion • Regional connectivity easier to achieve through Scenario 2 using: • Re-routing and efficiencies for the direct connection to some of the smaller outlier communities such as High River, Nanton, Strathmore, Irricana, Black Diamond, and Turner Valley • Banff and Canmore weekend service possibility from Cochrane • Possible savings to provide benefits to residents of these communities with transit service • Potentially reducing operating costs for the initial GreenTRIP funding recipients, since outlier communities would fully "pay their way” • Help cover capital cost for buses, maintenance buildings, and other facilities that any of the municipalities would otherwise have to pay for by themselves. • Produces an obvious "win" for every community participating
  • 17. Motion: Addressing Regional Feasibility Studies • • • • Calgary Regional Transit Plan 2009 Guiding document-not an in-depth feasibility study States feasibility studies need to be completed As regional transit implementation evolves, goals, objectives realigned • Conducting feasibility studies from regional perspective: • • • • Black Diamond, Turner Valley and Okotoks Approached about this possibility Application of regional lens Same reasoning as conducting individual studies in past
  • 18. Governance Models • Report describes the different possible regional models available best suited to what we are trying to achieve • Mentions boards, committees, extended municipal service and even a modified regional transit services commission within context of providing examples • Ultimately, it is the need for a decision-making body • Some forms are better suited than others • All used within the context of making decisions best suited for the Regional Transit Implementation plan • Will be explored in-depth in phase 2
  • 19. Steering Committee Approved Scenario 2 • Workshop conducted on April 16, 2013 attended by the steering committee, municipal staff and other stakeholders. • Purpose: to review the results of the Phase 1 analysis and provide feedback about the benefits, challenges and risks of each scenario. • Results clearly indicated that Scenario 2 would offer the best possible solution for making key regional transit decisions going forward.
  • 20. RFD • The Regional Transportation and Complete Mobility Steering Committee voted unanimously to recommend Scenario 2 as basis on which to move forward. • Once the CRP Board approves Scenario Two as the basis to move forward, Phase 2 will move on to explore regional transit governance models best suited to what we are trying to achieve in the Region.
  • 21. Recommended Motion • The Regional Transportation and Complete Mobility Steering Committee recommends: … that the CRP Board approve Regional Transit Governance Scenario 2 (as outlined in the attached report) as the basis on which to move forward and directs CRP Administration to develop an implementation framework to move the Scenario 2 approach forward.