Transport 2000 Atlantic Rural Public Transport Toolkit

Compiled by Tim Crabtree

Acknowledgements
Special thanks go to:
Laena Garrison, Stephanie Sodero, Don MacLeod, John Pearce and Marcus Garnet
Transport 2000 Atlantic Rural Movement Project Steering Committee

Rural Movement Project coordinated through:
Transport 2000 Atlantic

supported through funding from:
Conserve Nova Scotia

administrative support provided by:
Ecology Action Centre

further guidance provided by:
Nova Scotia Community Based Transportation Association

The list of people deserving of thanks and acknowledgement is too long to mention here, but representatives from the following groups have been instrumental in the development of the Rural Movement Project and this Rural Public Transport Toolkit:

Association of Community Rail Partnerships
Bittern Line Community Rail Partnership
Community Stations Initiative
Community Transportation Assistance Program (Nova Scotia)
Heart of Wales Line Forum
Island Corridor Foundation
Kings Transit Authority
Metro Transit
Parry People Movers Limited
Pictou County UNITES
Royal Mail Postbus
Rural Dignity
Saskatchewan Transportation Company
Strait Area Transit Cooperative
Transport Collectif Intégré
Transport de Clare
Table of Contents

Introduction
- The Rural Public Transport Toolkit and the Rural Movement Project
- What information does the Toolkit provide?
- Who is the Toolkit document for?
- How do I use the Toolkit?
- Why focus on rural public transit?
- The Local Context: Public transportation in Nova Scotia in 2008
- Cause for optimism

1. Maintaining and improving existing services
- Partnerships for funding, promotion and labour
- Challenges and risks
- Nova Scotian Possibilities for Community Partnerships
- Beyond the bus route
- Creative Marketing and Promotion
- Eco-tourism
- Working with Local Businesses
- The Need for Caution
- Station Stewardship
- Multi-use Stations

2. Saving a threatened service
- Use of services
- Working together to save services: Coalitions and Partnerships

3. Working with limited resources
- Integrating freight and passenger services
- Volunteers
- Working with School Boards
- Shared Facilities and Resources
- Contracting
- Integrating passenger services
- Pooling seats

4. Innovative methods of new service provision
- Starting up a new service
- Doing your homework
- Assessing the needs of the local community
- Different methods of service delivery
- Public
- Private
- Public-Private Partnerships
- Potential Partners in Your Community
- Cooperatives
- Transportation Cooperative
- Cooperative opportunities for indirect funding
- Slow and steady

5. Innovative technologies
- Vehicles
- Paying Attention to Fuel Efficiency
- Hi-tech and appropriate technology
- Ultra-Lightweight Rail Vehicles
- Fully Electric and Hybrid Technologies
- Alternative fuels
- Concerns with Biofuels
- Global Positioning Systems (GPS) technology
- Increasing Accessibility and Intermodal Possibilities

6. Long-term possibilities
- Province-wide service
- Saskatchewan
- Nova Scotian Possibilities
- Regeneration of Rail
- Insurance

Appendices
- A. Potential Sources of Funding
- B. List of Resources: Documents and Groups
- C. Key Benefits of Rural Public Transportation

Introduction

The Rural Public Transport Toolkit and the Rural Movement Project
This document is the product of research carried out for the Rural Movement Project. The Rural Movement Project is a project of Transport 2000 Atlantic, a non-profit public transport consumer group working in the Atlantic Provinces. The project was undertaken between September 2007 and May 2008. Research consisted of document reviews, site visits and email, telephone and in-person semistructured interviews. The 8 month project was funded by Conserve Nova Scotia and focused on researching innovative, sustainable public transport services and initiatives that hold applicability in rural Nova Scotia. This document was publicly launched at the Green Mobility Forum in Wolfville, Nova Scotia on 22nd May 2008.

What information does the Toolkit provide?
The Toolkit provides guidance in improving sustainable public transportation options in rural and small urban locations. Areas examined include starting up a new service, saving a threatened service, and getting involved with an existing service to help maintain, promote and improve it.

Who is the Toolkit document for?
For anyone in rural or smaller urban areas interested in improving public transportation options; Members of community groups, businesses, municipal governments, organizations or individuals.

This document is aimed at both groups and individuals who know little about rural public transportation and are looking for guidance, and those that have a grounding in rural public transportation, but are interested in fresh ideas.

How do I use the Toolkit?
The toolkit is designed to be taken either as a whole, or as a reference to be dipped into as and where the reader may choose.

The first part of the Toolkit is divided into sections relating to different areas of interest, such as ‘starting up a new service’, ‘working with limited resources’, and ‘saving threatened services’. These sections provide guidance to the reader based on their particular interests. The information in these sections is based on research carried out into best practices in rural transit across Canada and internationally.

Appendices to this first part provide resources to assist in any actions the reader may take: A compilation of potential sources of funding, a reference guide outlining a number of documents and websites that may be useful in working on public transportation, and a reference to groups working in the area of sustainable public transportation that may provide support of varying kinds including advice, advocacy and sharing of best practices.

The second part of the document is made up of case studies of best practices that illustrate in more detail paths that have been taken towards improved public transportation options. The case studies provide a profile of these services including information on local and historical context, successes and challenges and a final section considering applicability of each case to rural Nova Scotia.

Why focus on rural public transit?
In Nova Scotia, particularly rural Nova Scotia, cars dominate the modal share. For commuting trips, 78% of residents drive, 8% walk, 5% use transit and 1% bike. With only three transit systems (Metro Transit (HRM), Kings Transit and Transit Cape Breton) and nine rural accessible dial-a-ride services in the province, there is significant potential for growth in sustainable transportation modes, particularly transit.

The environmental impacts of transportation are obvious in metropolitan areas where large numbers of automobiles consume valuable space for roads and parking, and emit carbon dioxide and other pollutants while stalled in traffic. As a result, government policy has focused on urban transit and its potential to reduce emissions, energy use and land consumption. Because of this justifiably urban emphasis, opportunities for promoting environmentally sustainable transportation in rural areas are not being fully exploited. While physical space, traffic volumes and congestion are not an issue in the rural context, the distances that must be driven for typical trip purposes are longer.

The environmental benefits of public transportation are most evident in urban areas where large numbers of passengers can be carried. However, public transportation in rural areas holds the potential to have a marked positive environmental impact, particularly due to the longer distances that are often involved. The numbers of private vehicle trips can be reduced, and with longer term reliability and sustainability of services individuals, families and other businesses and institutions may choose to get rid of primary and secondary vehicles.

Beyond the environmental advantages of well run rural public transportation systems there are significant social, health and economic benefits. For further illustrations of the many benefits of rural public transportation see Appendix C.

The Local Context: Public transportation in Nova Scotia in 2008
Before advancing, it is useful to consider the present state of public transportation in Nova Scotia in 2008.

In terms of coverage, there are 3 transit authorities in Nova Scotia in the form of Metro Transit (serving parts of Halifax Regional Municipality [HRM]), Transit Cape Breton (serving parts of Cape Breton Regional Municipality [CBRM]) and Kings Transit (serving communities along the Annapolis Valley between Windsor and Weymouth). Hut’s Transit in Yarmouth is a privately owned and operated service which serves the town of Yarmouth with the assistance of an annual subsidy. Nine rural accessible dial-a-ride services provide service in sparsely populated parts of the province. All of these services rely heavily on municipal governments for funding.

There are also regional coach providers serving communities along 4 routes (Acadian Lines serving corridors between Halifax and Amherst, Digby and Sydney, and Trius Tours serving South Shore Communities between Halifax and Yarmouth). Beyond this, there are a number of shuttles (largely providing for commuter markets and airport access). Rail passenger service runs 6 days per week from Halifax, serving Truro, Amherst, and Springhill Junction (on request) and westward beyond Nova Scotia.

The present situation provides a contrast to previous years when a significantly larger number of communities were serviced by local and regional bus and rail services. The growth in private vehicle travel, and declines in the usage of public transportation over the second half of the 20th Century led to increasing costs in the provision of public transportation, at a time that saw decreasing willingness on the part of government to fund public transportation services. Rationalizations and cuts in rail and bus networks during this time significantly decreased transportation options across Nova Scotia. More recently, in the mid 1990s the Province conducted a ‘service exchange’ with municipalities which withdrew provincial responsibility for investment in public transportation and left cash-strapped municipalities with the choice of whether to spend municipal funds on public transportation or other key services. This was the last straw for many struggling local bus services, and only a handful of forward-looking councils continued to provide funding for public transit.

Cause for optimism
In spite of this negative picture, there is cause for optimism for the future of public transportation in the province. In the last few years there has been growing interest in the possibilities that public transportation can hold for rural and smaller urban communities. On the community level, a number of community organizations are responding to the demand from their communities for the need for public transportation in their areas (for example, community health boards across the province consistently rank public transportation as a top priority). A number of organizations have been set up with the purpose of advocating for public transportation in their areas (such as Pictou Unites, Citizens for Public Transportation in the Lunenburg area and the Strait Area Transportation Cooperative), and many other communities across the province are only a couple of steps behind. Regional organizations have also been expanding their work on public transportation in Nova Scotia such as the Nova Scotia Community Based Transportation Association the Ecology Actions Centre and Transport 2000 Atlantic.

Some municipal governments have continued to provide support to services, and have been instrumental in expanding services in some areas (Kings Transit and expanded rural services in the HRM) and even starting up new services (Strait Area). A number of federal programs offer financing towards public transportation and 2007 also saw the announcement of a $700million Federal Investment in Via Rail.

In recent years, stable provincial investment in public transportation has been restricted to $550,000 for the Community Transportation Assistance Program (CTAP), providing funding to accessible dial-a-ride services in rural parts of Nova Scotia. This compared somewhat unfavourably with public transportation investment in other provinces: Saskatchewan and Manitoba, the two provinces with populations closest to those of Nova Scotia, invested around $11million each into public transit, on average between 2003 and 2007 (Ecology Action Centre, 2008).

The situation in Nova Scotia has radically changed in 2008 with the announcement of $3million to service unserved and underserved rural communities across the province. At the time of writing, more details were not available on this program, but it shows that awareness of the importance of public transportation to rural areas is beginning to filter up to the provincial government level.

1. Maintaining and improving existing services

Many areas with existing public transportation services may be experiencing problems with these services. Poorly planned, executed and marketed services are particularly prone to low ridership levels. These services may therefore face excessively large costs to maintain, threatening their existence in spite of the crucial support they may provide for a number of their passengers. There are a number of ways that individuals and community groups can become actively involved in their local services to help their improvement. This section will:

• Provide guidance on methods to maintain and improve existing public transportation services, focusing particularly on partnerships for funding, promotion and labour

Partnerships for funding, promotion and labour
When individuals, groups and organizations join together around a high-profile transit project, their commitment can help attract funding and extend the resulting benefits through volunteerism.

One channel that has been pursued in the UK looks to develop partnerships with transport operating companies in order to maintain or improve existing services. In the ‘Community Rail Partnership’ model partnerships are formed between local government, train operating companies (TOCs), community groups and the national rail track and infrastructure owner. Partnerships act as a bridge between local communities and the railway industry with the aim of improving services.

The amount and type of activities of community rail partnerships vary significantly between partnerships. Some common activities include: promotion and development of the line/s, publishing newsletters, leaflets, posters, station adoption/development schemes, organising activities which promote rail use (guided walks, special events, festivals), developing bus-rail links, cycle projects, linking railway with local regeneration projects/initiatives, linking with cultural and heritage projects, on-train events (Santa Specials, Music Trains, Poetry Workshops), working to involve and support local railway staff.

Community rail partnerships have been tremendously successful in improving the lot of rural railways. Many lines have seen improvements in services, huge increases in ridership and even the development of new services and station stops. For more information on Community Rail Partnerships see the case study in part 2.

There are immediate advantages in increasing ridership on existing services as this serves to reduce the deficit required to run services. Furthermore, it leads to the improved environmental performance of services as it increases the number of passengers on each vehicle, and shifts trips away from private vehicles.

Challenges and risks

There are challenges and risks involved in the partnership process. Neil Buxton, general manager of the Association of Community Rail Partnerships points out that it is important that partnership agreements are strong and clear: “You need to make sure everybody knows what they’re supposed to be doing, and make sure that they all pull their weight”. It is also crucially important to have the right people in the right positions in these partnerships.

Cynthia Patterson, who was heavily involved with the struggle to maintain service on the Gaspé line in rural Québec (see the ‘Rural Dignity’ case study in part 2) emphasizes the importance of transparency and accountability in partnerships. When dealing with private entities there are limits on how much information, particularly financial information, can be shared, but it is crucial that processes are as accountable and transparent as possible to keep communities involved and informed and to ensure the continuation and success of services.

Nova Scotian Possibilities for Community Partnerships
There are certainly possibilities for groups and individuals to look to develop community rail partnerships for the Ocean Line. Following from the examples of community rail partnerships in the UK, the key players in such a partnership would be the transport operating company – in this case Via Rail, local governments (municipal and/or provincial), community groups, local businesses, and the infrastructure owner in the shape of Canadian National Rail. Such a partnership could be Nova Scotia-based, Maritime, or focus on the whole length of the line. The Community Rail Partnership focus of working slowly to improve existing services and increase ridership this way (with the addition of new stops and services held as future possibilities) would fit with Via Rail’s mandate to only add further services if can make the case that they will at least break even.

Furthermore, there may be possibilities to utilize some of the innovations demonstrated for Community Rail Partnerships for bus services. Coach services provide similar regional services in Nova Scotia as rail does in the United Kingdom. Future research and actions could look into the possibilities of developing such community bus partnerships.

This method relies at its base on cooperative thinking – rather than pitching passengers against service operators in attempts to improve services it tries to ‘get everybody singing from the same hymn sheet’, as Neil Buxton, general manager of the Association of Community Rail Partnerships says.

Obstacles can be encountered on some services when the company operating the transportation is not as interested in maintaining the service as those in the community. If cooperative attempts to preserve and improve transportation services fail, communities can look to work together to try to save the service, and in some cases, even take local ownership over the service. Section 2 of this document looks at some examples of this, as do the Rural Dignity and Island Corridor Foundation case studies in part 2.

Beyond the bus route
As community rail partnerships show, work on improving services does not need to focus solely on the transportation services themselves. Positive strides can be made through looking at promotion and events, marketing, and focusing on infrastructure.

Creative Marketing and Promotion
Creative marketing and promotion of services can focus on attracting different groups to services. As an example, there is a growing interest in environmental issues in the general public which is showing itself in lifestyle changes. Emphasizing the environmental benefits of public transportation can be a positive manner to draw new passengers to services. It can also work to shift some of the social stigma that is often associated with public transportation as a service for the ‘have-nots’ to a service for everyone. A 2007 Ecology Action Centre survey of Kings Transit Users in the Annapolis Valley found that the environmental benefits of taking transit were significant to riders: when asked to choose the top three positive aspects of taking transit, 48% of respondents considered benefit to the environment amongst them.

Eco-tourism

Eco-tourism is growing, and helps promote the message of environmental sustainability. Yet it is often difficult to transport skis, bicycles or canoes to remote areas except by car. Via Rail has tapped into this market on its remote services, offering large baggage cars and pre-arranged stops for groups wishing to disembark at isolated places between stations. In 2007, Via introduced a bike train service between Toronto and Niagara Falls to meet a strong demand in that corridor.

There are possibilities here for rail excursions within and to areas of Nova Scotia including allowing non-station stops and improving connections between stations and trails. Other untapped markets – both for rail and bus – might involve hotels, bed-and-breakfast operations and hunting lodges.

Directing marketing of services towards tourism can also be aided through improving the connections between different modes of transportation. Kings Transit has installed bike racks on its buses since 2005 served to encourage excursions along the Annapolis Valley.

Working with Local Businesses
Although the needs of tourist markets can sometimes be at odds with locals utilizing services many community rail partnerships in the UK have succeeded in utilizing tourist traffic to improve services and boost the local economy. Regional public transportation can serve to bring tourists in to local communities. Studies in the UK have shown that tourists visiting a site via train typically spend more money in these communities than those visiting by private vehicle.

Working with local businesses can operate in both directions. Community Rail Partnerships in the UK have demonstrated this idea very well developing ties between local businesses and rail services. As an example, discounts at local businesses can be offered for rail ticket holders – CRPs in the UK have had tremendous success organizing promotions such as ‘rail and roasts’, guided tours and walks.

Business can offer incentives and discounts to people with tickets, and also get involved through helping to fund brochures.

The Bittern Line in the UK, one of the most successful Community Rail Partnership which has seen ridership increase by 164% over the last seven years, also focuses on revenue-neutral promotional material. The CRP produces calendars, baseball caps and other items which it then sells and gives away, raising the profile of the line while covering its costs.

The Need for Caution
In looking to draw in new passengers, it is important to not focus too narrowly. There are restrictions that can emerge from a heavy focus on one demographic, or sector of the population. Hut’s Transit in Yarmouth has been hugely successful in attracting seniors to its service – Gary Hudson, owner/operator of the service estimates that around 90% of his passengers were seniors. However, this success has led many in the area to believe that the service is purely for seniors, consequently restricting potential ridership of the service. Similarly, le Transport de Clare has had significant success over its 12 year lifespan in serving people with disabilities. This has led to the mistaken assumption within the community that the service is purely for those with disabilities. Due to this misunderstanding seniors have been under-utilizing the service, though recent efforts have led to an increase in the number of seniors using the service. It is important to keep marketing broad from the start.

Station Stewardship
A number of initiatives in the UK have developed around improving the infrastructure serving public transportation services. Work through Community Rail Partnerships has focused on getting the local community involved with local stations and improving facilities. Station adoption programs provide a channel for individuals and community groups to become involved in the upkeep and improvement of their stations.

As an example, the transport operating company National Express in the UK encourages local residents to adopt their local station, to carry out activities such as ‘health checks’ on the state of stations and other activities. Groups have often worked to restore and improve gardens around their station. Thinking creatively can draw in resources. One community rail partnership enlisted the assistance of young offenders to help with their train station garden as part of their community service.

Multi-use Stations
Through arrangement with the leaseholder of station facilities, it may be possible to foster even more direct local community involvement in station facilities. The Central Stations Initiative (see the case study in part 2) in the UK was set up to remove some of the barriers that may exist towards the use of vacant facilities, particularly the cost of leasing these spaces. This has fostered more formal use of station space.

The Central Stations Initiative in the UK found tenants to occupy vacant station buildings and units. Tenants paid nominal rent, and were responsible for renovating what were often run-down spaces. The scope of this initiative has since been expanded nationally. Through this initiative there were multiple advantages through finding a use for neglected buildings, improving the appearance of the station and increasing awareness of rail services through bringing bodies into the station.

At present, the majority of bus terminals across Nova Scotia are located in privately-owned gas stations, limiting the possibilities on this front. There are particular possibilities for rail stations across Nova Scotia – as an example, Amherst has a historic station, originally opened in 1908. There are also promising possibilities to better link these facilities with other forms of transportation, both coach services and hiking and biking trails.

As public transportation has clear environmental benefits, there are strong arguments to focus on environmentally-based uses of stations. In looking to improve connections between other local public and active transportation services a transportation ‘hub’ can be created. Recreational trails could be extended to meet stations, regional coach and local bus stops could also be integrated more completely with these stations.

2. Saving a threatened service
Sadly, the loss of public transportation services is not new to Nova Scotia. In recent decades the abandonment of many road and rail-based passenger services and tearing up of rail tracks across Nova Scotia has left many communities without local and regional service. This section considers ways that passenger services may be maintained through examining some of the manners in which passenger services have been maintained in other parts of Canada and internationally. This section will:

• Provide guidance on saving threatened services, particularly through avenues of partnership and coalition building

Use of services
Services are often threatened due to low cost recovery at the farebox and, therefore, what is seen as an unsustainably high ‘subsidy’. As such, the first step towards maintaining a threatened service is to use the service as much as possible. With regard to passenger rail, Via Rail, a crown corporation, has a mandate to show that any new services must at least break even before they are licensed to provide this new service. In this case, increasing use of services adds weight to any arguments towards increasing the level of service on this line. To work towards increasing ridership on services, concerned members and groups within the community can look towards manners in which the community can become involved in improving the service in manners which will better serve the actual and potential ridership. For recommendations on improving marketing and use of services through partnerships between transportation providers, local governments and other stakeholders, see section 1 of this document.

Working together to save services: Coalitions and Partnerships

Companies running bus and coach services across the province are licensed by the province. As such, any potential cancellations of routes must be authorised by the province through the Nova Scotia Utility and Review Board (information on this board is included in Appendix B).

With regard to rail services there is legal recourse for communities to protect and take ownership and control over infrastructure that is slated for abandonment. For an infrastructure owner looking to sell off rail infrastructure they must first offer it up for sale to different jurisdictions; The federal government has first right of purchase, followed by the Province, then the Municipality/ies.

In many cases, the infrastructure owner would typically look to maximize profit through parceling off land used by a rail line and selling it to private interests. Selling the land in this way would make it very difficult and expensive to restart services in the future if the need arose. Furthermore, the value of this land to private interests is connected to its possibilities for use for non-rail purposes. If the rail corridor is threatened with sell off by the present infrastructure owners there are ways to improve an interested community’s negotiating position.

Municipalities can look to protect any corridors running through their jurisdictions through designating the land as a transportation corridor for ‘rail-use only’. In the case of the Island Corridor Foundation on Vancouver Island, municipalities along the line zoned the land as a ‘transportation corridor’ which reduced private interest in its purchase as the corridor could not then be developed in any manner that would obstruct this use.

A further obstacle to gaining local control of a rail corridor is the potentially prohibitive cost of its purchase. The Vancouver Island coalition could not afford to purchase and subsequently develop the line at the price the infrastructure owners were asking. In an innovative move to get around this the coalition registered itself as a charity – the Island Corridor Foundation – which enabled the coalition to grant tax receipts in exchange for any gifts received relative to the value of those gifts. This was sufficient to entice the infrastructure owners to gift the rail corridor to the Island Corridor Foundation, as they were subsequently able to use this tax receipt to gain a significant tax credit.

In the case of the Chaleur line in the Gaspé region of rural Québec concerned members of the community had to resort to more extreme measures when rail services were threatened with cuts. As a geographically and economically isolated part of the province, the rail line provided crucial service to the Gaspé peninsula, both as a passenger and freight connection to the mainline from Halifax to Montréal. When the line was placed on a ‘hitlist’ of services to be cut and rationalized in 1989 individuals, community groups and local politicians worked together to create a campaign to save the line.

High profile media events that had at their centre camera-friendly activities served to raise the profile of the cause. On one occasion groups and individuals joined boarded the train along the length of its track and met at the end to combine sections of cakes they had baked into a train, connected with licorice tracks. The group also joined with other communities trying to protect threatened rail services to conduct an event on Parliament Hill where all the names of communities whose services were threatened with cuts were written on a banner that stretched around the hill. The group also resorted to direct action and at one point used suitcases to blockade the tracks and prevent passenger trains from getting through. The actions of this coalition were key in preserving services on the rail line.

The Island Corridor Foundation has subsequently been able to secure the future of the rail corridor, increase rail traffic and develop a commuter rail plan for the line. Doug Backhouse, chief executive of the Island Corridor Foundation sees the Vancouver Island experience as a model to be exported to other areas. Service on the Chaleur line has been preserved, and a corporation made up largely of local elected representatives from the different municipalities along the line now has ownership over the entire line. Both of these cases offer examples and lessons that may offer assistance should further services be threatened within Nova Scotia. For more information, see the case study in part 2 of this document.

3. Working with Limited Resources
Services which may be crucial to a community and provide clear environmental benefits may also be very costly, but these costs can be offset in a number of ways which do not rely on just the farebox or government investments. There are many innovative ways that passenger services can work successfully with limited resources.

This section will set out areas where efficiencies can be made relating to:

• Better utilizing existing facilities
• Integrating passenger and freight services
• Pooling seats on existing transportation services

Integrating freight and passenger services

Many countries have developed ‘postbuses’ in rural areas where there is no other form of transportation. On these services, vehicles transporting mail also carry passengers. In the case of the Royal Mail Postbus in the UK there is a network of postbuses across England and Scotland. As of 2006 more than 200 services were operated by Royal Mail, often only once or twice a day but in some areas they are the only form of public transport available. In the case of the Royal Mail Postbus, passengers pay a small fare, but much of the cost is covered by national government support. The particular institutional arrangements around the ownership and
operation of mail delivery services and connections to government in Canada differ significantly to that in the UK. Furthermore, there are significant limitations connected around fitting the transportation of passengers around the transportation of parcels and freight.

Freight and passenger service has also been integrated the other way around. Many rural bus services across Canada and internationally also carry parcels and light freight, contributing significant revenue, saving money for rural businesses and reducing the need to make special delivery trips.

Combining passenger service with parcel and freight can bring efficiencies, and offset the costs of services that may otherwise be prohibitively costly. Significant financial and environmental efficiencies can be made through combining several services into one.

The Saskatchewan Transportation Company, a provincial crown corporation which services regional public transportation needs in Saskatchewan, provides express parcel service on all its routes. Vehicles carry freight onboard, and often with attached trailers. This competitive ‘express’ parcel service provides an important source of revenue which helps to offset costs of routes with lower ridership. Here in Nova Scotia, Acadian Lines coach services offers a parcel service and Via Rail carries parcels to 3 of the 4 Nova Scotian stops.

A 2007 study following the termination of the Eastern Shore Shuttle service in Nova Scotia in 2006 looked into possibilities to revive the service following the withdrawal of municipal support. The study proposed integrating deliveries of goods to public institutions such as schools, hospitals and libraries.

More recent discussion of service startups in the area have also put forward the potential of integrating
the transportation of people and goods.

Volunteers
Rural communities are well known for volunteerism, which can be drawn upon to help provide and promote public transport. There are clear positives that can be drawn from people’s willingness to devote their time and energies to the benefit of their communities. Volunteer drivers and administrators can cut down on the financial costs associated with running transportation services.

The Transport de Clare dial-a-ride service in Digby County, Nova Scotia has reaped the benefits that can be drawn from utilization of volunteer efforts over its 12 year lifespan. The service has continued to increase the number of rides it provides and the size of its fleet. If volunteer hours contributed to this service were calculated in terms of an hourly wage it would multiply the size of the actual financial contributions to the service (For more information on le Transport de Clare, see the case study in part 2).

The use of volunteer resources should not lead to the exploitation of goodwill and should not be used as a substitute for other available funding. There are also risks attached to relying too heavily on volunteer labour. There is the danger of volunteers being overworked and ‘burning out’, and the potential unreliability that comes with individuals offering support in their spare time. Service can suffer, or even collapse due to an over-reliance on volunteer staff. Nevertheless, many dial-a-ride services have done fantastic work with volunteers, and in times of limited financial support from other channels, volunteers can be a valuable resource. (For other ideas on engaging volunteer efforts towards transportation services, see section 1 of this document).

Working with School Boards
Across Canada, school children are transported using dedicated bus systems at considerable cost to taxpayers. The largest transportation providers in most regions of the province are the School Boards. In 2007, Guysborough Warden Lloyd Hines made public what many others had been thinking in bringing up the issue of the potential for adults to utilize school buses as a mode of public transportation.

As funding for School Boards comes from tax revenues it can be argued that there is a case for school buses to be used by the public at large. As such, they can be seen as a public service, and there is an argument to be made for the public deciding how that service operates.

There have been examples of school transportation being utilized for wider public service across Canada. In Québec no extra permit is required to carry adults on school buses and existing available seats may be used by agreement with the school board. For example, around 200 adults per day have been brought into Drummondville for the last 20 years on School Buses. In Ontario the Community Transportation Action Plan has led to the use of school buses between morning and afternoon student runs to transport seniors and people with disabilities.

There are barriers to the development of school bus-based public transportation. A significant one is the reluctance on the part of some adults to allow their children to ride with adults. In spite of concerns over the safety of the children, the Drummondville School Commission has never received a single complaint concerning its shared school bus resources.

At present, in Nova Scotia, institutional barriers around insurance and licensing of vehicles also make such developments difficult. School buses are licensed, through the Utility and Review Board, to carry students only, which is the main obstacle for expansion of service to other riders. However, developments elsewhere demonstrate that these barriers could be overcome with the political will. However, even if this were to be possible, school buses would not necessarily provide a sufficient service. Certain factors concerning routes, trip generators and schedules would have to be taken into account to determine the worth of utilizing school vehicles for other purposes. The route of the school bus may well not go where other riders want it to go, or allow them to get there when they want to go there.

Efficiencies can also be achieved the other way around. At present, a number of Community-Based Transportation services in the province have partnered with school boards to transport students in need of accessible transportation to and from schools.

Shared Facilities and Resources
Another arena in which the school board can be brought into the service of any new transportation service is through shared use of resources. In the Strait Area the Strait Regional School Board has agreed to share maintenance facilities with the Strait Area Transit Cooperative. Furthermore, the School Board will take responsibility for training drivers for the Strait Area Transit Cooperative. This arrangement has clear benefits for the School Board as it will increase their pool of potential reserve drivers in the area while eliminating a significant cost for the Strait Area Transit Cooperative.

Contracting
Public Transportation services can also gain contracts to transport the clients of various groups. Community-based transportation systems in Nova Scotia have been particularly successful in taking on contracts from continuing-care facilities.

The Nova Scotia League for Equal Opportunities points out in its recommendations to the Province that “Most continuing care facilities in the province have an accessible vehicle they use for transporting a small number of residents to appointments and/or day trips. Many of these vehicles were financed through a combination of community fundraising and government assistance. The vehicles are usually used infrequently and exclusively by the facility and remain parked for most of the time.

Community-based transportation providers could provide this service to the facilities in conjunction with the services they already provide to consumers and or start up new services if the vehicles in other areas of the province were made available.”

These contracts have the dual benefit of earning valuable incomings for the community-based transportation systems, and allowing care facilities to save money on little-used vehicles – thanks to contracts with le Transport de Clare, one care facility in the region was able to give up its own vehicle.

These care-facility vehicles would otherwise require maintenance and other investments in their vehicles.

There is also the environmental benefit here of reducing the number of vehicles on the road.

Integrating passenger services
Where different transportation services are operating in the same area, there are opportunities to be taken through these services working together, rather than in competition with each other to serve passengers. In the Annapolis Valley in Nova Scotia, Kings Transit and Trans County Transportation Services have worked successfully together to integrate their community-based transportation service and fixed-route public transit service. Kings Transit services are have low-floor buses and wheelchair ramps, and as such, are able to cater to the needs of some of the clients utilizing Trans County Transportation Services.

Pooling seats
In the case of the above examples different services receiving government funding have achieved efficiencies through working together. This approach has been taken a step further in parts of rural Québec which have implemented ‘Integrated Shared Transport’ systems. These ‘trip brokerage’ services, supported by government funding, provide rides through utilizing seats on existing transport vehicles in a community, including school buses, transport for people with disabilities, volunteer drivers and taxis. Passengers organize rides through calling a central telephone exchange and are then picked up by one of these vehicles. This project allows the existing services in the area to operate more efficiently and effectively, and, through shared resources, are able to provide more rides without putting more vehicles on the road through the use of existing resources and limited funding.

4. Innovative Methods of New Service Provision
There are a number of factors to consider when attempting to set up a new transit service. Lower population densities in rural areas lead to significant difficulties with regard to the high levels of investment required to run effective services. Nevertheless, settlement patterns in many parts of Nova Scotia provide promising environments for fixed-route transit and innovative ways of establishing services can help to offset some of the difficulties faced in rural transit.

This section will:

• Recommend resources for assessing the needs of the community, and the potential interest in and demand for, transit
• Provide background on innovative methods of new service provision through the example of the transit cooperative

Starting up a new service
Setting up a new transit service is a complex process, and should not be taken on lightly. This section will not go into minute detail regarding the setting up of a new service, but will outline some of the key steps and offer direction towards resources which can be useful in assessing the need for transit and developing and implementing transit service.

Doing your homework

A number of documents set out processes which can be followed to assess the needs of the community, and the potential interest in and demand for, transit.

The ‘Transit Implementation Guidelines for Small Canadian Municipalities’ document produced by the Town of Canmore provides a valuable guide. The document describes a process for examining the feasibility and implementation of public transit in a small community through the presentation of and working through of a series of questions. These questions can be worked through by a community looking to implement a public transit system to more fully understand the costs and benefits of operating a public transit system.

Through its members, the Nova Scotia Community Based Transportation Association has significant hands-on experience in starting up and running a range of transportation services in Nova Scotia.

They have developed a workshop which focuses on starting up a new transportation service. If you are interested in arranging a workshop in your community you can contact the NSCBTA (their details are included in Appendix B). Their ‘Facilitators’ Guidebook’ is also available online at their website http://www.nscbta.ca.

The NSCBTA document sets out the main different routing options that are available for transportation services:

Route types
The needs of the user should determine the route type that a transportation system uses. Route types include:

• Fixed route – the traditional system employed by city bus services. Buses follow a set route, make set stops at a specific time and do not deviate from that. Consumers must travel to and from the stops on their own accord.
• Demand-response services – this system can provide door-to-door or point-to-point service. Routes are not pre-set but are developed in accordance with consumer demand. Examples of this type of service include both para-transit and charter service.
• Deviated fixed-route services – this system is a hybrid of the fixed-route and demand-response system. The transit system maintains a set route but in between scheduled stops it can deviate from the route to do door-to-door pick up.

Halifax Regional Municipality has developed a document, entitled Rural Transit Planning Guidelines: User’s Guide (ENTRA Consultants: Feb 2008). (Further information on this document can be found in Appendix B). The document is mainly focused on rural areas of the HRM, giving communities a tool to assess possibilities for setting up a transit service in their community that may connect to the Metro Transit network. It sets out steps to follow, running through a number of key questions:

Step 1 Who will use the service?
Step 2 Where do people in my community want to travel?
Step 3 What service design would best serve my community?
Step 4 What type of vehicle is most appropriate for my community?
Step 5 What are the Capital costs of this service?
Step 6 What are the Operating costs of this service?
Step 7 Budget Summary

The document utilizes formulae which recommend different types of service depending on population density of communities. For many parts of rural Nova Scotia these formulae would show that fixedroute service would not be feasible. However, these formulae can be limiting as they don’t necessarily take into account settlement patterns. Due to the high numbers of coastal communities in Nova Scotia there are a number of areas which have ‘ribbon’ settlement patterns which provide ideal conditions for public transit service. This has been a key factor in the success of Kings Transit. Furthermore, when certain efficiencies are worked into a service, fixed-route services can be made more viable. Section 3 of the toolkit sets out ways in which services can do more with less and use existing resources more effectively.

Assessing the needs of the local community
It is important to get a grasp of what the level of demand for transit is in a community, and also to determine whether it will be used. To get a sense of the potential level of transit use in a community there are a number of methods that can be used. Surveys, questionnaires, interviews, focus groups and other research methods can help to get a clearer picture of what the local community needs.

Using this information, it is possible to begin to determine whether there is sufficient demand, what kind of service to develop, and potential routes based on suggested demand.

It is crucial that the correct questions are asked in any such exercise. For example, when asked if they want a public transit service, many people would respond yes, when it is more crucial to know whether they or their family would use the service. In terms of survey delivery, experiences across Nova Scotia suggest that conducting random telephone surveys, or in person at public meetings leads to higher response rates than a blanket mailout.

Beyond more exploratory research, feasibility studies and business plans offer more concrete tools to develop transit service. As the facilitator’s guide of the NSCBTA points out: “A business plan is a practical tool that allows a service provider to think through exactly who the business will serve and how it will deal with challenges and growth”. Funding is available for the development of feasibility studies, information on various sources of funding can be found in Appendix A. A wide range of groups could undertake the development of this work, such as consulting agencies and university business schools. Appendix B suggests potential groups which could assist in this process.

A number of groups can provide assistance in the development of such surveys. Template surveys can be found in a number of business plans for some of the groups trying to get transit off the ground in their area (Strait Area Transit, Pictou Unites), Transport 2000 Atlantic can provide assistance in developing a suitable survey, and there are a number of universities, and higher education institutions that can provide formal assistance in developing surveys, feasibility studies and business plans.

Contact information for these groups and further pointers can be found in Appendix B.

Kings Transit Providing formal and informal assistance. Over the years, Kings Transit Authority General Managers have given talks across the province to talk about their service, and helped to clarify the challenges and opportunities that exist for starting up a transit system (see Appendix B for more information and contact details). The Bridgewater-based group ‘Citizens for Public Transit’ have been in talks with Kings Transit about possibilities of them running a Bridgewater – Mahone Bay – Lunenburg service.

Dial-a-ride service coordinators such as Claredon Robicheau can offer assistance to those looking at implementing dial-a-ride and flexible services. They also hold between them decades of experience running transportation systems, dealing with vehicle maintenance and technology issues, securing funding, working with their respective communities. The various dial-a-ride coordinators can be accessed through CTAP and the NSCBTA (see resources appendix).

The Ecology Action Centre can provide advice and assistance to communities investigating transit possibilities and provide support for transit. They have also recently administered a capital grants program for sustainable transportation funded by the provincial government through Conserve Nova Scotia (this Green Mobility capital grant package is available again in 2008).

Beyond the technicalities, it is crucial to mobilize support for any potential transit service. Community groups, local politicians and businesses can all be powerful advocates for transportation services, and positive media coverage can also be a useful tool in the service advancing.

Different methods of service delivery
Probably the most difficult challenge in terms of funding is sustainability, in other words, being able to secure regular, predictable funding. Many transport operators have identified this as a key impediment to longer term planning and promotion of services. Provincial investment in transit in Nova Scotia is presently low, but growing. Municipalities presently play the most significant role in terms of financing and operation of transit across Nova Scotia. In the province and beyond there are public and private forms of ownership and operation of transit services, as well as mixes in the form of public private partnerships.

Public
Typically municipal governments run transit authorities. Different models exist in the province involving single municipalities (Metro Transit) numerous municipalities with different levels of investment and influence (Kings Transit). Kings Transit operates through a collaboration of municipalities which all contribute differently towards its funding. There are a variety of methods of sharing costs between municipalities, all with strengths and weaknesses, what is most important is that an arrangement can be decided upon which is to the liking of all the parties involved.

Beyond Nova Scotia there are models operated on a provincial level, such as the arms-length Crown Corporation of the Saskatchewan Transportation Company (more information on some of these services is included in the case studies in part 2 of this document).

Private
Private for profit entities are unlikely to get involved with public transportation in rural areas due to the high costs for running passenger transportation services in rural areas translating to a lack of possibilities to generate profits. Those routes that do hold possibilities of profit – largely regional transportation between larger towns – are presently covered by larger passenger agencies and private shuttles. Privately-owned services face further problems in terms of funding. At present, private for profit entities are unable to access most streams of federal or provincial funding for transit – a problem that has been experienced by Hut’s Transit of Yarmouth.

Public-Private Partnerships
In an age where government provision of spending on public service is out of favour, many investigations are being made into private involvement in services. Public private partnerships (PPPs) can operate in a number of different ways, with different limitations arising due to the different forms.

A public private partnership has been set up to run the Charlottetown Transit service in PEI (contact details are available in appendix B). The Prince Edward Island Island-wide Transit Feasibility Study provides a good schema setting out the advantages and disadvantages of different mixes of public and private involvement in transit services (more information in Appendix B).

Potential Partners in Your Community
Potential partners for funding, support, research assistance, etc. differ significantly from community to community. Appendix B provides a resource to help develop a list of potential partners. It sets out a number of groups which have been most crucial to transit developments in the province. There are also some further suggestions for groups to involve, but much can be gained by thinking creatively about which other groups may be included, and it is good practice is to cast the net wide in searching for support for transit. When considering potential partners for the development of transit services it is important to consider what different partners will bring to the table and hold in mind that not everybody may be suitable for the specific project.

Cooperatives
Rural Nova Scotia has a strong history of membership cooperatives that have been developed as a means to provide services to communities. Under cooperative models the users of the service are also the owners of the service. This model has a strong history of use in agricultural and retail services, recent strides made in arena of transit. Cooperatives provide a means for communities to obtain desired services through payment of membership fees to a non-profit organization.

Transportation Cooperative
In Nova Scotia, the Strait Area Transit Cooperative (SATC) has been developing a transit service utilizing a cooperative membership model over the last few years. Under the model developed by the Strait Area Transit Cooperative, the cooperative members do not own the service, but play a strong role in the development of the service. Cooperative membership is not required to ride the service, but it does bring other benefits. Cooperative members are able to attend the cooperative’s annual general meeting and can stand for election to the board.

SATC membership fees provide an important source of income for the cooperative, but, more important in the eyes of general manager Malcolm Beaton is how membership can foster local buy-in to the service. He stated that “it is difficult to ensure the long-term survival of transport services as long as there is a lack of stable funding sources. With a membership cooperative the local community, specifically cooperative members can not only determine the direction of their transport services, but they have a personal interest in keeping the service going if at some point it is under threat.” For more on the Strait Area Transit Cooperative see the case study in part 2.

Cooperative opportunities for indirect funding
Cooperatives can also be developed in other services as a means to generate funds for transport service. Community-run cooperatives can decide to direct a portion of their incomings towards other purposes. A major source of information and assistance on cooperatives in the province is the Nova Scotia Cooperative Council. This group was instrumental in the development of the Strait Area Transit Cooperative. More information and contact details can be found in Appendix B.

Slow and steady
There are advantages to be gained from a slow build up of service provision. If a service is able to prove itself and iron out kinks on a smaller scale it is far more likely to gain community support and draw in further funding. Claredon Robicheau, Coordinator of le Transport de Clare emphasizes the need to work slowly in an environment of limited funding options. The experience of le Transport de Clare backs up Robicheau’s argument. Transport de Clare has succeeded in increasing in size and scope over its 12 years of life, and this has been significantly helped by the organization not biting off more than it could chew. Kings Transit in the Annapolis Valley began with the core, smaller urban areas of Kentville and Wolfville and has since been able to expand steadily and serve much less densely populated areas.

In its initial planning, the Strait Area Transit Cooperative has resisted the urge to try to serve all of the communities in the area that would like to have service. SATC hopes to serve these communities in the future, but the board is looking to get the service right with a core area first before looking to expand further. For more information on these services, see the case studies in part 2.

Transit implemented badly can be a detriment to both those providing finance to keep service running, and to those whose needs it fails to serve adequately. Moreover, it can act as a threat to the development of future service in the area.

5. Innovative and Environmentally Sound Technologies
The environmental impact of rural public transit can be further reduced through attention to environmentally positive technologies. Environmental benefits of public transport are best realized when the vehicles are full. Beyond filling each vehicle to capacity, innovative technologies and fuels can also reduce the environmental impact of the operation itself while enhancing its image and working to draw funding to the service.

This section will:

• Outline potential avenues to be followed in the shape of alternative fuels, GPS systems, technology for accessibility and lightweight rail vehicles, and consider some of the costs and benefits involved in these technologies
• Emphasize the need to exercise caution when looking into innovative technologies

Although more environmentally sound technologies can be costly upfront, they can also have huge advantages. The use of new technologies can attract industrial development and environmental grants while raising the profile and enhancing the image of a public transport service.

Vehicles
The most direct avenue to consider is the vehicle itself. In this area we can consider fuel efficient vehicles, hybrid and electric vehicles.

Paying Attention to Fuel Efficiency
Greenhouse gas emissions of vehicles are directly related to the amount of fuel utilized by a vehicle, so purchasing fuel efficient vehicles is in itself a positive environmental decision. There are clear financial benefits to fuel efficient vehicles as increased fuel efficiency reduces costs. Furthermore, as oil prices continue their upward trend, the purchase of more fuel efficient, and therefore, less environmentally damaging vehicles, makes longer-term sense. Even if upfront costs are higher, makes clear economic as well as environmental sense.

The increasing profile of environmental concerns has led in recent years to the opening of new avenues for funding, both for specific technologies and to draw funding to services utilizing them.

Appendix A provides some examples of, and information about potential funding sources for environmentally-based transit funding through government (such as the federal Moving on Sustainable Transportation program) and other channels (environmental NGOs, such as the Ecology Action Centre’s Green Mobility Grants – for information on other sources of funding, see Appendix B).

Hi-tech and appropriate technology
Looking towards more innovative channels, even if the price is right and funds are available, there is a need for caution when considering making use of hi tech developments in transit services. Hi technologies often present difficulties with regard to practical considerations (the risks from using unproven technologies, potentially difficult and costly maintenance, highly-specialized and expensive replacement parts, danger of new businesses going under, etc.).

Ultra-Lightweight Rail Vehicles
Some of the best technological advances are also the simplest. As an example we can look to the simple design of Parry People Mover ultra-lightweight rail vehicles. Although the principle of storing energy when the vehicle brakes is innovative, the technology involved is simple, cost-efficient and easy to maintain. Their flywheel technology coupled with lightweight design make for lower operating costs and emissions in comparison to conventional diesel rail units used in the UK. During a weekly trial run in 2005-6 a PPM 50 vehicle achieved 99% punctuality and 80% carbon dioxide emissions reductions compared to the standard diesel trains (Class 153 single-car Diesel Multiple Units) that were operating on the line Monday-Saturday. These vehicles would also require significantly reduced maintenance costs on rail infrastructure compared to larger rail vehicles due to their lighter weight and lower impact on the rails.

It is worth noting that Parry People Mover technology has received significant media coverage in the UK. Furthermore, this ultra-lightweight rail technology has received recognition at the political level – in 2007 the UK Minister for Rail visited the Stourbridge Junction site, rode the demonstration model, and expressed support for the concept of light rail for local transport use and the environmental and maintenance advantages this has. In 2007 a new contract was signed for service provision in the area which includes the Parry People Mover serviced Stourbridge line. The transportation company responsible for this area decided to implement a Parry People Mover-based service on this line, and commissioned the building of 2 vehicles to conduct the service. As these local service ‘franchise agreements’ are authorized at the highest level through the UK Government’s Ministry of Transportation, this demonstrates a UK Government seal of support for this type of lightweight rail technology.

Use of such visible technologies offers the potential to tap into green interest, provide a showcase, and offer prestige to a service. Parry People Movers technology is just one possible type of technology that could be utilized, but it highlights the possibilities of getting lighter-weight rail services operating on existing track, and lighter-weight tram services for urban settings. Such innovative developments offer the potential to shift perceptions away from our existing rail infrastructure as a burdensome relic to a valuable resource for the future (for more information on Parry People Mover vehicles, see the case study in part 2). This type of vehicle could offer the potential to restart services on unused and underused rails across Nova Scotia at significantly reduced costs compared to fullsized trains.

Fully Electric and Hybrid Technologies

Electric and hybrid technologies are still in early stages of development, but there have been significant advances in recent years, opening exciting possibilities for an even greener future for transit. Metro Transit recently purchased two hybrid buses for use in the HRM. The hybrid buses use 25 to 30 per cent less fuel and cut greenhouse gas emissions by about 30 per cent compared to conventional diesel buses. The comparatively higher cost of these vehicles compared to similar diesel buses is a significant barrier. However, transit providers which have the ability to plan for the future and source out the necessary funds can reap benefits in the longer term. As hybrid technology receives more research and becomes more popular, upfront costs may significantly decline increasing the accessibility of such technologies.

Fully electric technologies hold the possibility to provide emissions-free service if the electricity is sourced from renewable supplies. Electric vehicles also provide no emissions at the site of use, which provides clear benefits on air quality. On the other side of the coin, if the local power supply is powered by fossil fuels, electric vehicles may be less environmentally sound than gasoline or diesel powered vehicles. As, in 2008, much of Nova Scotia’s power is supplied by coal, which has the highest emissions impact of any fossil fuel. Furthermore, some of this coal is imported from overseas, which adds to the emissions impacts due to increased energy use in transportation. These issues present a significant concern for the future of electrical vehicles in the province.

As such, it is important to consider these issues when looking to electrically-charged vehicles, and shows the need to push for more environmentally sound energy generation methods in Nova Scotia.

The Energy Issues Committee of the Ecology Action Centre can provide further information on energy related issues. Contact details can be found in Appendix B.

Alternative fuels
There has been a significant growth in recent years of the use of plant-based fuels for vehicles. As plants soak up carbon dioxide as they grow there are perceived environmental benefits to using these fuels as the carbon dioxide they release when they are burned was soaked up from the atmosphere as they were growing. In theory, they therefore have a lower emissions profile than other fossil fuels.

In recent years, much stock has been put into the possibilities of biofuels to reduce carbon dioxide emissions from transportation. Research has increased, significant amounts of agricultural lands have been turned over to the cultivation of crops for fuel stuffs and governments have begun to mandate that all fuel sold regionally and nationally should have a certain percentage of biofuel.

Concerns with Biofuels
However, serious caution should be taken not to leap into something simply as it is labelled ‘green’. In the case of biofuels warning flags have been raised due to debates about their true energy savings and, more worryingly, their effects on demand for land to grow food crops (even the slash and burnclearing of rainforests  or their conversion to land to grow biofuel crops) and their effect on the price of food. Furthermore, many assessments of the environmental impacts of these fuels do not include considerations of the manner in which  these crops were grown – often in huge monocultures, cultivated using petroleum-based fertilizers.

There are many different types of biofuels, with markedly different environmental and other impacts. The large targets that have recently been set by the Canadian government as well as the US and European Union mean that total demand for such biofuels already makes a huge impact on existing agricultural land. It also guarantees that a significant percentage of these biofuels will come from sources that have an overall environmentally-negative impact.

Many groups have called for the brakes to be put on expansion in the use of biofuels until their impacts on food prices, greenhouse gas emissions and the natural environment can be properly measured. These voices are no longer just coming from environmental activists. Governments, businesses and even transportation providers have added their weight to such calls. For example, National Express, the major coachline in the UK recently abandoned a trial of biofuels on its coaches, citing environmental concerns.

Although there is a significant amount of underused farmland in Nova Scotia, it would be wise to resist the call to develop it towards growing crops for biofuels. At present, only a small percentage of food eaten in Nova Scotia originates in the province. The environmental benefits of encouraging the use of local farmland for food, consequently reducing long distance shipping emissions would be far more environmentally beneficial.

In spite of these concerns, there are significant benefits to be achieved from certain types of biofuels. There is a consensus that the use of waste cooking oil from commercial restaurants for fuel has significant benefits, through utilizing waste materials that would otherwise have to be otherwise disposed of.

A number of groups can provide assistance on the development of such fuel usage and continue to look at the possibilities of using this fuel. The Healthy Parrsboro group has been investigating possibilities for use in local transportation (contact Tod Benson). For more information you can also contact the Maritime Biodiesel Cooperative in in Halifax (see appendix B).

Global Positioning Systems (GPS) technology
GPS systems have decreased significantly in cost in recent years, and have become standard for many transit services. Transmitters in fleet vehicles communicate the position of the vehicles to receivers elsewhere via satellites. These systems can relay information on the position of vehicles almost instantaneously, allowing the central office to be informed on the exact position of their vehicles.

Utilizing GPS systems on transit services can provide useful tools to help in the development of routes, monitoring and evaluation. Systems can be used to track speed and position of vehicles and combine this with information on where, when, and how many passengers are picked up. These systems can also be used to track fuel consumption and mileage of vehicles. With regard to Community-based transportation and dial-a-ride systems GPS can be a valuable tool in helping to coordinate these systems. This technology allows the best coordination of flexible routes by a dispatcher, providing the ability to give waiting riders up-to-the-minute information on the location of vehicles.

Increasing Accessibility and Intermodal Possibilities
The environmental benefits of public transport are best realized when the vehicles are full. As such, technologies which help increase the pool of potential riders can lead to increased environmental performance. With regard to the transportation of people with special accessibility requirements there are specialized vehicles available designed for various accessibility advantages, as well as modifications that can be made to pre-existing vehicles, such as adding wheelchair ramps and lifts and removing seats to add wheelchair berths. Such modifications broaden the pool of potential users and also increase the number of potential funding sources. They also allow standard fixed-route transit services to interact more productively with specialized accessible transportation services.

Standard transit buses can also be modified to increase their capacity to transport bikes and other active transport vehicles. Kings Transit started placing bike racks on its buses in 2005 and has since offered promotions for riders with bicycles. The Green Mobility Grant program of the Ecology Action Centre has also assisted groups linking active transportation biking and walking trails up to bus stops (see appendix B for more information on the Ecology Action Centre and Green Mobility Grants).

7. Long-term possibilities
The research conducted for the Rural Movement Project raised a number of issues that did not quite link into community-level involvement in transportation, but are worth considering in terms of their importance to a longer term focus on public transportation in Nova Scotia. This section will focus on:

• Longer term possibilities for a province-wide public transportation network across Nova Scotia
• Reinvigoration of passenger rail

Province-wide service
Across Canada, a number of provinces provide significant levels of investment into public
transportation. Saskatchewan provides a particularly interesting model of public transit service
provision through its province-wide transportation company.

Saskatchewan
The Saskatchewan Transportation Company (STC) is a crown corporation of the province of Saskatchewan, operating at arms-length from the provincial government, which was founded in 1946. The STC is a province-wide bus service with 28 routes, serving 275 communities and carrying approximately 275,000 passengers annually.

Following a period of steady decline in ridership numbers, there has been a recent reinvigoration of the service. Marketing drives have served to increase ridership levels over the last few years. A significant feature of the STC is its impressive level of service to rural communities across the province. As the STC provides service to urban centres it can use the relatively higher cost recovery it receives from fares on these routes to balance out the higher-cost rural services. The STC also operates an express parcel delivery service which provides a further crucial source of incomings. In spite of these incomings, the STC still requires a generous government investment to operate, and the province has continued to provide financial support for the STC. Furthermore, this support has expanded to include a $25million investment into a new flagship passenger station and maintenance facility.

Such a level of financial support from the government is possible because of the high level of awareness of the general population of the importance of the service that the STC provides. A 2006 STC surveys demonstrates that the high level of public support of this service stretches far beyond its users into the general population. The survey found that 94% of Saskatchewan residents felt that the STC provided an important service to the province, regardless of whether they themselves used the service.

Nova Scotian Possibilities
Nova Scotia in 2008 is not the same as Saskatchewan in 1946. The political and transportation climates are now very different from what they were when the STC was initially set up. There is far less emphasis on the need for public investment in services, and far more car owners. However, with increasing gas prices, energy security concerns, increasing interest in public transportation, an increasing numbers of seniors, and most threatening of all climate change, there is reason to believe that a public transportation in the province could be significantly expanded into a more coherent network.

The provincial government recently took an important step towards involvement in public transportation in the province. The 2008 budget announcement included a $3million public transportation funding package for unserved and underserved areas of the province.

The situation in Nova Scotia is unique, and is not necessarily best-suited to the type of centralized system in place in Saskatchewan. With the 3 existing transit authorities and the multiple CTAP-funded community transportation services, a number of smaller providers have developed on the ground with intimate knowledge of what their local communities need, and developed a strong knowledge-base around operating public transport. Any larger scale provincial involvement in developing transportation services should be careful to not only use this experience and expertise to its advantage, but to foster more of the same. There is already a strong base to work from, and there is room to connect pieces through a provincial network.

An important lesson to be learned from the case of the Saskatchewan Transportation Company is of the importance of public support for government investment. Attempts to increase the scope of provincial investment in transit will be significantly strengthened through strong efforts to show the benefits of transit to the larger population, and to mobilize the huge level of support that already exists.

Recent movements nearby show that interest in regional public transportation systems is present and growing. Prince Edward Island has been looking into implementing a province-wide public transit service. The Prince Edward Island Public Transit Coalition hired a consultant to conduct a feasibility study on Island-wide transit with $125,000 received from the Federal Public Transit Capital Trust, administered provincially (see Appendix A on funding sources). The Coalition is continuing discussion with the provincial government to push this scheme forward. For more information on the Saskatchewan Transportation Company, see the case study in part 2 of this document.

Regeneration of Rail
In spite of heavy losses in the area of services and infrastructure, there are still possibilities for developing passenger rail on existing shortlines and mainlines in Nova Scotia. Across the US and Canada in recent years many shortlines, previously only being used for carrying freight have been reinvigorated providing passenger rail service. Furthermore, Québec has been leading the way in terms of provincial investment in shortlines, spurring federal investment to match these provincial funds.

Passenger services and rail lines which may not be profitable for conventional private companies can provide lifelines and hold future economic development potential to the communities they serve. The case studies of the Chaleur and Island Corridor Foundation demonstrate how community mobilization can play a key role in maintaining service and infrastructure (see part 2). Holding on to rail resources will provide key economic advantages to regions in coming years – in terms of goods transportation, the efficiency of rail means that this mode of moving freight will have an ever increasing advantage over trucking as fuel prices increase. Governments and communities would do well to consider these advantages before allowing any more rail lines to be abandoned.

Indeed there is significant interest from people around the province in rail as a way of getting around. Rural train services were not given up without complaint in the province, and voices continue to be heard in the media calling for the return of major rail passenger service to the province. Jack Peake of the Island Corridor Foundation cites the success of other short freight lines across the continent that have added passenger services very effectively. There is also a growing level of formal interest in the possibilities that may lie in freight rail lines being once again used for passenger services across Nova Scotia. The community group Pictou Unites group has been looking to reinstate public bus service in the county. The group has also highlighted the potential of including rail passenger service at a later stage, as a freight shortline provides a spine running through the core smaller urban areas of the county.

Since the time of termination of many passenger rail services new, cost-effective and environmentally sound technologies have developed to provide passenger rail services. There are possibilities to use these technologies to significantly reduce costs taken on in the provision of passenger rail service – section 5 of this document considers some of the possibilities around ultra-lightweight rail vehicles, as does the case study of Parry People Movers in part 2 of this document.

Appendices

Appendix A. Potential Sources of Funding
This source is up to date at the time of writing in May 2008. It is not exhaustive and should be considered a snapshot of present funding opportunities, and a guide to where future funding opportunities may come from.

Funding Sources:

Government Funding Opportunities
These are largely split between funding for operating costs and funding for capital expenditures. There are also often separate sources for existing services and proposed services.

FEDERAL

Federal Public Transit Fund
Under the banner of the federal government’s $33billion Building Canada Infrastructure Plan. Capital funding source for already operating services under Canada-Nova Scotia Agreement on the Transfer of Federal Public Transit Funds (2006-2010).
Total Funding Available: $11.7million provided to Nova Scotia for 2006-7 fiscal year, grants based on ridership.
Eligibility: Eligible recipients – a municipality or duly authorized agent (including its wholly owned corporation such as a transit agency) and Community Transit Organizations. For Community Transportation funds available to services funded by NS Community Transportation Assistance Program (CTAP)
http://www.infrastructure.gc.ca/ip-pi/public_trans_commun/pt_can_ns_e.shtml

Federal Public Transit Capital Trust
Capital funding source for existing services distributed on the basis of ridership.
Total Funding Available: $14million in 2008 for Nova Scotia (already allocated), $500million nationally, distributed on per-capita basis.
Grants distributed: $13million to HRM, Kings Transit and CTAP services received the remaining $1million.
Eligibility: Funds for this round were only available to those who had made public commitments to invest in public transit before March 31st 2008.

Federal Gas Tax Fund
Funding for Environmentally Sustainable Municipal Infrastructure, allocated through Canada-Nova Scotia Agreement on Transfer of Federal Gas Tax.
Total Funding Available: $145million for Nova Scotia between 2005 – 2010 (2008 budget extended and increased Federal Gas Tax Fund to 2013-14 at $2billion p/a nationally, allocation to be determined).
Eligibility: Funding is accessed through municipalities, who must develop Integrated Community Sustainability Plans at municipal or regional level.
Application Deadline: ICSPs must be submitted 2010
http://www.infrastructure.gc.ca/ip-pi/gas-essence_tax/gt_can_ns_e.shtml

Integrated Community Sustainability Plan Guide:
http://www.gov.ns.ca/snsmr/muns/infr/pdf/ICSP_2007.pdf

Municipal Rural Infrastructure Fund
Fund to help support municipal infrastructure such as water and wastewater treatment, or cultural and recreation projects, for smaller and First Nations communities. At least 60% of this funding to go towards ‘green’ projects, including transit.
Total Funding Available: $111million (cost-shared between Federal, Provincial and Municipal governments) over 6 years (up to 2012) delivered through the Atlantic Canada Opportunities Agency (ACOA) in Nova Scotia.
Eligibility: Municipalities expected to provide one third of eligible costs.
http://www.infrastructure.gc.ca/ip-pi/mrif-fimr/index_e.shtml

Green Municipalities Fund
Focus on projects offering improvements in air quality, reduction in emissions.
Funding Available for:

• Transportation: Loans: up to $10 million, Grants: up to $ 1.5 million
• Feasibility Studies and Field Tests: Grants for up to 50% of costs to a maximum of $350,000
• Sustainable Community Plans: Grants for up to 50% of costs to a maximum of $350,000

Eligibility: “Potential applicants can submit an Intent to Apply only in response to specific targeted calls for applications in each sector. Specific prerequisites and criteria are set through each call for applications. In most cases, applicants must have already completed a feasibility study or field test”
Application Deadline: Launch date of August 2008
http://www.sustainablecommunities.fcm.ca/GMF/

Transport Canada: Moving on Sustainable Transportation
Funding available for studies, analyses and plans; developing innovative sustainable transportation tools; undertaking small pilot or demonstration projects testing new sustainable transportation approaches or alternatives.
Total Funding Available: Approximately $3.2million over a five year period (2007 – 2012) Grants available: up to $150,000 over 3 year period, to a maximum of 50 per cent of eligible costs (cash or in-kind).
Eligibility: Eligible organizations: non-profit, non-governmental organizations (NGOs), community organizations (voluntary groups, community associations, and institutions), First Nations and Aboriginal organizations and associations, educational and academic institutions, labour organizations, businesses and industries and their professional associations.
Application Deadline: March 31st 2008
http://www.tc.gc.ca/programs/environment/most/applicantguide.htm

Building Canada Fund (BCF) Community Component
Total Funding Available: $37million
Note: Present round focused on water and waste, future rounds may offer funding for transit and transportation related infrastructure. Round 2 will be held in fall 2008.
http://www.nsinfrastructure.ca/pages/Building-Canada-Fund.aspx

Eco Action Community Funding Program
Funding Program for projects that address Environment Canada’s priority issues of Clean Air and Climate Change, Clean Water, and Nature.
Grants Available: Maximum amount available per project is $100,000. At least 50 percent of project total value must come from sources other than federal government.
Application Deadlines: February 1st and October 1st annually
http://www.ec.gc.ca/ecoaction/

Further Channels:

Gas Tax and GST Rebates
Public transit services have eligibility to claim back tax on fuel purchases

Service Canada
Job Creation Programs and Older Workers Program can be utilized for conducting studies and creating employment through transportation services

PROVINCIAL

Rural Transit Incentive Program:
The 2008 budget announced a $3million investment in an incentive program to help municipalities provide public transit in unserved and underserved rural areas in order to encourage greater use of public transit. More details were not available at the time of writing.
http://www.gov.ns.ca/snsmr/

Service Nova Scotia and Municipal Relations: Community Transportation Assistance Program
(CTAP)
Provides operating support for community-based inclusive transportation services in low population density communities in Nova Scotia.
Total Funding Available: In 2007 CTAP provided $450,000 to Community Transportation Services.
Grants Available: Grants at a maximum of $1.60/capita, minimum service level of 0.2 rides/capita/annum. Start up research grants available up to $5,000.
Eligibility: Eligible groups: municipalities and non-profit community-based organizations (incorporated groups) involved in delivery of inclusive transportation in low population density areas (at or below 0.15 persons per acre) of Province. Services must have insured vehicles and meet Nova Scotia Utility and Review Board requirement for 6 month servicing. Only one service per region, no service overlaps. Services must be, or intend to be, accessible and inclusive, subject to priorities established at community level.
Application Deadline: Applications considered annually for funding within the fiscal year.
http://www.gov.ns.ca/snsmr/muns/infr/ctap/community_trans_assist.asp

Accessible Transportation Assistance Program
Capital assistance funding for the purchase of an accessible vehicle or modification of an existing vehicle.
Total Funding Available: $100,000 p/a
Grants Available: Up to $20,000 for new vehicle, $10,000 for used vehicle.
Eligibility: Funding available to communities, organizations or groups involved in delivery of accessible transportation services.
www.gov.ns.ca/snsmr/dialaride/pdf/ATAP_Program_Guidelines.pdf

Provincial Government Departments
Different government departments may provide money for transporting specific individuals:
Department of Health: non-emergency individuals
Department of Education: students with special needs to classes or additional training programs
Department of Community Services: mobility disadvantaged individuals

MUNICIPAL
Municipal funding presently provides the major funding for public transportation systems across Nova Scotia.

Different funding arrangements are practiced across the province. Match Funding – Strait obtained commitments from municipalities to ‘match’ the $1.60 per capita from CTAP program. Subsidy – Town of Yarmouth provided a subsidy to (privately owned) Hut’s Transit. Contracting – Digby and other municipalties contracting services from Kings Transit at 100% cost recovery rate. Core Budget Funding – municipalities and county in core area of Kings Transit Service provided core budget funding for this service.

A snapshot of municipal funding for transit and community transport in 2007:

• Richmond County committed $15,584 and the town of Port Hawkesbury $5,627 to the Strait Area Transit Cooperative.
• Municipality of the town of Yarmouth provided a subsidy of $40,000 to Hut’s Transit.
• Digby contracted Kings Transit service at a cost of $136,106.
• Kentville committed $67,035 towards Kings Transit.
• Municipality of Clare committed $8,000 to Transport de Clare Community Transport.

OTHER CHANNELS

Contracting and leasing out services
- Provides key source of financing to CTAP services
- Lease of vehicle, driver

Corporate, community group and private sponsorship
- Private companies, community groups and individuals in an area can provide valuable support to transportation services in different capacities.
- Sponsorship, advertising on buses
- Donations
- Financial, capital, in-kind
- Funding and partnerships
- Capital
- Individual capital donations – The Independent Transportation Network in the US has received a number of donations of seniors’ vehicles, often in exchange for a number of rides through their services.
- Subsidized employee bus passes
- Promotions with local businesses – e.g. discount on meal with presentation of bus ticket

potential for ‘Green Money’
- Ecology Action Centre awarded Green Mobility Capital Grants between $5,000 and $25,000 in 2007. Program being developed for 2008-9 round.

Efficiencies with existing services
- Potential to utilize school board maintenance facilities/drivers (Strait Area Transit Cooperative)
- Potential to organize ‘ride brokerage’ services utilizing available seats on existing vehicles in the area
- Kings Transit has relationship with Metro Transit for training and maintenance

Freight/Parcel Service
- Synergy with package deliveries as potential revenue generation stream:
- Private packages, freight, deliveries to public delivery to public facilities – libraries/hospitals, etc.

Volunteer/In Kind
- Volunteer drivers and staff (many dial-a-ride services across Nova Scotia utilize volunteer drivers, though this can have impacts on insurance, reliability of the service and overwork or ‘burn-out’ of the volunteers).

Membership Models, Cooperatives:
- Membership models can provide a further stream of income for a service:
- A Cooperative model such as that practiced by the Strait Area Transportation Cooperative can provide valuable source of funding, and also, foster community buy-in of service. This version of the cooperative model charges $10 for membership of the service (not required to ride) that allows members to attend and vote at the AGM and stand to be elected to the Board of Directors
- Alternative membership models available offering exclusive use of service, discount on rides etc.

Appendix B. Resources: Documents and Groups

List of Reference Materials
The following list includes documents that the reader may find useful in developing transit service in your area.

Nova Scotia Community-Based Transportation Association: Facilitator’s Guidebook
Guidebook for NSCBTA members to run workshops for groups interested in starting up a transportation service in their area. The workshop is designed to encourage participants and help transmit the information of NSCBTA members to the broader community.

The guidebook can be accessed online through www.nscbta.ca Arrangements can be made through the NSCBTA to hold workshops in your community where the NSCBTA will work through the guidebook.

Contact David Mooney at 902 761 3395 available on the website at http://www.nscbta.ca

Halifax Regional Municipality: Rural Transit Planning Guidelines: User’s Guide
(ENTRA Consultants: Feb 2008)

Guidelines developed to assist communities within the HRM to plan and operate rural transit systems efficiently and addressing community needs effectively with an eye to connecting with existing and planned services. The guidelines build on the regional municipal planning strategy and data developed by the Canadian Urban Transit Association (CUTA).

http://www.halifax.ca/MetroTransit/documents/Part2.pdf

Town of Canmore: Transit Implementation Guidelines for Small Canadian Municipalities
(Masterton Planning Group, in association with D.A. Watt Consulting, Transportation Division: 2006)

Report by the Town of Canmore describes a process for examining the feasibility and implementation of public transit in a small community through the presentation of and working through of a series of questions. These questions can be worked through by a community looking to implement a public transit system to more fully understand the costs and benefits of operating a public transit system.

http://www.toolkit.bc.ca/sites/default/files/TransitGuidelinesSmallCommunities.pdf

Ecology Action Centre: Green Mobility Strategy
This sustainable transportation strategy, aimed at provincial decision-makers offers recommendations for improving the environmental, social and economic sustainability of transportation options in Nova Scotia. These transportation options include transit, carpooling, walking and cycling.

The goals of the Green Mobility Strategy are to develop an NS passenger transportation strategy that
will:
· Increase provincial government commitment to sustainable transportation
· Decrease transportation-related emissions that cause climate change and air pollution, while maintaining or increasing mobility levels of Nova Scotia residents
The objectives of the strategy are to:
· Develop a rationale for sustainable transportation in NS, including the benefits for the economy, health, tourism and safety
· Identify existing, proposed and potential transportation projects in NS, and their strengths and weaknesses
· Identify priority transportation projects and propose an implementation schedule and budget
· Identify implementation framework and guiding principles to support the delivery by the provincial government of transportation projects.

http://www.ecologyaction.ca/files/images/file/Transportation/GMG.pdf

Prince Edward Island Transit Cooperative: Island Wide Feasibility Study
This document presents the findings of a feasibility study into implementing an island-wide public transportation system in Prince Edward Island connecting rural and small urban locations.

Contact: David MacKay, 902-626-4364, david@ecopei.ca

http://www.ecopei.ca/ptc/PEI_Public_Transit_Feasibility_Entra_Final-Report-ExecSumm-June_05-
08.pdf

Partnerships and connections

Potential Partners and Groups who can Provide Assistance
Partners for funding, support, input, etc. differ from community to community. Presented below is information on some of those groups which have been most crucial to transit developments in the province. There are also some further suggestions for groups to involve, but much can be gained by thinking creatively about which other groups may be included, and it is good practice is to cast the net wide in searching for support for transit. When considering potential partners for the development of transit services it is important to consider what different partners will bring to the table.

Transport 2000 Atlantic
Transport 2000 Atlantic is a non-profit, consumer-based organization that promotes sustainable transport through advocacy and education. The association functions as a citizen-based advocacy group, focusing on all modes of public passenger transportation. Transport 2000 Atlantic’s activities include preparing studies, proposals, inquiries and reviews of public transport policy, researching public transport questions and providing contract consulting services, presenting briefs at public hearings, defending the user of public transport services in regular contact with government, regulatory bodies, transport companies, labour and other groups. Transport 2000 representatives regularly attend public hearings, participate in public forums and sit on industry and government advisory boards. Transport 2000 publishes the national newsletter Transport Action and the quarterly Atlantic Bulletin. Transport 2000 publishes occasional studies and position papers and regularly represents consumer interests in the media. Transport 2000 holds public meetings and seminars on the regional and national level, sometimes in concert with other groups.

http://www.transport2000.ca/atlantic

In addition to Transport 2000 Atlantic there are 5 other Transport 2000 groups across Canada. These groups can provide assistance and advice based on their particular experiences. Contact details for each of these groups can be obtained through the website at http://www.transport2000.ca

Ecology Action Centre
The Ecology Action Centre (EAC) has acted as a voice for Nova Scotia’s environment for over 35 years. Under the banner of the EAC are a number of projects and working groups which focus on transportation.

The Transportation Issues Committee (TIC) aims to improve sustainable transportation options in Nova Scotia.

TIC’s overarching goal is to foster environmentally sustainable and healthy communities through the promotion of sustainable transportation

TRAX aims to make sustainable transportation options more viable in Nova Scotia.

Green Mobility Grants successes in 2007-8 and are in the process of developing their 2008-9 program.

Looking provincially with the Green Mobility Strategy

Contact: www.ecologyaction.ca/trax, trax@ecologyaction.ca, 902 429 0924

There are a number of other projects and committees that run through the Ecology Action Centre. Included in these are specific projects around the built environment, coastal issues, energy, food, marine, wilderness and climate change.

More information is available via the website: http://www.ecologyaction.ca/, by email:
info@ecologyaction.ca or by phone at 902 429 2202

Nova Scotia Community-Based Transportation Association (NSCBTA)
The NSCBTA is an association of groups and individuals committed to the ideal of inclusive transportation. NSCBTA works to remedy lack of access to affordable, accessible transportation across Nova Scotia by educating both the community and decision makers, networking and working with both current and potential funders. The vision and mission of the organization are as follows:
Vision: Every Nova Scotian has access to affordable, accessible community-based transportation that supports them in making their lives what they are able and wish to have.
Affordable means the service is aware of the general resource limitations of the community and consumers it serves.
Accessible means accommodating to wheelchairs.
Community-based means the service is governed by the community itself and enables public engagement.
Mission: Recognizing the crucial role transportation plays in individual well-being, to promote, stimulate, and support the development and sustainability of community-based transportation throughout Nova Scotia.

Contact: David Mooney, 902 761 3395, davidmooney@eastlink.ca, http://www.nscbta.ca
Membership: Individual: $10 waged, $5 unwaged, Organization: $50

Pictou Unites

Citizens for Public Transit

National and from other jurisdictions

Canadian Urban Transit Association
The Canadian Urban Transit Association represents the public transit community in Canada and engages in a multitude of activities in support of its mission and goals. These include conferences, training, public affairs, awards, exhibitions, technical services, research, statistics and government relations. The Association’s primary activities include two conferences per year, one trade exposition, numerous magazines and bulletins, a detailed statistical database, research, training and government advocacy. Although the major focus of the organization is on urban transit, resources and expertise on rural transit can be accessed through CUTA.

Contact: http://www.cutaactu.ca/

Prince Edward Island Transit Cooperative
The Prince Edward Island Transit Coalition was instrumental in the development of the transit service in  Charlottetown. They have also recently been working towards an Island Wide Transit System. The feasibility study for this service will be available from the PEITC.

Contact: David MacKay, 902-626-4364, david@ecopei.ca

Victoria Transport Policy Institute
The Victoria Transport Policy Institute is an independent research organization dedicated to developing innovative and practical solutions to transportation problems. It provides a variety of resources available free on its website to help improve transportation planning and policy analysis. It are funded primarily through consulting and project grants. Its research has been widely used. It can help you:
- Identify better solutions to transportation problems, including some approaches that are frequently overlooked or misunderstood.
- Identify the full benefits, costs and equity impacts of alternative transportation policies and programs.
- Compare and evaluate alternatives.
- Create a bridge between theory and practice.

Contact: http://www.vtpi.org/, phone: (250)360-1560, e-mail: info@vtpi.org

Community Transportation Association of the Americas
The Community Transportation Association of America consists of organizations and individuals who support creating mobility for all Americans regardless of where they live or work.

Rural focus

http://www.ctaa.org

Transportation Providers
There are a number of transportation providers across the province with significant first hand experience in running services. Often these providers are willing to share their expertise, as witnessed by the outreach efforts of Metro Transit and Kings Transit.

All the Case Studies in part 2 of this document include contact information on those transportation service providers. Below are the contact details of other transit authorities and transportation providers across the province and in the Maritimes.

Transit authorities
Metro Transit (Halifax Regional Municipality), http://www.halifax.ca/metrotransit/
Transit Cape Breton (Cape Breton Regional Municipality), dlmacdonald@cbrm.ns.ca
Kings Transit (Annapolis Valley), http://www.kingstransit.ns.ca, Ron Mullins, General Manager, phone: 902-678-7310, email: manager@kingstransit.ns.ca
Strait Area Transit Cooperative (Strait Area), http://www.strait-highlands.ns.ca/, Malcolm Beaton, General Manager, phone: (902) 625-1475, email: straitareatransit@ns.aliantzinc.ca
Charlottetown Transit, Bobby Dunn, General Manager, phone: 902-566-9962, E-mail: charlottetowntransit@pei.aibn.com

Other Transportation Providers
Community Transportation Assistance Program service providers, contact details for all these services can be found at http://www.gov.ns.ca/snsmr/dialaride/
Huts Transit (Yarmouth), Gary Hudson, General Manager, phone: (902) 749 4309, email: hudson_891@hotmail.com
Acadian Lines (Provide motor coach passenger and package service across Nova Scotia), http://www.smtbus.com/, info@acadianbus.com, 1-800-567-5151
Trius Tours, (Provide daily linehaul service between Halifax and Yarmouth. Have transit experience through public-private partnership running Charlottetown Transit on Prince Edward Island.)
http://www.peisland.com/triustours/line.htm, phone: (902) 566-5664, Email: trius.tours@pei.aibn.com
Via Rail, http://www.viarail.ca, Ron Jackson, 902-494-7903,
Canadian National Railway, http://www.cn.ca/, Public Enquiries, 1-888-888-5909

There are also a large number of taxi and shuttle services across the province. You can check your local phone book for details on such transportation providers in your area.

Municipal governments
There are 55 municipalities across the Province. Municipalities are presently the largest financial contributors to transportation services across the province. Further to this, applications for Federal (and, to a changing extent, Provincial) transit money are typically applied for through municipalities, as such, municipal involvement is a key part of the transit puzzle.

A significant opportunity is presently opening up with regard to the development of Integrated Community Sustainability Plans (ICSPs), which, when developed and completed, allow communities access to funding pools. Many municipalities are developing their own ICSPs with input from their communities. These plans present possibilities to push the issue of local transit to the forefront, and to get transit included as a component of the ICSP from an early stage.

As well as dealing with your individual municipalities, the Union of Nova Scotian Municipalities (UNSM) is an overarching body which encompasses all the municipalities in the province, has regular meetings and a number of working groups. This is a level at which advocacy and information sharing can be focused towards a more regional and provincially-minded context. The UNSM also provides a channel of communication where municipalities who have seen the benefits of transit in their areas can communicate this to other, perhaps more sceptical municipal officials. Groups such as the Nova Scotia Community-Based Transportation Association have recently begun to work with this Union to push the cause of rural transit forward in Nova Scotia

Other groups

Regional Development Authorities
The primary function of the Regional Development Authorities (RDAs) is to integrate and coordinate the activities of all local development groups and/or undertake activities itself to accomplish common objectives within the regions. Ultimately, this is so communities may build competitiveness and capitalize on market opportunities. Many Regional Development Authorities across the province have demonstrated interest in public transportation, some becoming actively involved, such as the Strait-Highlands RDA.

Information on your local regional development authority can be found through the Nova Scotia RDA Association.

http://www.gov.ns.ca/econ/rda/

Community Health Boards
There are 37 Community Health Boards (CHBs) in Nova Scotia. CHBs are volunteer groups whose main task is to consult with local community residents about the various factors that affect health. Examples include physical environment, education, employment, personal health practices and social support networks.

Transportation has consistently come up as a key issue in the consultations of CHBs across the province. In recent years, CHBs have been instrumental in a number of positive transportation developments in Nova Scotia, such as the Kings Transit Service extension into Hants County and the development of the Strait Area Transit Cooperative.

You can find details on your local Community Health Board through the Health Promotion Clearinghouse.

http://www.hpclearinghouse.ca/initiatives/boards.asp 1-877- 890-5094

Local Universities
Nova Scotia has a wealth of resources at its fingertips in terms of higher education institutions which provide consulting services (usually at a financial cost). Students may also provide unpaid services if they are looking for projects for which they can gain credit for courses
- Saint Mary’s business school have developed a number of business plans and feasibility studies for potential public transport systems:
http://www.smu.ca/academic/sobey/contact/welcome.html
- Dalhousie University has a school of urban and rural planning which has conducted a number of studies on rural public transportation in recent years:
http://architectureandplanning.dal.ca/planning/index.shtml

Nova Scotia Utility and Review Board, Motor Carrier Division
“The Nova Scotia Utility and Review Board (“NSUARB” or “Board”) is responsible for the regulation of all public passenger carriers within the Province and interprovincial carriers operating to or from Nova Scotia. Carriers are broadly defined to include commercial bus companies, school bus operations, and van pools with a capacity of 9 or more passengers (excluding the driver). The mandate includes licensing, approving fares, routes, stops, and equipment for use, as well as hearing complaints against carriers, and hearing applications for modification or discontinuance of service. The Board acts under both the Motor Carrier Act and the Federal Motor Vehicle Transport Act, 1987. A public passenger vehicle is defined as a motor vehicle carrying passengers for gain.”

http://www.nsuarb.ca/
David White, Director, Motor Carrier Division
Phone (902) 424-4448, email: dave@gov.ns.ca

Nova Scotia Cooperative Council
provides a variety of services designed to help both new and existing co-operatives to grow and expand their business.

Contact: 902 893 8966 http://www.nsco-opcouncil.ca/

Maritime Biodiesel Cooperative
www.maritimebiodiesel.com, 1312 Robie St, Halifax, N.S., Email: info@maritimebiodiesel.com
Association of Community Rail Partnerships

Partnerships of local government, train operating companies (TOCs), community groups and the national rail track and infrastructure owner (Network Rail) in England, Scotland and Wales on rural railways. Partnerships act as a bridge between local communities and the railway industry with the aim of improving services.

http://www.acorp.uk.com/
Peter Roberts, Chair, Association of Community Rail Partnerships, phone: (+44) 01484 847790,
Email: peter@acorp.uk.com
Island Corridor Foundation, Vancouver Island
Charitable Foundation made up of Municipalities and First Nations groups. ICF negotiated the takeover of the rail corridor in Vancouver Island when it was under threat of abandonment. Infrastructure owners donated the corridor in return for a tax receipt.
http://www.islandcorridorfoundation.ca/

Doug Backhouse, Executive Director, phone: 250 754 5651, email: backhouse@lanarc.ca
Local Businesses

As discussed in section 4 there are a number of ways that local businesses may get involved with setting up and supporting public transportation services. Local Chambers of Commerce and Downtown Business District groups can provide information on resources.

Local Charitable Organizations, Community Groups and Service Clubs
Again, local chambers of commerce may be able to provide assistance in finding out more on these groups in your area.

Appendix C. Key Benefits of Successful Rural Public Transit

Some statistics and notes
- A U.S.A. Department of Transport (1998) study found a 3.35 to 1 benefit/cost ratio for investment in rural public transit. This essentially means that for every dollar spent on transit, $3.35 would be generated and/or saved in the local community.
- A study commissioned by the Regional Conference of Elected Representatives in Québec using a methodology based on the above study found benefit/cost ratios of rural public and adaptive transport systems in rural Capitale Nationale Québec up to 5.5 to 1.
- The average Canadian spends more on transportation than food or shelter ($7,600 per year in 2000) (PEI Transit Coalition, October 2007)

- Nova Scotia has the highest rural-urban income disparity, highest disability rate, and second highest proportion of over 65s in Canada.- The population of the bulk of Nova Scotia is declining and aging, leading to an increasing need to serve the needs of an aging population, maintain local populations and attract newcomers.

Key Benefits of Successful Rural Public Transit
Mobility
- Reliable and economical transportation for persons without access to private vehicle – youth, students, seniors, lower income families, people with disabilities, members of households with cars when car otherwise in use
Equity
- Improves equity of opportunity for those with and without regular access to private vehicles
Economic:
- Reduces strain on individuals’ transportation budgets (taxis, shuttles, private vehicle costs – fuel, insurance, registration, maintenance, repairs), increases disposable income which can be spent elsewhere in the community
- Improved access to jobs, increased pool of potential employees
- Increases draw of area to tourists, mobility of tourists
- Increases attractiveness of areas to potential employers looking for new locations
- Support to retail sector
- Increased traffic for other transportation providers
- Direct employment creation for drivers, staff
- Allows seniors to stay in their homes longer, reduces costs on long-term care facilities
- Reduces costs on healthcare providers and community services providing transportation and transportation costs to clients
- Reduction in accident-related health costs
- Reduced number of vehicles on roads, reduces wear and tear on roads, cost of maintenance
Environmental
- Net reduction in GHG emissions through shifting trips from private vehicles to shared
- Improvement in air quality through reductions in smog-producing particles
- Reduction in traffic
- Reduction in levels of toxic fluid run-off (oil, antifreeze, transmission, hydraulic and brake fluids) into water bodies
- Reduction in demand for construction of parking lots and road infrastructure
- Reduction in stress on ecosystems through fostering more compact and efficient development
Social
- Increased mobility leading to improved quality of life
- Improved access to social and recreational opportunities, community facilities etc.
- Decreased isolation and fostering of independence
- Improved autonomy for riders
Cultural
- Regular or event-based public transportation allows improved access to cultural events for locals and tourists
- Helps to preserve and strengthen local culture through allowing and encouraging groups to remain
in their communities
- Brings isolated individuals into communities
Community Viability
- Allows those without regular access to private vehicle to access services while remaining in their communities
- Allows formerly isolated individuals to belong to a community
- Improves attractiveness of served communities to potential residents
- Shows area to be community-minded and forward looking
- Assists in revitalization of downtown business districts
Health
- Provides ability to address key ‘determinants of health’
- Curative: Improved access to medical facilities
- Preventive: Improved access to nutritional food, routine medical appointments, recreational opportunities
- Significant benefits for individuals’ mental health due to reduction in isolation
- Transit riders typically walk more than drivers
- Possibilities for synergy with active transportation – bike racks on buses, etc.
Educational
- Improved access to educational facilities and training programs
- Students and teachers with mobility restrictions need not relocate for schooling
Safety
- Reduced number of vehicles on road
- Transit vehicles involved in fewer accidents than cars and light vehicles
- Risk of injury in accidents significantly lower for transit over cars

Advertisement