MMM Group Limited - Innisfil · Final Report | Town of Innisfil Transit Feasibility Study MMM Group Limited | September 2015 | 1515009 i TABLE OF CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1.0 INTRODUCTION

MMM Group Limited

TOWN OF INNISFIL

TRANSIT FEASIBILITY STUDY

FINAL REPORT September 2015

http://www.google.ca/url?sa=i&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&frm=1&source=images&cd=&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0CAcQjRxqFQoTCMa70qGJl8cCFYU4iAodqt0Plw&url=http://innisfil.ca/innisfil-community-grant-programs&ei=8bHEVYb_I4XxoASqu7-4CQ&bvm=bv.99804247,d.cGU&psig=AFQjCNGMpbZyQdaFUAdHuOUUvLP_q_duUg&ust=1439040362919584

Final Report | Town of Innisfil Transit Feasibility Study

MMM Group Limited | September 2015 | 1515009

i

TABLE OF CONTENTS

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

1.0 INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................1

2.0 CONTEXT FOR TRANSIT IN INNISFIL .....................................................2

2.1 Policy and Planning Context ........................................................................................... 2

2.2 Demographics, Land Use and Growth ........................................................................... 6

2.3 Modes of Travel and Destinations .................................................................................. 8

2.4 Transit and Transportation Services............................................................................ 11

3.0 WHAT WE HEARD FROM THE PUBLIC ................................................18

3.1 The Consultation Approach .......................................................................................... 18

3.2 Telephone and Online Survey ....................................................................................... 19

3.3 Public Open Houses ...................................................................................................... 24

3.4 Stakeholder and Staff Workshops ................................................................................ 27

3.5 Additional Consultation ................................................................................................. 32

4.0 VISION, MISSION AND GOALS FOR TRANSIT IN INNISFIL ................34

4.1 Vision and Mission for Transit ...................................................................................... 34

4.2 Goals for Transit ............................................................................................................. 35

5.0 TRANSIT SERVICE MODELS AND MARKET ASSESSMENT ..............37

5.1 Overview of Transit Service Models ............................................................................ 37

5.2 Peer Review of Fixed Route, Fixed Schedule Transit ................................................ 41

5.3 Peer Review of Specialized Transit Service ................................................................ 45

5.4 Transit Ridership in Innisfil ........................................................................................... 48

6.0 SHORT-TERM TRANSIT SERVICE OPTIONS .......................................51

6.1 Service to Priority Destinations .................................................................................... 51

6.2 Comparison of Options for Priority Destinations ....................................................... 57

6.3 Service to Additional Destinations ............................................................................... 59

6.4 Specialized Transit Service ........................................................................................... 61

7.0 SHORT-TERM TRANSIT SERVICE RECOMMENDATIONS ..................63



ii

7.1 Service Plan .................................................................................................................... 63

7.2 Service Hours and Schedule ......................................................................................... 64

7.3 Service Standards and Bus Stops................................................................................ 66

7.4 Bus Stops and Shelters ................................................................................................. 68

8.0 LONG-TERM TRANSIT NETWORK ........................................................71

9.0 SERVICE DELIVERY ...............................................................................73

9.1 Service Delivery Options ............................................................................................... 73

9.2 Conventional Transit Service Delivery Recommendations ....................................... 77

9.3 Specialized Transit Service Delivery Recommendations .......................................... 81

9.4 Regulatory Requirements and Risk Management ...................................................... 83

10.0 VEHICLES AND TECHNOLOGY .............................................................84

10.1 Vehicles ........................................................................................................................... 84

10.2 Technology ..................................................................................................................... 86

11.0 MUNICIPAL ORGANIZATION AND STAFFING .....................................88

12.0 MARKETING AND COMMUNICATION ...................................................90

12.1 Launch Marketing ........................................................................................................... 90

12.2 Ongoing Marketing and Communication ..................................................................... 92

13.0 FARE STRUCTURE AND RIDERSHIP PROJECTIONS .........................93

13.1 Recommended Fares ..................................................................................................... 93

13.2 Ridership and Fare Revenue Projections .................................................................... 94

14.0 FINANCIAL PLAN ....................................................................................96

14.1 Capital Costs ................................................................................................................... 96

14.2 Operating Costs.............................................................................................................. 96

14.3 Revenues and Funding .................................................................................................. 98

14.4 Five-Year Financial Plan .............................................................................................. 100

15.0 IMPLEMENTATION PLAN .....................................................................105

APPENDIX A – Survey Questions and Results

APPENDIX B – Additional Information on Contracting and Procurement



iii

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Introduction

The Town of Innisfil is a growing municipality within Simcoe County that has developed a vision for its

future: “The place to be by 2020”. As the population grows, the Town is aiming to dramatically improve

quality of life, showcase Innisfil’s diversity and appeal, and make sure businesses can excel. In line with

these objectives and with the recommendations of the Innisfil Transportation Master Plan, the Town is

evaluating the need for public transit and considering the options for transit in Innisfil.

Building on the work completed by the Town of Innisfil as part of the Transportation Master Plan and

subsequently, MMM Group conducted a Transit Feasibility Study that reviews the options for transit and

develops recommendations for the coming years. The specific objectives of the Study are as follows:

► To identify Innisfil public transit needs;

► To develop a transit network concept, service plan and service standards for transit that address

community needs and meet Accessibility for Ontarians with Disabilities Act (AODA) requirements;

► To recommend a service delivery model, business plan, financial plan and implementation plan for

the recommended transit service; and

► To engage the public and stakeholders in a dialogue about transit in Innisfil.

Public and Stakeholder Consultation

As part of the Transit Feasibility Study, the consultant team worked with Town staff to undertake a wide

range of consultation and engagement activities including the following:

► Statistically valid telephone survey of Innisfil residents and online survey;

► Stakeholder workshops with Nantyr Shores Secondary School, Sandycove Acres and the Innisfil

Accessibility Committee;

► Two public open houses; and

► Conversations with Innisfil business representatives, Barrie Transit, the County of Simcoe, Tanger

Outlet Mall, Georgian Downs and others.

The consultation activities indicated a strong need for transit and a high level of support for transit

among Town residents. Frequently mentioned themes included the importance of transit for youth,

seniors and people with disabilities; the need for transit to access jobs, education, shopping, recreation,

health services, and other destinations; and community benefits related to property values, quality of life

and ability to attract future growth. At the same time, some residents expressed concerns about transit

due to the additional costs for the Town and taxpayers, and the rural geography of the Town.

The results of the telephone survey are particularly informative, as they represent a randomly selected

cross-section of residents. Environics Research conducted a statistically valid automated telephone



iv

survey of 477 Innisfil residents on June 8, 2015. The margin of error for a sample of 477 is plus or minus

4.5 percentage points (at the 95% confidence level). Key findings of the telephone survey are as follows:

► There is widespread support (77%) for the introduction of a public transit service in Innisfil. More

than half of survey respondents (56%) indicated that they “strongly support” the introduction of public

transit in Innisfil.

► More than six in ten residents believe that an extra $25 a year in property taxes is reasonable to pay

for transit.

► Residents were asked what destinations they would like to see connected to the “core” destinations

of Alcona and the Innisfil Recreational Complex. Barrie Transit/the south end of Barrie was by far the

most frequently selected destination for transit to serve. The Tanger Outlet Mall in Cookstown was

selected second most frequently.

Transit Vision, Mission and Need

Based on the review of the Innisfil context and consultation results, an Innisfil transit service would

provide many benefits, now and in the future as Innisfil grows and develops. These include the following:

► Mobility for seniors, youth, people with disabilities and other non-drivers;

► Increased affordability of transportation for residents who struggle with the costs of vehicle

ownership and use;

► Support for active transportation, physical activity and public health;

► Increased use of other Town services and facilities such as the Recreational Complex; and

► Resident and business attraction and retention.

A draft vision, mission and goals for a transit system were developed based on a review of the Innisfil

context and results of public and stakeholder engagement. These statements can be adopted or refined

by Innisfil Council when there is a decision to implement a transit system. The proposed Vision and

Mission are identified below. The primary target audience for Innisfil’s transit service includes seniors,

youth, people with disabilities, and residents without regular access to a vehicle.

Vision Mission

Transit supports the long-term vision of Innisfil as “the place to be”. Thanks to transit, Innisfil residents of all ages and abilities

can access opportunities and achieve a high quality of life.

To deliver an affordable, accessible, customer-focused Innisfil transit service that connects

people and places.



v

Transit Service Recommendations

Short-Term Conventional Service

MMM Group developed and analyzed a number of options to address Innisfil’s priorities for transit in the

immediate future. Based on the analysis of Innisfil’s population and employment, travel patterns and

consultation results, the priority destinations for transit were identified as follows:

► Alcona (along Innisfil Beach Road and through the urban area to Nantyr Shores Secondary School);

► Innisfil Recreational Complex and Town Hall; and

► South end of Barrie, with a connection to Barrie Transit.

A variety of on-demand, flexible and fixed service models were considered. Five route options were

developed and compared, all of which would operate on an hourly frequency with either one or two

vehicles in operation. Based on the comparison of route options, two routes were shortlisted: a one-bus

option and a two-bus option. Ridership was estimated based on experiences in other peer municipalities

and based on the route characteristics. The tables below summarize the two shortlisted route options.

Alcona to Barrie South GO (1 bus - hourly service)

Service Design

Hourly service can be provided with a single vehicle in service.

Anticipated ridership: 6-7 boardings per hour, ~16,000 per year

Serves the core destinations only, connecting to Barrie Transit at the Barrie South GO; does not

serve Sandycove Acres or Park Place.

Total round trip travel time is 52 minutes which provides 8 minutes for recovery between trips.

Service to Nantyr Shores Secondary School and the residential areas south of Innisfil Beach Road is via a one-direction loop. Service in two directions cannot be provided via the Alcona South loop as it would increase the round trip travel time to 60 minutes.



vi

Sandycove to Park Place via Alcona (2 bus - hourly service)

Service Design

Hourly service cannot be provided with a single vehicle in service; two vehicles are required.

The total round trip travel time is 102 minutes long which provides 18 minutes for recovery between trips.

Anticipated ridership: 5-6 boardings per bus per hour, ~25,000 per year

Wider service area coverage than the one-bus option, serving Sandycove Acres and Park Place

Service to Nantyr Shores Secondary School and the residential areas south of Innisfil Beach Road is via a two-direction loop.

It is possible to accommodate route deviations to serve a potential future GO Station at 6th Line Road without requiring additional vehicles in service.

It is also possible to serve the Barrie South GO Station with northbound buses on Yonge Street continuing northbound to the Barrie South GO Station instead of turning onto Lockhart Road.

It is recommended that the Innisfil transit service begin with service hours from 7:00am to 7:00pm on

weekdays and 9:00am to 5:00pm on Saturdays. Service standards are proposed for hours of service,

service coverage, frequency of service, route design, bus stops and performance standards.

The MMM team also identified two short-term service options to connect Tanger Outlet Mall with Alcona:

a fixed schedule limited service, and an on-demand service. In addition to connecting Alcona and

Tanger Mall, these services would connect Lefroy-Belle Ewart residents to Alcona and Tanger. Either

transit service option could be delivered using small vehicles such as taxis, or with larger vehicles such

as community buses. The telephone and online surveys clearly identified the Tanger Mall as residents’

next priority for transit, after connecting the “core” destinations and the south end of Barrie. However, the

demand for transit to Tanger is expected to be significantly lower than for the core transit service.



vii

Specialized Transit Service

The Town of Innisfil’s conventional transit service will be fully accessible, in line with AODA

requirements, reducing demand for door-to-door transit and making it easier for residents with

disabilities to travel within the Town. In addition, under section 45(1) of the Integrated Accessibility

Standard Regulation, an alternative accessible method of transportation must be provided by a

municipality if its conventional transportation service cannot be used by a person with a disability

because of his/her disability and if there is no specialized transportation service in the area. MMM

Groups recommends that the Town offer a dedicated specialized transit service and define the service

area as within 800m walking distance of the conventional transit route.

Long-Term Transit Network

Based on the analysis of options, three additional transit routes/services are recommended as part of

the long-term service plan to connect key employment areas and larger residential areas that are

expected to experience growth. The following three routes/services will supplement the fixed route

transit service connecting Alcona, Barrie and the Innisfil Recreational Complex:

► Cookstown to Alcona via Lefroy and Tanger Outlet Mall: limited-hour fixed schedule service or on-

demand service;

► Alcona to Innisfil Heights and Georgian Downs: peak hour fixed route service; and

► Alcona to Big Bay Point/Friday Harbour: on-demand service.

Service Delivery

Conventional Transit Service Delivery

MMM assessed the options for conventional transit service delivery based on factors that include:

service quality, operating costs, risks, flexibility, local capacity and revenue possibilities. Based on this

assessment, a contracted service delivery model is recommended. The MMM team also identified

potential operators for the conventional transit service.

A competitive procurement process using a publicly advertised request for proposal (RFP) is

recommended to obtain the best price and quality for contracted service delivery. Before soliciting bids,

the Town may want to obtain an updated quote for conventional transit service delivery through an inter-

municipal agreement with the City of Barrie.

Specialized Transit Service Delivery

The demand for specialized transit in the Town will likely be low in the initial years of service, and will

grow in subsequent years as awareness of the service increases and the ridership base grows. To limit

the costs of providing specialized transit service in the first five years of service, a scalable service

delivery model is recommended with costs based on the actual service delivered (vehicle hours or



viii

kilometres). It is therefore recommended that the Town delegate or contract service delivery to one of

the organizations in the area that already operates wheelchair-accessible transit service and that has the

staff, vehicles and capacity to meet varying levels of demand for specialized transit service. There are a

number of organizations that would be well positioned to deliver specialized transit in Innisfil.

To better establish the capacities of these organizations and their interest in delivering specialized transit

service in Innisfil, the Town could issue a Request for Expressions of Interest. This could be used as the

basis for subsequent negotiations with qualified providers and a potential sole source agreement.

Alternatively, it could be followed by a Request for Proposal or Request for Quote targeted at qualified

potential service providers.

Five-Year Financial Plan

MMM Group developed five-year financial plans for the one-bus and two-bus transit services, including

estimates of capital costs, operating costs, revenues and funding sources. Capital costs include the cost

of purchasing vehicles, purchasing and installing bus stop signs and infrastructure upgrades to priority

bus stops. Operating costs include hourly costs of contracted service delivery, costs for contractor-

provided standby vehicles, municipal staffing costs, bus stop maintenance costs, marketing costs and

costs related to vehicle refurbishment. In addition to fare revenues, primary funding sources include the

Ontario Gas Tax program, County of Simcoe grant funding and potential cost-sharing arrangements with

the City of Barrie.

One-Bus Service

Table E1 identifies the total costs, revenue sources and net costs for the one-bus service. Table E2

presents the associated key performance indicators for conventional transit.

Table E1 Year 1 to 5 Net Costs – One Bus

Net Costs Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5

Total Costs

Total Capital Costs $231,000 $10,000 $10,000 $10,000 $10,000

Total Operating Costs $330,000 $344,000 $366,000 $389,000 $410,000

Total Costs $561,000 $354,000 $376,000 $399,000 $420,000

Revenue Sources

Fare Revenue $39,000 $47,000 $51,000 $55,000 $59,000

Ontario Gas Tax Funding* $200,000 $152,000 $161,000 $171,000 $180,000

Simcoe County funding** $50,000 - - - -

Total Revenue $289,000 $199,000 $212,000 $226,000 $239,000

Net Costs $272,000 $155,000 $164,000 $173,000 $181,000

* Gas Tax funds provided to each municipality cannot exceed 75% of municipal own spending on transit. Municipal own spending includes passenger revenues and municipal contributions to operating and capital expenses. As a result of this 75% cap, the Gas Tax funding available to the Town would decrease after year 1 as total costs of the transit service would be lower.

**Potential revenue source; availability depends on 2016 budget and other municipal applications



ix

Table E2 Year 1 to 5 Key Performance Indicators – One Bus, Conventional Transit

Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5

Total Operating Cost per Service Hour $83 $85 $88 $91 $93

Cost Recovery Ratio 13% 16% 17% 17% 18%

Net Cost per Passenger* $17 $14 $14 $14 $13 *Total operating cost minus fare revenues

Two-Bus Service

Table E3 identifies the total costs, revenue sources and net costs for the two-bus service. Table E4

presents the associated the key performance indicators for conventional transit.

Table E3 Year 1 to 5 Net Costs – Two Buses


Total Costs



Total Costs: Capital and Operating $980,000 $610,000 $644,000 $679,000 $708,000

Revenue Sources

Fare Revenue $67,000 $84,000 $92,000 $101,000 $101,000

Ontario Gas Tax Funding $200,000 $200,000 $200,000 $200,000 $200,000

Simcoe County Funding* $50,000 - - - -

City of Barrie Cost-Sharing* $58,000 $59,000 $60,000 $61,000 $62,000

Total Revenue $375,000 $343,000 $352,000 $362,000 $363,000

Net Costs $605,000 $267,000 $292,000 $317,000 $345,000 *Potential revenue sources; availability unconfirmed

Table E4 Year 1 to 5 Key Performance Indicators – Two Buses, Conventional Transit

Performance Indicators Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5



Net Operating Cost per Passenger $17 $15 $14 $14 $14 *Total operating cost minus fare revenues

Implementation Plan

An implementation schedule was developed with a target launch date of August 1, 2016 used for

planning purposes. This date would enable the Town to figure out any final service delivery details

before September, when school resumes and transit demand tends to increase. Recommendations

regarding timing include the following:

► Manufacturers have indicated that 18- to 24-seat, low floor cut-away transit vehicles can take up to

six months for delivery after they are ordered. The Town should order the vehicle in early January of



x

2016 in order to receive the vehicle in late June of 2016. This will provide a month for vehicle testing,

driver training, decal application, etc.

► It is recommended that the Town negotiate and finalize a contract with an operating company in

April or May of 2016. This will provide the operating company with several months to hire staff (if

needed) and prepare for service delivery in advance of the launch date.

► With a start date of August 1, 2016, the Ministry of Transportation has indicated that there will be

adequate time for the Town of Innisfil’s transit service to be considered for inclusion in the

2016/2017 Ontario Gas Tax program. Town staff should contact the Ministry for advice on next steps

after two decisions have been made: the decision to proceed with a transit service, and the decision

regarding whether the Town will operate a system on their own or partner with a neighbouring

municipality.



1

1.0 INTRODUCTION


future: “The place to be by 2020”. As the population grows, the Town is aiming to dramatically improve

quality of life, showcase Innisfil’s diversity and appeal, and make sure businesses can excel. In line with

these objectives, the Town is evaluating the need for public transit and considering the options for transit

in Innisfil. The Town has heard from residents that there is a need for public transit to improve quality of

life. The Town’s 2013 Transportation Master Plan (TMP) also identified the importance of transit to

improve mobility for residents without access to a vehicle and to prevent additional road congestion.

Building on the work completed by the Town of Innisfil as part of the TMP and subsequently, MMM Group

conducted a Transit Feasibility Study that reviews the options for transit and develops recommendations

for the coming years. The specific objectives of the Study are as follows:

► To identify Innisfil public transit needs;

► To develop a transit network concept, service plan and service standards for transit that address

community needs and meet AODA requirements;

► To recommend a service delivery model, business plan, financial plan and implementation plan for the

recommended transit service; and

► To engage the public and stakeholders in a dialogue about transit in Innisfil.

The Transit Feasibility Study Draft Final Report is organized as follows:

► Section 2 describes the context for transit in Innisfil;

► Section 3 presents the results of public and stakeholder engagement;

► Section 4 discusses the vision, goals and challenges for transit in Innisfil;

► Section 5 presents the results of the peer review and market assessment;

► Section 6 identifies short-term transit service options for Innisfil;

► Section 7 provides short-term transit service recommendations for Innisfil;

► Section 8 outlines a long-term transit network for Innisfil;

► Section 9 identifies service delivery options and provides service delivery recommendation;

► Section 10 discusses vehicles and assets;

► Sections 11 and 12 discuss municipal staffing and marketing and communications;

► Section 13 recommends a fare structure and provides year-by-year ridership projections;

► Section 14 present a five-year financial plan with costs and revenue sources; and

► Section 15 presents an implementation plan, with timelines and next steps to make transit a reality in

Innisfil.



2

2.0 CONTEXT FOR TRANSIT IN INNISFIL

2.1 Policy and Planning Context

This section summarizes the strategic planning, transportation planning and transit planning work that the

Town has conducted to date. The feasibility study builds on this strong foundation of technical analysis

and community consultation.

Inspiring Innisfil 2020


future: “The place to be by 2020”. Traditionally a rural municipality with a number of small community

centres, the Town is expected to grow from about 32,000 people in 2013 to about 65,000 by 2031. As the

population grows, the Town is aiming to dramatically improve quality of life, showcase Innisfil’s diversity

and appeal, and make sure businesses can excel. Specific objectives include: improving transportation

networks to unite residents, businesses and communities; and promoting a vibrant urban core in Alcona.

The Town has heard from residents that there is a need for public transit to improve quality of life.

Official Plan and Our Place Official Plan Update

The Town of Innisfil is in the process of updating the Town's Official Plan (OP) through a comprehensive

process entitled ‘Our Place’. The Town is not only looking to ‘check the boxes’ for a legislated Official Plan

update, but to identify and articulate the policy elements that achieve place making and strengthen

emotional connections between residents and the Town of Innisfil. ‘Our Place’ will have updated planning

principles and policies to guide how the Town grows and develops over the next 20 years. Our Place aims

to improve the quality of life experienced by all residents, while transforming Innisfil as a more balanced

and complete community that provides greater opportunities to live, work, shop and play. The following

themes being considered as part of ‘Our Place’ are relevant to public transit in Innisfil:

► Healthy Communities: Innisfil’s current Official Plan has strong complete community policies that

encourage the efficient use of land and infrastructure, a pedestrian scale environment, an

interconnected active transportation and transit network, and diverse and mixed communities. In ‘Our

Place’, these policies will be strengthened. The Healthy Communities Discussion Paper

recommendations include the following: identifying alternate modes of transportation in the vision,

creating a separate alternate transportation mode section, encouraging compact urban form and

considering connectivity between active transportation and transit.

► Intensification: The Simcoe County Official Plan establishes intensification targets for local

municipalities and minimum density targets for designated greenfield areas. The Town of Innisfil has

an intensification target of 33% and a minimum density target of 32 persons and jobs per hectare for

new greenfield area developments. With the trend toward intensification and increased density, Innisfil

can expect an increased market for public transit and higher ridership levels in the coming years.



3

► Retail: Residents currently have to leave Innisfil to do much of their shopping. However, an updated

retail demand analysis has concluded that there is market support for an expanded retail sector in the

Town, and includes recommendations to advance the retail sector in Alcona. An expanded retail

sector and a public transit service would be mutually supportive. Public transit would help Town

residents access retail destinations, employees access retail sector jobs, and contribute to local

business success. At the same time, an expanded retail sector would help to increase internal trip-

making within Innisfil and boost public transit ridership.

Innisfil Transportation Master Plan

In line with the strategic objectives of Inspiring Innisfil 2020, the Town developed its first Transportation

Master Plan (TMP) in 2013. The vision of the 2013 Innisfil TMP is as follows: “Innisfil’s transportation

network connects people and communities, fostering healthy living and operates efficiently across the

Town as an environmentally and financially sustainable

system.” The TMP identified the importance of transit to

improve mobility for residents without access to a

vehicle and to prevent additional road congestion. The

TMP also documented the community’s interest in an

Innisfil transit service and the priority transit

destinations, based on in-person consultation and an

online survey. Finally, the TMP developed two transit

network concepts for Innisfil. The short-term network

concept featured one conventional fixed transit route

supplemented by shared-ride, fixed route taxi service to

outlying areas (Figure 1). The long-term network would

extend the fixed route to Churchill and Lefroy.

Transit Service Level Change Requests

Since the TMP, the Town has done significant additional work to advance transit. The Town presented a

staff report on transit options to Council in June 2013 (DSR-105-13) and obtained a Council resolution to

request a Service Level Change. The Town also conducted a review of public transit in other

municipalities, developed a route plan and recommended hours of service, and estimated the cost of

delivering the service in partnership with Barrie Transit. Finally, staff presented Service Level Change

requests for transit as part of the 2014 and 2015 budget processes. In 2015, the proposed costs of

delivering the service were significantly lower than in 2014 as Barrie Transit’s new contractor offered lower

hourly rates. Despite the lower cost, Council did not feel that it had the information required to approve the

Service Level Change. Instead, in January of 2015, Council directed staff to conduct a transit feasibility

study and present it prior to the final budget deliberations.

Figure 1 TMP Short Term Transit Network Concept



4

Previous Public Consultation on Transit

The Town has already obtained input from residents through three opt-in surveys: the TMP Questionnaire

in 2012, the Public Transit Survey in the fall of 2013 (in advance of the 2014 Service Level Change

request), and the “Your Two Cents” online survey for the 2015 Operating Budget. The Town also received

public input on transit at open houses conducted as part of the TMP in 2012 and in the fall of 2013. Finally,

the desire for public transit emerged from a telephone survey conducted as part of the ‘Our Place’ Retail

Sector Discussion Paper. The results of these consultation activities are summarized below.

Level of Support for Transit

The consultation conducted as part of the TMP indicated a strong level of support for transit. About 74% of

Questionnaire respondents support local public transit, stating that they would use the system if it were

provided. Numerous respondents also noted that they expect that local transit service would be required to

support their future mobility needs as they age. The TMP Questionnaire respondents who did not support

public transit in Innisfil questioned the availability of sufficient funds to support a transit system.

Additional feedback on this topic from the TMP Public Open Houses included the following:

► Local transit is needed for work, medical, school, recreation, and shopping trips, especially for youth,

adults and seniors without access to a vehicle. Local transit is also needed because of road

congestion and lack of sidewalks/trails.

► Big Bay Point / Sandycove in particular will need transit services since many of the residents are

elderly and taxi service would be cost prohibitive to get around.

► Taxpayers do not want to pay for services that are underutilized.

Additional information on residents’ desire for public transit emerged from a telephone survey conducted in

March of 2015, as part of a retail demand analysis linked to ‘Our Place’. Tate Economic Research

contracted Telepoll Research to undertake an in-home consumer telephone survey of approximately 400

households. When asked the open-ended question, “What one type of service would you like to see more

availability of in Innisfil”, public transit was the second most common response (18%), second only to

“Don’t know”. More doctors / health care and restaurants were further down the list, with 14% and 11%

respectively.

Destinations for Transit to Serve

Approximately 40% of TMP survey respondents desire a local Innisfil public transportation system to

support travel to municipal facilities within each community, and between the different communities in

Innisfil. In addition, over 70% of respondents would like a public transit connection to the north to connect

to Barrie, and approximately 40% of respondents would like a public transit connection to the south to

Bradford and York Region.



5

In the 2013 Public Transit Survey, respondents selected the following top destinations for transit to serve:

Barrie South GO (54%), the Innisfil Recreational Complex and Town Hall (50%), Downtown Alcona (49%)

and within all areas of Innisfil (43%). Park Place (33%) and Stroud (33%) were also common responses.

Figure 2 Desired destinations for public transit to serve – TMP Questionnaire (left) and Public Transit Survey (right)

Willingness to Pay for Transit

Two of these surveys addressed the public’s willingness to pay for transit, and these surveys yielded

contradictory results. In the Public Transit Survey in the fall of 2013, about 65 percent of the 268 survey

respondents indicated that they would support a 1% tax increase to pay for transit. However, in the “Your

Two Cents” survey, about 70 percent of respondents indicated that they were not willing to pay higher

taxes for buses. This uncertainty may have contributed to Council’s unwillingness to invest in public transit

in 2014 and 2015.

The statistically valid telephone survey conducted as part of the current Innisfil Transit Feasibility Study

addresses the questions of level of support for public transit, willingness to pay for transit and priority

destinations for transit to serve. The results of the telephone survey and other public consultation activities

conducted as part of the current study are presented in section 3 of the report.

Requirements of the Accessibility for Ontarians with Disabilities Act

Ontario’s Accessibility for Ontarians with Disabilities Act (AODA) (2005) sets out goals, actions and

timeframes to make Ontario accessible by 2025. AODA requires transportation service providers to meet

certain standards for accessible service provision (Table 1), eligibility (Table 1) and accessible vehicles

and stops (described in Section 10.0). There are also requirements related to: service disruptions and

service delays; connections between specialized transit in adjacent municipalities; non-functioning

accessibility equipment; emergency preparedness and response; vehicle steps, floors, indicators and

alarms; accessibility of information; accessibility training for transit staff and volunteers; and eligibility

application process, timelines and appeal process.



6

Table 1 Accessibility for Ontarians with Disabilities Act Requirements for Specialized Transit Service and Eligibility

Transit Service Eligibility

► Vehicles: Vehicles for conventional and specialized

transportation must be fully accessible as described in

Section 10.0.

► Alternative accessible method of transportation or

specialized transportation: An alternative accessible

method of transportation must be provided by a

municipality if its conventional transportation service

cannot be used by a person with a disability because of

his/her disability and if there is no specialized

transportation service in the area.1 AODA requirements

for specialized transportation are identified below.

► Hours of service: Provide specialized transit service, at a

minimum, for the same service hours as conventional

transit service.

► Reservations: Provide same day service for specialized

transportation users to the extent possible.

► Fare parity: Fares for specialized transportation must be

the same or lower than the highest fare charged for

conventional transportation in the same jurisdiction.

► Medical aids: Allow a person with a disability to travel

with a medical aid.

► Companions and children: Allow persons with

disabilities to travel with companions and children.

► Definitions and application process: Each municipality

defines what it means for a person to have “a disability

that prevents them from using conventional transportation

services”. Each municipality develops their own

application process for specialized transit.

► Categories of eligibility: AODA sets out three

categories: “unconditional”, “temporary” and “conditional”

eligibility. A specialized transportation service provider

may deny requests for specialized transportation services

to persons who are categorized as having temporary

eligibility or conditional eligibility if the conventional

service is accessible to the person and the person has the

ability to use it.

► Visitors: Make specialized transportation services

available to visitors.

2.2 Demographics, Land Use and Growth

Demographics, land use and growth are important determinants of transit demand. This section highlights

population and employment data and projections from the TMP 2013 that are relevant to the transit

feasibility study.

1 As an example, a municipality could provide accessible taxi service as an alternative accessible method of transportation. There are no fare parity requirements for alternative accessible methods of transportation.



7

Population and Demographics

The Town of Innisfil has experienced notable population growth in the last ten years. Between 2001 and

2011, the population increased by 15%, from 28,670 to 33,080, or 1.4% per year based on Census data.

The number of households has increased at a similar rate over the past ten years, from almost 12,000 to

almost 14,000. Population density for the Town as a whole has increased from 101 persons/km2 to 116

persons/km2. However, there is significant variation in population density in different parts of the Town.

According to 2001 to 2011 Census data, there is also a demographic shift toward an older population in

Innisfil. The proportion of the population aged 45 or older has increased from 34% in 2001 to 45% in 2011.

This shift has occurred alongside a decrease in the proportion of the population aged 24 to 44, from 33%

in 2001 to 24% in 2011.

Land Use and Growth

The Provincial Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe (2006) allocates population and

employment targets to upper-tier municipalities within the Greater Golden Horseshoe, including to Simcoe

County. In addition to these allocations, the Growth Plan contains policies that direct growth to built-up

areas, provide for a range of land uses and dwelling types, and promote multi-modal transportation

options.

In 2012, the Province released Amendment 1 to the Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe. The

Amendment addressed the Simcoe Sub-area and identified Alcona as a “Primary Settlement Area”, where

the majority of future growth is to be directed. The Amendment also identified Innisfil Heights as one of

four Strategic Settlement Employment Areas within the County.

Under the Provincial Growth Plan and Simcoe County Official Plan, the Town of Innisfil’s population and

employment is projected to double between 2006 and 2031. The 2031 population and employment

allocations for the Town of Innisfil are 56,000 people and 13,100 jobs. The growth in population and

employment has been allocated between the Town’s settlement areas by the Town’s Water and

Wastewater Master Servicing Plan (2012). The Town’s current Official Plan extends to the year 2026, and

the Town is currently updating its Official Plan to extend to the 2031 horizon year.

In addition to the 2031 population forecasts from Simcoe County’s Official Plan, the Town’s Transportation

Master Plan identifies an additional 1,600 units proposed within the Friday Harbour Resort (Big Bay Point),

half of which are already under construction. This all-season vacation home community for GTA residents

will include a large inland marina, 18-hole golf course, and Marina Village and boardwalk with shops,

services and restaurants. An additional 5,000 people are also expected as part of the Sleeping Lion

development project within the Alcona South expansion area, bringing the total Innisfil population forecast

to 65,000 by 2031. The Sleeping Lion project would see the construction of almost 1,000 single-detached

homes, more than 220 town homes, approximately 570 apartment units and a large area zoned mixed-use

community commercial adjacent to the rail line with up to 16,000 square meters of office space and retail.



8

Based on this information, Table 2 (reproduced from the 2013 Transportation Master Plan) illustrates the

Town’s projected population and employment. The majority of the growth is projected to occur in Alcona,

with approximately 15,000 people being added. Significant growth is also projected to occur in Lefroy –

Belle Ewart, Big Bay Point, Sandycove and Cookstown. The small, historic, partially serviced Village

Settlements of Stroud, Churchill, Fennell’s Corners and Gilford are not projected to experience significant

growth.

Table 2 Population and employment projections (reproduced from the Transportation Master Plan)

Settlement Area

Population Employment

2006 2021 2031 % growth 2006 to

2031 2006 2021 2031

% growth 2006 to

2031

Big Bay Point 2,743 6,983 7,356 +168% 205 500 1,233 +501%

Sandycove 3,405 3,405 9,551 +180% 255 200 303 +19%

Leonard’s Beach 1,232 1,237 1,238 0% 0 0 0 n/a

Alcona North Existing

Settlement 6,935 11,925 11,925 +72% 900 937 974 +8%

Alcona South Existing

Settlement 6,935 11,925 11,925 +72% 730 742 755 +3%

Alcona South Expansion Area 0 5,000 5,000 n/a 0 0 0 n/a

Big Cedar Point 806 806 819 +2% 0 0 0 n/a

Lefroy – Belle Ewart 3,063 6,098 8,218 +168% 269 402 534 +99%

Gilford – Degrassi Pt 1,826 2,141 2,141 +17% 161 150 139 -14%

Fennel’s Corner 196 196 196 0% 0 0 0 n/a

Churchill 620 620 761 +23% 114 135 155 +36%

Stroud 2,239 2,494 2,494 +11% 413 461 509 +23%

Cookstown 1,431 3,477 3,477 +143% 264 487 709 +169%

Innisfil Heights 321 321 321 0% 2,388 4,388 5,388 +126%

Innisfil Heights Expansion Area 0 0 0 n/a 0 0 2,400 n/a

Total 31,752 56,628 65,422 +106% 5,699 8,402 13,099 +130%

2.3 Modes of Travel and Destinations

This section draws on data from the Transportation Tomorrow Survey conducted in 2011 to analyze Innisfil

residents’ travel patterns and modes of travel, building on the analyses included in the TMP. The



9

Transportation Tomorrow Survey is a household travel survey conducted by telephone in the Greater

Toronto and Hamilton Area every five years in conjunction with the Census or National Household Survey.

The analysis of existing travel patterns and modes of travel supports the assessment of transit need and

the design of transit networks.

Modes of Travel and Automobile Dependency

The automobile is the dominant mode of transportation in Innisfil. Over 85% of trips made by Innisfil

residents during the morning peak period are made by private vehicle, either as a driver or passenger.

Walking and cycling account for 5% of trips and GO transit accounts for 1% of trips. An additional 9% are

made by other modes, the majority of which are trips by school bus (Figure 3). In the mid-day, the

proportion of automobile passenger trips is considerably higher than during the morning peak period,

which may be linked to non-drivers completing errands and shopping, attending appointments, etc. The

mode split has remained relatively constant since 2001.

Figure 3 AM and Mid-Day Mode Split (2011)

The TTS data indicates that non-drivers within the Town of Innisfil may struggle to make trips and access

opportunities. Residents age 16 and over who have a driver’s license make 50% more trips per day than

residents who don’t have a driver’s license (Figure 4). The reduced rate of trip-making for all purposes

suggests potential mobility challenges among non-drivers.

Figure 4 Number of Trips per Day by Driver’s License Status (2011)



10

Innisfil households owned an average of 2.0 vehicles in 2011, a slight increase over ownership rates in

previous years (Figure 5). These vehicle ownership rates are comparable to those of other rural

municipalities in the area, but are higher than those in Barrie and other more urban municipalities.

Figure 5 Vehicle Ownership Trend 1996-2011

Travel Patterns and Destinations

The destinations of trips made by Innisfil residents vary by time of day. Trips within Innisfil account for the

highest proportion of trips during the mid-day period (9:00am to 4:00pm). Trips to or from Toronto and

York Region are most prevalent during the morning peak period (6:00 to 9:00am) and evening peak period

(4:00pm to 7:00pm). Trips to or from Barrie are relatively stable during all periods of the day, as a

proportion of total trips (Figure 6).

Figure 6 Trips Made by Innisfil Residents to/from Innisfil: Origins/Destinations by Time of Day (2011)

Figure 7 illustrates the total trips made by Innisfil residents to these destinations at different times of the

day. Absolute trip making rates within Innisfil are highest during the morning peak period, while trip making

rates to and from Barrie are highest in the evening peak period.



11

Figure 7 Trips Made by Innisfil Residents to/from Innisfil Per Hour by Time of Day (2011)

2.4 Transit and Transportation Services

Local and regional transit integration can create synergies that generate improved travel options and

increase the efficiency and effectiveness of services. This section inventories existing transit and

transportation services in the area for reference in transit feasibility assessment and network development.

Routes, schedules, fares and delivery mechanisms will be developed to support partnerships and take

advantage of existing local and regional capacity.

GO Transit Service

The Town of Innisfil is served by GO Bus Route 68 that runs between the Newmarket GO Terminal to the

south and the Barrie Downtown Transit Terminal to the north. The GO Bus travels through the Town along

Yonge Street (County Road 4), with stops at Victoria Street in Stroud, Innisfil Beach Road and Killarney

Beach Road in Churchill. The stop at Innisfil Beach Road functions as a “flag” stop only on the side of the

road. The Town of Innisfil asked GO Transit to stop at the Innisfil Recreational Complex but was not able

to accommodate this request due to concerns about entering and exiting the complex.

From Monday to Friday, the GO Bus runs on a one-hour frequency, increasing to a 30-minute frequency in

the peak direction and peak period. On Saturday and Sundays, GO Bus Route 68 operates less frequently

and with shorter service hours. Table 3 presents the schedule for GO Bus 68.



12

Table 3 GO Bus Route 68 Departures from Stroud (Yonge and Victoria) as of June 2015

Day Northbound Southbound

Monday to Friday 7:04, 8:04, 9:09, 10:14, 11:04, 12:04, 13:04, 14:04, 15:09, 16:22, 17:27, 17:58, 18:28, 18:53, 19:23, 19:54, 20:29, 21:09, 22:09, 00:05

5:01, 5:26, 5:54, 6:29, 6:59, 7:24, 8:14, 9:14, 10:14, 11:14, 12:14, 13:14, 14:09, 15:09, 16:09, 17:14, 18:14, 19:14, 20:16, 21:16

Saturday and Sunday 10:02, 12:02, 14:17, 16:12, 17:12, 18:12, 20:09, 21:55, 23:50

7:16, 9:14, 11:09, 13:09, 15:09, 17:14, 18:14, 19:14, 21:16

There is also a GO Train service between Barrie and Toronto that passes through the Town of Innisfil.

However, there are no stops in the Town of Innisfil. The two closest stations for Innisfil residents traveling

south to York Region and Toronto are Barrie South GO Station, just north of Mapleview Drive and Yonge

Street, and the Bradford GO Station located in Downtown Bradford. There are currently five southbound

GO trains that operate during the weekday morning peak period and seven northbound GO trains that

operate during the evening peak period.

Metrolinx/GO Transit has considered building a new GO Train Station in Innisfil. In 2005, Metrolinx/GO

Transit conducted an Environmental Assessment (EA) that identified a potential GO Station at Belle Aire

Beach Road (5th line) east of 20

th Sideroad. Since that time, the 2012 Ontario Growth Plan amendment for

the Simcoe area designated Alcona as a Primary Settlement Area. Given the importance of connecting

Primary Settlement Areas with public transit, the Innisfil TMP suggested an alternative location for a future

GO Station closer to Alcona, at 6th Line. Metrolinx has not made any commitments to the timing or funding

of the station, therefore there is an opportunity to update the 2005 EA to consider alternative locations

closer to Alcona.

The existing GO Transit service may meet the needs of Innisfil commuters who work in York Region or

Toronto. However, it does not connect major destinations and residential areas within Innisfil. The majority

of Innisfil’s population resides along Lake Simcoe and therefore has no access to public transit at this time.



13

Figure 8 GO Transit System Map

Barrie Transit

Barrie Transit provides transit service within the City of Barrie, and several routes operate in the southeast

corner of the City adjacent to Innisfil:

► Routes 1, 2 and 8 serve Park Place and the Barrie Molson Centre.

► Routes 3, 4 and 8 connect to the Barrie South GO Station.

► Route 7 extends south of Mapleview to Commerce Park Drive, just west of the 400.

► Route 4 serves the southeast of Barrie, extending east along Mapleview and Big Bay Point Road past

Yonge Street to Prince William Way.

Barrie Transit will also be considering opportunities to serve the intersection of Huronia Rd. and Lockhart

Rd. as part of a fall route review, either by extending an existing route or by developing a new route in

partnership with Innisfil.

The City of Barrie has recently signed a twenty year contract with a new operator, MVT Canadian Bus, to

deliver transit within the City. The City of Barrie also operates transit service in the adjacent Township of



14

Essa as part of the same contract with MVT. Route 90 connects Barrie’s Allandale Waterfront GO Station

with Canadian Forces Base Borden in Angus, Township of Essa, and has shorter hours than other Barrie

Transit routes. The City and MVT have also indicated an interest in delivering transit service for the Town

of Innisfil under a similar arrangement.

Barrie Transit routes operate on a 30-minute frequency on weekdays until 7pm and on Saturday. Routes

operate on a 60-minute frequency on weekdays after 7pm and on Sundays. Cash fares are $3.00 for

adults, students and children over the age of 5. Cash fares for seniors are $2.60. Monthly passes and

multi-ride cards allow riders to pay less per trip. The Barrie Transit System Map is included as Figure 9,

and the intersection of Huronia and Lockhart is illustrated with a red star.

Figure 9 Barrie Transit System Map



15

Simcoe County Transit Feasibility Study

The County of Simcoe is currently conducting a Transit Feasibility and Implementation Study that explores

options to provide an inter-municipal transit service. Building on the County’s Transportation Master Plan,

the study responds to the challenge of supporting transit initiatives in and between smaller urban

communities and the larger centres, as well as understanding and addressing the needs of vast rural

areas and spread out geographically. It will assess the feasibility of a broader county transit service that:

► serves local communities;

► connects urban centres;

► facilitates local, inter-municipal and inter‐regional commuter travel; and

► supports the broader economic, environmental and social objectives of development in Simcoe

County.

The County has completed its first round of public meetings and is accepting comments through July on

the materials presented. A second round of consultation is expected to take place in November 2015. At

that time, preferred options for transit will be presented. No preferred options have been developed at this

time. The initial stage of the project has been to collect public input on the need, type and destinations for

transit. The potential for a County-level inter-municipal transit service has been considered as part of the

transit network plan.

Other Transportation Services

Other transportation services that are relevant to the Town of Innisfil include the following:

► Red Cross Simcoe Muskoka Branch provides non-emergency transportation to local medical

appointments and medical appointments located in Toronto hospitals. Services are provided by

volunteer drivers with their own vehicles or by wheelchair accessible vans with paid drivers. The

service is available for older adults and adults with disabilities (minimum age of 18 years). Fees

depend on the distance traveled.

► Parkbridge, the organization that manages Sandycove Acres, currently contracts a vehicle to bring

Sandycove residents to and from doctors’ appointments and/or to shopping in Barrie. The bus usually

has approximately 15 riders per trip, and riders pay $7.50 round-trip. There are two bus trips per week,

one on Wednesday and one on Friday. On Wednesday the destinations are: Georgian Downs (OLG),

Mapleview Shopping area, and Parkplace Shopping Center. On Friday the destinations are: Bayfield,

Kozlov and Georgian Malls, then on to the Royal Victoria Hospital, Barrie Bus Depot and The Atrium

Medicial Clinic. On alternate weeks the destinations are: Innisfil No Frills, LCBO, and Innisfil Beach

Road. On both Wednesdays and Fridays, the vehicles depart at 9:00 am and return at 1:30 pm,

providing riders with two to three hours at their destinations. Sandycove has a series of bus shelters

throughout the property that are used by the existing transit service.



16

► Lakeside Retirement home has one small cut-a-away style bus that operates every 3 to 4 days on

determined routes, servicing No Frills, Bank, Barrie Walmart and Georgian Downs. Trips are pre-

booked and no fare is charged.

► Georgian Downs Shuttle Service is operated by Angel Coaches of Canada and provides shuttle

service between Georgian Downs and pick-up/drop-off points in Barrie Collingwood, Wasaga Beach,

Newmarket and Bradford. There are no official pick-up/drop-off points in Innisfil. No fare is charged for

the shuttle service. The Georgian Downs Shuttle Service uses coach buses that do not comply with

the requirements of the Accessibility for Ontarians with Disabilities Act (AODA).

► Friday Harbour Resort is advertising that it will provide shuttle service to and from Barrie GO Station

so that owners can arrive by train if they prefer.

► Private taxi service is currently offered in Innisfil by Innisfil Taxi, Global Taxi, Barrie Taxi and Deluxe

Taxi. Private taxi service provides an additional mobility choice for Innisfil residents. Barrie Taxi has a

fleet of three wheelchair-accessible taxis to serve Innisfil residents with disabilities. Global Taxi also

has wheelchair-accessible taxis as part of its fleet. According to the TMP, key trip purposes and

destinations for taxi service include recreational trips to Georgian Downs, shopping trips to Tanger

Outlets in Cookstown and No Frills grocery store in Alcona, and medical trips to hospitals and medical

centres in Barrie.

► School bus service for the Simcoe County District School Board and Simcoe Muskoka Catholic

District School Board is contracted by the Simcoe County Student Transportation Consortium

(SCSTC). Contracted operators in the area include Sharp Bus Lines, First Student, Sinton-Landmark,

Switzer-Carty Transportation and Parkview Transit Inc.

Why Transit in a Small Municipality such as Innisfil?

Based on the review of the Innisfil context and consultation results, an Innisfil transit service would provide

many benefits, now and in the future as Innisfil grows and develops. These include the following:

► Mobility for seniors, youth, people with disabilities and other non-drivers. Seniors, youth and

other residents without regular access to a vehicle currently struggle to get around Innisfil. In the short-

term, they are among those who would benefit most from transit.

► Affordability of transportation. Vehicle ownership and use is very expensive. Transit provides an

affordable transportation option for residents who struggle with the costs of vehicle ownership and use.

This includes young people with student debt who are just entering the job market.

► Support for physical activity and public health. Studies indicate that public transit users obtain

significantly physical activity benefits solely from walking to and from transit. 2 Public transit also

2 Studies include: Besser, L.M. and A.L. Dannanberg (2005). Walking to Public Transit: Steps to Help Meet Physical Activity Recommendations. American Journal of Preventive Medecine, Vol. 29 (4): 273-280.



17

supports the use of walking and cycling for transportation, increasing the number of destinations that

can be accessed with active transportation.

► Increased use of other Town services. Transit can enhance the use of other Town services, by

making it easier for residents to access facilities such as the Recreational Complex.

► Resident attraction and retention. Transit would make Innisfil a more appealing place to live for

older adults who will eventually give up their drivers’ license, for parents who want their children to be

able to travel independently, and for millennials and other people who simply prefer to walk, cycle and

use transit.

► Business attraction and retention. For businesses, the availability of transit may make Innisfil more

attractive, as employees of all ages, abilities and socio-economic backgrounds can easily travel to

work.

Finally, transit advances Innisfil’s long-term vision as “the place to be” – a forward-thinking, inclusive and

welcoming place where all people can live, work and play.



18

3.0 WHAT WE HEARD FROM THE PUBLIC

3.1 The Consultation Approach

Public and stakeholder engagement is a core component of the Transit Feasibility Study. It is important to

understand the wants and needs of Innisfil residents in order to establish transit recommendations and

solutions that respond to the key concerns and interests. At the beginning of the assignment, the

consultant team worked with Town staff to establish a consultation and engagement strategy with the core

aim of “bringing the information to the people” and “strategically engaging core groups”.

In the months of May and June 2015, the consultant team worked collaboratively with Town staff to

undertake in-person and online / telephone consultation and engagement activities including:

► Project initiation workshop with Town staff;

► Telephone survey of Innisfil residents;

► Online survey of Innisfil residents;

► Stakeholder workshops with Nantyr Shores Secondary School, Sandycove Acres and the Innisfil

Accessibility Committee;

► Two public open houses;

► An information booth at the Family Fun Fair; and

► Conversations with Innisfil business representatives, Barrie Transit, the County of Simcoe, Tanger

Outlet Mall, Georgian Downs and others.

A figure illustrating the consultation timeline for the Feasibility Study is presented below.

With a short project timeline, emphasis was placed on complementing the consultation and engagement

strategy with an aggressive promotion and outreach program. The consultant team worked with Town staff

and other stakeholders to promote the study and the opportunities for involvement through a number of

different promotion and outreach mechanisms including:



19

Updates on the project

webpage including

posting of relevant

project information

Updates on the

Town’s twitter page

including promotion of

the public open

houses

A promotional flyer that

was distributed at the

Town’s offices and at

key locations

throughout the Town

Advertisements on the

local Radio station about

the study and public

open houses

Local newspapers

posted the open house

notice and also

provided coverage of

relevant study issues

Using a variety of promotional tools helped generate interest and support for the study, and also helped to

identify transit champions in the community including seniors and students.

The following sections provide an overview of the different staff, public and stakeholder consultation

activities that were undertaken to inform the development of the Transit Feasibility Study. For each of the

consultation and engagement initiatives undertaken, the approach, date, time and location, number of

respondents and key themes are summarized below. The information presented at each of the sessions

was consistent to ensure that the input received could be compared and contrasted. The input received

was documented in various forms and key themes were used to shape the proposed vision, mission, goals

and service plan presented in sections 3 through 7.

3.2 Telephone and Online Survey

Environics Research conducted a statistically valid automated telephone survey of 477 Innisfil residents on

June 8, 2015. The margin of error for a sample of 477 is plus or minus 4.5 percentage points (at the 95%

confidence level). The telephone survey questions were also posted on the Town website as an online

survey between June 5 and June 24, 2015. The online survey received 138 responses and though it is not

statistically valid, the responses received enhance the statistically valid responses generated through the

telephone survey.

The survey focused on the public level of support for transit and willingness to pay for transit. It also

explored residents’ priority destinations for transit and the types of service models that would work for

them. Concluding questions gathered socio-demographic information for respondents. For the online

survey, two additional open-ended questions were added to obtain residents’ comments on why they

support (or oppose) transit and on what else the Town should consider as part of the study. The following

is a summary of responses from both the telephone and online survey which have been compared to

highlight common themes and responses.

http://www.shutterstock.com/subscribe?clicksrc=inline_thumb



20

Telephone Survey

Overall, the survey revealed that there is strong support for transit among residents, and that the majority

of residents are willing to pay additional property taxes for transit. Specific findings of the telephone survey

are as follows:

► There is widespread support (77%) for the introduction of a public transit service in Innisfil (Figure 11).

More than half of survey respondents indicate that they “strongly support” the introduction of public

transit in Innisfil.

► More than six in ten residents believe that an extra $25 a year in property taxes is reasonable to pay

for transit.

► Overall, there is a slight preference (expressed by 54% of residents) for costs to be covered by

additional property taxes on households whose neighbourhoods are served by transit. However, the

view that costs should be shared by all residents increases with support for public transit (Figure 12).

► Residents stated that they would be more likely to use a fixed schedule bus service than an on-

demand transit service; 37% said that they would be very or somewhat likely to use an hourly

weekday bus service, as compared to 21% who would be very or somewhat likely to use a service

requiring advance reservation.

► Residents were also asked what destinations they would like to see connected to the “core”

destinations of Alcona and the Innisfil Recreational Complex. Barrie Transit/the south end of Barrie

was by far the most frequently selected destination for transit to serve. The Tanger Outlet Mall in

Cookstown was selected second most frequently (Figure 13).

Figure 10 Telephone Survey Results – Support for Introduction of Public Transit in Innisfil



21

Figure 11 Telephone Survey Results – Who Should Pay for Public Transit, By Support for Public Transit

Figure 12 Telephone Survey Results – Destination Preferences

Though there was significant overall support for the introduction of transit within Innsifil, responses to

questions related to assessing the different transit alternatives yielded less supportive results. Only 37% of

residents indicated their support for a service that runs every hour on weekdays and only 21% noted that

they would be interested in a service that required advance reservation (Figure 14)



22

Figure 13 Telephone Survey Results – Likelihood of Using Different Transit Service Models

Additional education on the different transit service alternatives was also provided through public open

houses and stakeholder sessions (summaries of input provided below).

Online Survey

Several key online survey results mirror the telephone survey results. Like the telephone survey, the online

survey revealed a high level of support for public transit (over 70% who strongly support or somewhat

support). Similarly, almost six in ten residents expressed a willingness to pay additional property taxes for

transit. Like in the telephone survey, the connection to Barrie Transit in the south end of Barrie was

selected as the priority destination to connect to Alcona and the Innisfil Recreational Complex, with the

Tanger Outlet Mall in Barrie selected as a second choice.

However, there are also several differences between the online and telephone survey results. These

differences likely stem from the online survey selection bias; strong opponents of transit seem to have

been more likely to respond to the survey than residents without strong opinions. Furthermore, potential

transit users seem to have been more likely to respond to the survey than those who have are not likely to

use transit. The key differences are as follows:

► Significantly more online survey respondents indicated that they strongly oppose transit (22%, as

compared to 9% of telephone survey respondents). However, in both surveys, 56% of respondents

said that they strongly support transit.

► In line with the responses from those who strongly oppose transit, more online survey respondents

indicated that they do not want to pay additional property taxes for transit (42%, as compared to 36%

of telephone survey respondents). However, more online survey respondents also expressed a

willingness to pay $50 or $100 in additional property taxes (28%, as compared to 22% of telephone

survey respondents).

► More online survey respondents indicated that they would be likely to use a Town transit service. For

fixed schedule transit, 51% of online respondents stated that they would be very likely or somewhat

likely to use transit, as compared to 37% of telephone survey respondents. For on-demand transit

requiring an advance reservation, 36% of online respondents stated that they would be very likely or

somewhat likely to use transit, as compared to 21% of telephone survey respondents.



23

The two open ended questions posted to only survey respondents generated a number of different results.

Though the questions were optional, approximately 126 respondents provided additional details on why

they support or oppose transit and around 90 respondents provided additional thoughts / comments that

they would like considered as part of the feasibility study. Upon review of the responses, many of the key

themes mirror sentiments expressed by the open house attendees. Unlike the set questions and

responses of the telephone survey, the open ended questions of the online survey mimic the style of

engagement used at the open houses – open platform for discussion. As such, many people felt

comfortable providing their true opinions through both of these activities. The following table provides a

summary of some of the most common responses in support of and in opposition of transit.

Table 4 Themes of Responses to Open-Ended Online Survey Questions

Reasons for Support Reasons for Opposition

Geography. The community is growing and needs to

accommodate the growth with different transportation

alternatives. Connections are needed to surrounding areas

including Barrie, Bradford and even as far as Newmarket and

Toronto.

Demographics. There is a growing seniors population that

require accessible transportation alternatives if they cannot

drive. Students should also be considered as well as

underprivileged populations. If the Town is looking to retain

their residents they need to provide the transportation and

employment opportunities.

Community Benefits. By investing in Transit the Town and its

various communities can decrease environmental impacts and

can also help to draw other tourism and economic growth.

Access to Community Destinations. Providing alternative

transportation options will allow people to access the key

destinations in the community e.g. shopping.

More options. There are limited transportation options in

Innisfil. Transit would allow people to be less reliant on others

(e.g. parents) and could access key destinations

Geography. The Town is still significantly rural with people

who leave the Town to work in cities that are too far to access

via transit. People are not looking for “big city” transit and don’t

want the Town to expand to the size of Barrie or other

surrounding cities.

Cost. Taxes already go up every year, additional costs are not

needed. Affordable options should be the priority when

considering service options

Underutilization. The perception is that a transit system would

be underutilized. With a population that relies on their personal

vehicles investing large amount of money into a system that will

not be used by residents would be considered a waste of

money.

Disconnection. Other than being geographically spread out

there are also issues of disconnect between the communities

following amalgamation. A system should be equitable to the

different communities within Innisfil.

In addition to the reasons for support and opposition, the following are some of the key areas of

consideration that were highlighted in survey responses that should be considered when designing and

implementing a transit system:



24

► The Town should consider starting with an accessible service and then expanding to more wide

spread service throughout the Town.

► The Town should consider other funding alternatives from the Province.

► Transit could be considered an attractive aspect for the Town for more tourists during the summer

months.

► Consideration needs to be given for transit amenities such as bus stops.

The telephone and online survey questionnaire and responses are included as Appendix A.

3.3 Public Open Houses

Two public open houses were held in addition to the stakeholder workshops. The sessions were used to

provide residents with an opportunity to review study materials, discuss with the study team and provide

their input to inform the recommendations and proposed solutions identified. The sessions were held

between 5:00 p.m. and 8:00 p.m. on Tuesday June 16, 2015 and Thursday June 18, 2015 and were

located at key destinations throughout the community.

The study team used this approach to try and maximize the number of attendees at locations where they

may be attending for other events. On Tuesday the study team held the open house at the public library on

Innisfil Beach Road. Between 30 and 40 people were in attendance. On Thursday the session was held at

the Innisfil Recreational Complex. As the information was displayed in the front entrance of the complex,

tracking attendees proved to be more difficult. Over 25 people were engaged through this session.

The same materials were used to engage the public as were used to engage the stakeholder groups.

There were a total of four interactive display boards which included mapping, ranking and open ended

questions. The questions posed through the interactive displays were also used as the questions on the

comment form for consistency. The following are graphics of the input that was provided using the

interactive display boards.

One of the first interactive display boards asked attendees their initial thoughts and interpretations when

they heard the word “Transit”. The following graphic is a wordle representing the most frequently provided.

Many of the words identified as consistent with the key themes that have been identified through this

summary.



25

The mapping display boards provided a significant amount of information on the key destinations and

origins throughout the Town. As part of our analysis, the study team prepared a representative graphic of

the key origins and destinations throughout the Town based on the number of responses that were

provided. The destinations were used to identify some of the stops along proposed routes and can also be

used to inform future expansions to the network, should the Town wish to do so. The destinations were

relatively consistent between the stakeholder workshops and public open houses with some variation

based on the meeting locations e.g. many of the destinations identified by Sandycove residents were

within southern Barrie and related to medical or day to day appointments.



26



27

3.4 Stakeholder and Staff Workshops

Sandycove Acres

On June 9, 2015 the study team attended a meeting with the residents of Sandycove Acres. The meeting

provided residents with an opportunity to learn about the intents and purposes of the assignment, review

and understand the transit alternatives being considered and engage in discussions with the study team.

Attendees were invited to participate in small group discussions and to document their input on comment

forms and interactive display materials.

The workshop session was coordinated by the consultant in collaboration with local residents. Using the

“home owners association” mailing list, the study team was able to distribute invitations to over 400

residents. In total over 30 residents attended the session between 1:00 p.m. and 3:00 p.m.

Representatives from the community undertook their own survey which was conducted by the Home

Owners Association. The survey results were provided to MMM Group and were reviewed and considered

when undertaking the feasibility study. A key highlight from the survey was that:

“Our takeaway from this input…is that our residents are not so much concerned with provision of

public transit in the Town as they are in ensuring the continuance of our local service…”

The findings of the internal survey were consistent with the responses and input gathered during the

workshop session. Though some concerns were expressed, many attendees were interested in providing

their input to ensure that their opinions were heard. The majority of the residents were interested in a fixed

service with some deviations on a request by request basis.

The comments that were received ranged from strongly supportive to strongly opposing. Many of the

opposing comments stemmed from a lack of information / understanding about the intents and purposes of

the assignment and the different transit alternatives being considered. Many residents were of the opinion

that a route had been confirmed and that they had no opportunity to provide input. Through one-on-one

discussion with the study team many of the attendees were able to voice their interests and concerns

which resulted in a better understanding of the project and next steps. Highlights from these discussions

are illustrated in the table below.

Table 5 Sandycove Acres Residents’ Concerns and Interests

Concerns Interests

► Cost. Residents were concerned that taxes would be increased and with some financial restrictions the impact would be significant.

► Cancelled Service. Existing shuttle service provides rides to and from key destinations two days a week. There is concern that the shuttle will be cancelled.

► Minimal Access. A Town-wide service that aims to

► Improvements. Though Sandycove Acres currently has a shuttle, there are improvements that can be made to the service frequency, timing and destinations to make it more useable.

► Accessible Service. Service should take into account and should be designed with accessibility in mind. The design of the buses, stops and the service in general should



28

Concerns Interests

connect all key destinations was perceived to require local residents to walk to a stop on the main road, which is either impossible due to mobility issues or inconvenient with shopping bags and other supplies.

consider a range of mobility needs.

► Better Access. There are destinations within the Town and in bordering areas that require better access e.g. the hospital, medical clinics, banks, etc. Coordinated access to these locations is needed.

► Personal Freedom. Many individuals still drive but understand that this may not be the case forever. When they are no longer able to drive transit service will be the means of achieving personal freedom and mobility.

► Transportation Alternatives. Similar to personal freedom, people are looking for more choices for transportation. If they are not able to use their car, other options should be available.

Individuals also keenly provided input on the primary origins and destinations that they would like to

access using transit throughout Innisfil. Some of the primary destinations include:

► Park Place

► Bayfield Mall

► Kozlov Centre

► Walmart, Loblaws, No Frills & Sobeys

► Georgian Mall

► Big Bay Point

The maps to the right illustrates the origin (red)

and destinations (green) identified by

Sandycove Acres residents.



29

Accessibility Advisory Committee

The accessibility advisory committee meeting was held on June 18, 2015 between 1:00 p.m. and 3:00

p.m. It was held at the Town’s municipal offices and was coordinated through the Town’s committee staff

representative. A total of four individuals were present at the meeting. Each of the individuals engaged

with members of the team through a roundtable discussion and facilitated Q&A session.

The meeting started with a presentation to the committee which was followed by discussions related to two

key questions; what transit means to each individual and the key origins and destinations throughout the

Town. With such a focused group session, the team was able to engage on other key issues such as

accessibility design considerations, transit service preferences and implementation priorities.

Key highlights from the group discussion include:

► Customer Service. The service provided by the transit providers and the bus drivers is an important

consideration for people with mobility limitations. How the providers interact with users may need to be

something that is mandated and enforced by the Town.

► Cost Effectiveness. The current cost to get to and from key locations for those with accessibility

needs can be very high. Providing alternatives that are affordable, without compromising the level of

service provided should be a key consideration.

► Accessible Amenities. The service is not just about the buses. Amenities including stops, ramps,

storage for groceries, location for wheelchairs, etc. should be clearly defined and easily accessed by

those who need it as well as those helping them.

► Flexible. Service is sometimes needed in short notice e.g. medical appointments. The service should

be available with at least 24 hours’ notice and should accommodate door to door requests as well as

supportive customer service (see above).

All of the attendees agreed that the Town should take advantage of “low hanging fruit” and should work

towards implementing simple but cost effective solutions quickly with emphasis on providing accessible

options as a first priority.

Nantyr Shores Secondary School Presentation & Engagement Session

MMM Group held a session with the grade 11 Leadership Class at Nantyr Shores Secondary School on

May 26, 2015 to explore the need for transit, the destinations that should be served and the potential

service models and network concepts. There were 15 students engaged through the workshop session.

The workshop session was broken into two parts. The first was a discussion around the overall need for

transit, key destinations and points of interest and their current modes of transportation. The second part

of the session focused on providing the students with information on the different types of transit being

considered as part of this assignment – fixed and on-demand service. As part of the second session the

students engaged in a group activity which asked them to map out their own transit routes for day to day

activities throughout Innisfil.



30

Key highlights from the first and second parts of the session are documented in the table below.

Table 6 Themes from the Workshop with Students of Nantyr Shores Secondary School

Part 1:

Transit Justification & Current Mode Choice

Part 2:

Transit Network Identification

Need for transit. Students strongly expressed the need for

transit in Innisfil and the desire to be able to access

destinations more easily. Students living outside of Alcona

were particularly likely to describe a feeling of isolation; one

student described “being on an island”, unable to access Town

amenities. Students also raised the affordability of transit

service as an issue; some identified $3.00 as an appropriate

fare round-trip, others thought that $3.00 one-way would be

appropriate.

Current modes of transportation. Students in the

Leadership Class currently get to school and around Innisfil by

school bus, being driven by family members, walking, running,

longboarding and occasionally cycling. One student also

mentioned paying friends for a ride to a job in Barrie.

Locations that they have trouble accessing. Students

identified a number of destinations that they would like to be

able to access but that they currently have trouble getting to.

These destinations include the Innisfil Recreational Centre,

Town Library, Lefroy Library and Community Centre, jobs in

Barrie and at Tanger Outlet Mall, and friends’ houses.

Students also mentioned the challenge of walking or cycling to

the Innisfil Recreational Centre because of the lack of

sidewalks or bike lanes.

Other transit users. Students indicated that their parents and

other family members would also want to use a Town transit

service. They also identified elderly people as an important

user group that otherwise struggles to access destinations.

Key destinations. All four of the groups identified Alcona, the

Innisfil Recreational Complex, Sandycove Acres, Stroud, Lefroy

and Cookstown/Tanger Outlet Mall as key destinations. Three

of the four groups also connected their transit network to the

south end of Barrie, either the Barrie South GO Station or Park

Place and the Barrie Molson Centre. Two of the four groups

extended their network to the north of Big Bay Point Road.

Priority connections. All of the groups also identified Innisfil

Beach Road between Alcona and the Innisfil Recreation

Complex as the hub or top priority for the transit system. One

group identified the connection to Barrie as the second priority;

another group identified the connection to Cookstown as the

second priority.

Transit service models. All of the groups used fixed schedule

transit services to serve Alcona, the Innisfil Recreational

Complex, Stroud and other core destinations. One of the

groups included route deviations, while the other groups used

fixed routes. Two of the four groups also used “on-demand”

transit services to serve lower density locations (e.g. areas

around Cookstown, Gilford, Big Bay Point Road, and the land

uses at Innisfil Beach Road and the 400). The other two groups

used fixed schedule transit to serve all locations. In subsequent

discussions of the various transit service models, students

indicated that the value of on-demand transit service would

depend on how far in advance trips would need to be reserved.

They indicated that they could reserve trips two hours in

advance, but that booking further in advance would be a

challenge for many types of trips.

Prior to the session with MMM, the Leadership Class had prepared a petition to Town Council requesting

public transit in Innisfil. The class had collected 356 signatures from fellow students at Nantyr Shores

Secondary School who supported the introduction of a transit service. This further demonstrates the

importance of transit to high school students in Innisfil.



31

Workshop with Town Staff

MMM Group conducted a project initiation workshop with Town staff from Engineering, Planning,

Communications and Library on May 25, 2015. Eight staff members were in attendance at the workshop

session. The workshop explored the goals and objectives for transit, transit service models, network

concepts, routes, destinations and implementation-related considerations. Key themes which emerged

from the staff workshop included the following:

► Key destinations. The two groups of staff both identified the following key destinations in mapping out

their ideal transit network: Alcona, the Innisfil Recreation Complex, Sandycove Acres, Lefroy,

Cookstown, the land uses at Innisfil Beach Road and the 400, and the south end of Barrie.

► Transit service models. One group used a fixed schedule, fixed route service to connect Alcona, the

south end of Barrie, the Innisfil Recreational Complex and the land uses at Innisfil Beach Road and

the 400. They used on-demand service to serve Cookstown, Gilford Beach, Sandycove Acres and

Lefroy. The other group used a fixed schedule, fixed route service to connect Alcona, the Innisfil

Recreational Complex and Sandycove Acres to the GO Bus route along Yonge Street. A separate

fixed route connected the Tanger Outlet Mall to Fennell and the Yonge Street GO Bus. They used on-

demand service to connect Lefroy, Cookstown, Gilford Beach and Innisfil Beach Road at the 400.

► Priority connections. When asked to identify the priority transit connections given budgetary

constraints, both groups maintained a fixed schedule, fixed route transit service connecting Alcona

and the Innisfil Recreational Complex. One group maintained a fixed route connection to Sandycove.

The other group maintained a fixed route connection between Fennel’s Corner and Cookstown, and

maintained on-demand transit service in Lefroy-Belle Ewart and Gilford.

They were also asked to undertake a visioning exercise which asked attendees to provide their input /

thoughts on an overall vision for transit and a mission statement supporting future transit investment. The

following table documents the input received related to these two project outcomes.

Table 7 Staff Feedback on Elements of a Vision and Mission for Transit in Innisfil

Vision Statement Mission Statement

► Access to key destinations: Barrie, Bradford, the Innisfil Recreational

Complex/YMCA

► Access to employment, educational opportunities and social services

► Cohesiveness and reduced isolation between Innisfil’s communities

► Connections to neighbouring communities, to trails and recreational

opportunities, to other transit network (e.g. GO Transit, Barrie Transit, any

future Simcoe County transit system)

► Transportation options that provide opportunities for healthier lifestyles

including increasing walking, combining cycling and transit trips

► A system and service that meets the current and future needs of youth

and the aging population and retirement community

► Affordable transportation options – alternatives to taxis.

► Connecting people and places

► Customer focused service

► Affordability for users and for the Town

Though not an element of the mission

statement, it was acknowledged that

partnerships will be an important component of

facilitating the implementation of the mission

statement.



32

3.5 Additional Consultation

In addition to the formal public and stakeholder consultation, the Town undertook additional consultation

activities where they engaged with members of the public as well as select stakeholder groups, including:

► A booth at the Family Fun Fair;

► A session with the Lakeside Retirement Home;

► A session with the Stroud Seniors Group;

► Telephone conversations with the Tanger Outlet Mall management staff and Georgian Downs

management staff.

The following is a summary of the activities and key themes and considerations that were highlighted.

Lakeside Retirement Home

Approximately 20 people attended this session on Monday June 29, from 2:00 to 3:00pm. Residents

reported transportation challenges and provided the following comments:

► Some residents use Red Cross accessible service which has to be pre-booked 7 days in advance.

Most cannot afford a car or not able to drive. Taxi service is expensive for residents (e.g. $12 for a

short round trip to Shoppers Drug Mart in Innisfil and well over $25 one way to Barrie). There are no

medical specialists in Innisfil so residents must travel to Barrie for appointments.

► Residents would like public transit service to Georgian Downs (at least 3 times a month), to the Innisfil

Recreational Complex, to the Legion at Belle Ewart and along Innisfil Beach Road.

► The chair of the residents’ committee felt that transit is long overdue, and that hourly or 30 minute

service should be a priority on Innisfil Beach Road, with a loop into Sandy Cove Acres.

► Accessibility in winter is a problem, snow clearing can be improved at intersections and would be

required at bus stops.

► All should pay for transit in Innisfil, $3.00 fare would be reasonable.

► Residents suggested that the Lakeside-owned bus could be utilized more, possibly the Town should

operate it. They also suggested that the Georgian Down shuttle buses could service Lakeside and

Sandy Cove.

Stroud Seniors Group, Stroud Arena

Approximately 100 seniors attended a short 15-minute presentation that occurred during their regular

monthly meeting on Tuesday June 30 at 1:00pm. Feedback included the following:

► Some want to travel between Barrie, Stroud and Innisfil, and there are currently no reasonable

options, there is no accessible transit in Innisfil. Transit service needs to go across municipal

boundaries, especially to Barrie and the Royal Victoria Hospital.



33

► Transit fares should include senior discounts.

Tanger Outlet Mall

In a telephone conversation with MMM, Tanger Outlet Mall management staff identified a clear need for

transit to help employees and customers access the mall. According to the Marketing Manager, many

young employees from Alcona, Stroud, Barrie, Alliston and other areas would like to work at Tanger but

have no way of getting to and from the mall. It is an issue that is raised very frequently by employees and

by store managers. Tanger also receives emails from customers asking about transit services to reach the

mall, though these are less frequent than the requests from employees and potential employees.

Georgian Downs

In a telephone conversation with MMM, Georgian Downs management staff identified a need for transit to

help employees and customers access the racetrack and slot machines. Many of the facility’s younger

employees live in Innisfil and struggle to get to work. The Georgian Downs Shuttle Service operated by

Angel Coaches of Canada is for customers only. From a business perspective, management staff

indicated that a transit service would also be beneficial to help customers access the facility.



34

4.0 VISION, MISSION AND GOALS FOR TRANSIT IN INNISFIL

4.1 Vision and Mission for Transit

This section discusses the elements of a vision and mission statement for transit in Innisfil and proposes a

draft vision statement and mission statement for the Town’s consideration. By developing a vision and

mission statement as part of the transit feasibility study, the Town will be able to evaluate the extent to

which different transit service and delivery options align with their mission and vision.

What is the Difference Between a Vision and Mission Statement?

A vision statement expresses the desired future state or mental picture of “what will be different”. Visions

are intended to clarify the pathway forward. When effective, the vision statement has an illuminating

quality that allows organizations to move fast and with great precision. A vision statement should not

describe what an organization does. It should describe the resultant experience or outcome after the work

is done. It can also describe the unique twist that the organization brings to the above outcome. Examples

of vision statements from other leading transit agencies are as follows:

► “A transit system that makes Toronto proud”. (Toronto Transit Commission)

► “A better place to live built on transportation excellence”. (TransLink)

► “A fully integrated, progressive, easy-to-use public transit system that supports economic development

and improves the quality of life in Edmonton”. (Edmonton Transit System)

A mission statement identifies the core purpose of an organization. Unlike a vision statement, it describes

what an organization does and how it does its work. Examples of mission statements from other leading

transit agencies are as follows:

► “Reliable, efficient and integrated network. To provide a reliable, efficient and integrated bus, streetcar

and subway network that draws its high standards of customer care from our rich traditions of safety,

service and courtesy.” (Toronto Transit Commission)

► “Together, we connect the region and enhance its liveability by providing a sustainable transportation

network, embraced by our communities and our people.” (TransLink)

► “Customer-focused, safe, reliable and affordable public transit services that link people and places”

(Edmonton Transit System)

► “Our team is committed to providing safe, accessible, convenient and environmentally responsible

transit services in a friendly and courteous manner.” (Burlington Transit)



35

Proposed Vision and Mission for Transit in Innisfil

Based on the definitions presented above and the results of consultation with staff, stakeholders and

members of the general public, we have identified themes that are relevant to the vision versus those that

are most relevant to the mission. These are presented in Table 8.

Table 8 Vision and Mission Statement Themes

Vision (“Outcomes”) Mission (“What” / “How”)

► Transit provides access to opportunities for people of

all ages and abilities

► Transit supports growth, development, Alcona as a

vibrant urban core, and the Town’s vision of Innisfil as

“The place to be by 2020”

► Transit contributes to healthy lifestyles, community

cohesiveness and a high quality of life

► A transit service that connects people and places

► A transit service that is customer-focused and convenient to

use

► A transit service that is affordable for users and for the Town

► A transit service that is accessible

► A transit service that is “made in Innisfil”, customized to the

Innisfil context and that evolves as Innisfil grows and changes

Based on these themes, we have developed a proposed vision and mission statement for consideration by

the Town (Table 9).

Table 9 Proposed Vision and Mission Statements

Vision Mission

Transit supports the long-term vision of Innisfil as “the place to be”. Thanks to transit, Innisfil residents of all ages and abilities can

access opportunities and achieve a high quality of life.

To deliver an affordable, accessible, customer-focused Innisfil transit service that connects

people and places.

4.2 Goals for Transit

To maximize the benefits of transit in Innisfil and fulfil the vision and mission, the transit service will be

designed with the following goals and principles in mind:

► Clear target audience: The primary target audience for Innisfil’s transit service includes seniors,

youth, people with disabilities, and residents without regular access to a vehicle. The service hours will

therefore focus on schedules for shopping, errands, recreation and other “discretionary” trips. (A

commuter-focused service is not recommended at this time given the large numbers of trips outside of

Innisfil and the prevalence of travel by private vehicle.) Based on experiences in other municipalities,

transit systems are most likely to be cost-effective when they are clear about their target audience.

► Convenience and customer focus: Regardless of service type, service levels or service hours, the

transit service should have a strong customer focus. It should be easy to use; clean, safe and

enjoyable; and customer service should ensure that riders feel respected and valued. The route and

schedule should be designed for efficient and convenient travel.



36

► Accessibility: This is a key consideration for those who experience mobility challenges as well as for

the growing seniors’ population. The transit service will be designed to meet and/or exceed AODA

requirements and will include supportive infrastructure e.g. customer service.

► Affordability: The service should be affordable for the Town and taxpayers and should leverage

partnerships where possible to improve the value of the service. This means that service levels and

operating expenses should be comparable or below those in other peer municipalities. All

opportunities to build partnerships, reduce costs and explore creative revenue sources should be

considered, while maintaining a customer focus and high standard of service.

► Fairness and efficiency: The costs and benefits of transit should be fairly distributed between the

Town’s communities and between riders and taxpayers. This may mean that households only pay for

transit if they are within the transit service area; this model is used in many Ontario municipalities

including Milton, Belleville, Greater Napanee and Loyalist Township.

► “Made in Innisfil” approach: Innisfil has a small urban core and a large rural area. Different

alternatives should be considered that reflect the unique aspects of the built up areas of Innisfil versus

the rural areas. Phased implementation will also be considered to focus transit first in the areas that

are most transit-supportive and where highest ridership is anticipated.



37

5.0 TRANSIT SERVICE MODELS, PEER REVIEW AND MARKET

ASSESSMENT

MMM Group conducted a review of transit systems in peer municipalities for two purposes. First, a

quantitative peer review of key performance indicators informs the ridership estimates, recommended

service levels and cost estimates. Second, a qualitative review of transit service models, including

telephone interviews with three peer municipalities, provides Innisfil with an understanding of other models

of transit services that are used in different jurisdictions. The results of the peer review are presented on

the pages that follow..

5.1 Overview of Transit Service Models

The majority of transit systems use a fixed route, fixed schedule service model. However, this is not the

only service model used by Canadian municipalities. In municipalities with lower population densities,

flexible transit service models can provide cost-effective alternatives to fixed route, fixed schedule transit.

Flexible service models can also supplement fixed route, fixed schedule transit service in select areas.

Transit service models can be divided into two categories: fixed schedule and on-demand. These

categories and the variations within each category are discussed below. All of the transit service models

discussed in this section can be offered by a range of vehicle sizes and types. Recommendations

regarding vehicle size and specifications will be developed as part of the next phase of the project.

Fixed Schedule Transit Service Models

Fixed schedule transit services depart from a set start/end point at designated times, regardless of

whether passengers are on board. A scheduled number of service hours is provided each day and each

week. Fixed schedule transit services can feature routes that are 100% fixed, or routes that deviate based

on passenger requests. This variation is illustrated schematically in Figure 15.

Figure 14 Variations on Fixed Schedule Transit Service

Fixed Schedule, Fixed Route

This is the service model that most people are familiar with. A transit vehicle leaves from a designated

location on a fixed schedule (e.g. each hour) and follows a specific route, picking up and dropping off

passengers along the way.



38

Fixed route, fixed schedule service works well in higher density areas with a variety of trip origins and

destinations concentrated along major corridors. Service is generally provided along major roadways

where destinations are located. Passengers do not need to plan ahead. They can board spontaneously

along the route at the scheduled time. Service levels, ridership levels and costs for fixed schedule, fixed

route transit in other Ontario municipalities are presented in section 5.2.

Fixed Schedule, Route Deviations

With this variation on fixed route transit, transit vehicles still leave from key stops on a fixed schedule.

However, the vehicle can deviate from its normal route to pick up or drop off passengers on demand at

designated off-route locations. Passengers that board at scheduled stops do not need to make a

reservation; they can request their drop-off point at the time of boarding. Only passengers wishing to board

at request stops along the route deviation need to call in advance to make a reservation.

Fixed schedule service with route deviations can increase transit’s coverage, without requiring additional

vehicles. Route deviations are particularly relevant to provide service to households in low-density areas

that are located more than 800m from major roadways. An example of fixed schedule transit with route

deviations provided by Winnipeg Transit is included in Table 10.

Table 10 Example of Fixed Schedule Transit with Route Deviations

Fixed Schedule Transit with Route Deviations: Winnipeg DART

Winnipeg’s DART service provides request bus service to residents living in selected areas of South and

South East Winnipeg. The three DART routes operate during off-peak hours only, and generally connect

to a fixed route transit stop. DART buses leave the transit terminal on a fixed schedule, and serve one or

more additional fixed stops before entering the areas with route deviations. Within the route deviation

areas, bus drivers plan their route according to the pick-up and drop-off requests that have been received.

Passengers wishing to make reservations call

vehicle operators directly to book their pickup time

and location. Passengers are picked up at their home,

but are dropped off at designated stops along the route.

DART routes average between 7 and 20

boardings per service hour.

On-Demand Transit Service Models

With on-demand transit service models, passengers make reservations in advance of their trips. Transit

vehicles optimize their routes to pick up and drop off passengers at/near their origins and destinations.



39

Transit vehicles only enter into service if a reservation has been made. On-demand (also called “dial-a-

ride”) transit service is most commonly used for specialized transit. However, it is also used by several

Ontario and Quebec municipalities for conventional transit.

On-demand transit service can work well as an alternative to fixed schedule transit in low-density areas

where demand for transit is lower and destinations are more dispersed. It can also be used to connect

passengers in lower density areas to fixed schedule transit “hubs”. On-demand transit systems may

become increasingly common as technology evolves to support optimized routing and scheduling in real-

time. Variations to on-demand transit service include the following:

► Vehicles can pick up and drop off passengers at designated stops;

► Vehicles can provide door-to-door service; and

► Vehicles can travel to and from a fixed start/end point only (e.g. a GO station or transit hub).

These three variations are illustrated schematically in Figure 16.

Figure 15 Variations on On-Demand Transit Service

Fixed Start/End Point

On-demand service is most frequently offered to/from a fixed start/end point (fixed route transit hub or GO

Station). This limitation on trip origins/destinations makes it more likely that multiple passengers can share

a single vehicle. Examples of on-demand service to a fixed start/end point offered by Milton Transit and

Bradford West Gwillimbury are included in Table 11.

Designated Stops across the Municipality

In Quebec, municipalities including Alma and Rimouski offer on-demand service between designated

stops across the municipality. Some larger municipalities also create geographic “zones” for on-demand

transit. Riders can travel within a zone for a lower fare, or they can travel between zones for a higher fare.

Table 11 also describes the Rimouski Taxi-Bus Service with designated stops in zones across the

municipality.



40

Table 11 Examples of On-Demand Transit

Town of Milton, ON

Milton Transit uses both fixed route and on-demand transit service to meet community needs. Milton Transit is currently offering two different on-demand services, both of which connect riders to a fixed start/end point: Trans-Cab and GO Connect.

Trans-Cab provides on-demand service for passengers in areas of reduced travel demand. It provides

connections to and from Milton Transit’s fixed routes at a single designated transfer point. Milton Transit previously had a fixed route service in this area, and changed it to an on-demand service in 2011. They received mixed feedback from riders; some people did not like having to book their trip and then wait for the fixed route transit at the transfer point. However, overall, riders understood and appreciated the reason for the change. Ridership has grown steadily since the service’s implementation and is now just under 500 boardings per month. Rides are shared whenever possible, and Milton Transit guarantees service within one hour of reservation. Riders pay a $0.50 premium to use Trans-Cab. The service is sub-contracted to a local taxi company by Pacific Western, Milton Transit’s transit contractor.

Milton Transit has also partnered with Metrolinx to launch GO Connect, a pilot project focused on GO

commuters. Customers can book a trip to or from the GO station though a mobile app or website. Shared-ride taxis and shuttle buses are dispatched and routed dynamically to meet demand. Small fare reductions are offered to customers that are willing to change their travel time to reduce the number of vehicle trips required. The one-year pilot launched in April 2015 and ridership was approximately 50 trips per day as of June 2015. The service is only offered in the morning and evening peak periods, when GO trains operate. The service can accommodate up to 200 trips per day.

Bradford West Gwillimbury, Taxi-to-GO

Bradford West Gwillimbury established a municipal transit service for the first time in the spring of 2014. The transit service includes two fixed routes and an on-demand service to connect riders to the Bradford GO Station during peak hours. The on-demand service is called Taxi-to-GO and is operated by a local taxi company, Town Taxi, under contract to the municipality.

Taxi-to-GO ridership has increased from 342 boardings per month in June 2014 to almost 600 boardings

per month in April 2015. Town Taxi is required to fill one taxi before dispatching a second taxi; this is particularly feasible given the relatively small geographic area. Thus far, a second vehicle has rarely been needed.

Bradford West Gwillimbury also offered the Taxi-to-Bond Head on-demand transit service for a three-

month pilot period. This on-demand, shared-ride taxi service connected a fixed start/end point (the SmartCentres in Bradford) to two designated stops in the community of Bond Head. No riders used the service during the pilot, so the service was suspended after three months.

Ville de Rimouski, QC, Taxi-bus and Taxi-bus-plus

Société des transports de Rimouski uses both a taxi-bus and fixed-route bus system. The taxi-bus system was implemented in 1993 to replace expensive fixed-route service in low-demand areas.

Rimouski has two types of taxi-buses. The standard taxi-bus travels between designated stops within zones, and allow users to transfer to fixed route transit services that connect different zones. Taxi-bus-plus, in contrast, allows passengers to travel across zones without having to transfer. Regular fares range from $3.60 for standard taxi-bus to $5.25 for taxi-bus-plus.

Taxi-bus service is provided by a cooperative of all local taxi drivers and managed by a non-profit organization established by the City of Rimouski. Users must be registered with the City and must phone to make a reservation at least 1 hour prior to their trip. Pickups and drop-offs occur at designated stops.

Door-to-Door (Specialized) Transit Service

Door-to-door transit service is generally only offered as specialized transit, for riders with disabilities that

prevent them from using conventional transit. Under the requirements of the AODA Act (2005) and section



41

34(1) of the Integrated Accessibility Standard Regulation, transit service providers must either provide:

door-to-door specialized transit service within the conventional transit service area; or an alternative

accessible method of transportation if the conventional service cannot be used by a person with a

disability because of his/her disability and if there is no specialized transportation service in the area.

The most common model for specialized transit service is to establish a separate transit service with

dedicated vehicles that only provide door-to-door service. Ridership levels and costs for dedicated,

specialized transit services in other Ontario municipalities are compared in section 5.3.

Innisfil also has the option of accommodating people with disabilities on its conventional transit service,

with accessible vehicles making route deviations to pick up and drop off eligible riders who have made

advance reservations within the service area. This is further discussed in section 5.4 and in section 6.

Table 12 describes a dedicated specialized transit service in Collingwood as well as a community bus

route in Prince George that uses route deviation to provide door-to-door accessible transit service. Finally,

Innisfil has the option of connecting people with disabilities with accessible taxi service as an alternative

accessible method of transportation.

Table 12 Accessible Transit Service Models

Dedicated Accessible, Door-to-Door Transit: Collingwood, Ontario

The Town of Collingwood, ON has contracted specialized transit service to the Red Cross. Specialized, door-to-door transit service is available to Collingwood residents with disabilities who are unable to use conventional transit. The Town owns the specialized vehicles (one converted minivan and one cutaway bus) and pays the Red Cross an annual fixed amount for operations and vehicle maintenance. The Town is responsible for establishing the eligibility criteria while the Red Cross manages the application process. The specialized transit service operates Monday to Friday from 7:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. Fares within Collingwood are $3.50 for a one way trip and $4.00 roundtrip or may vary. Riders are asked to try and book three days in advance, however emergency bookings can be made. Limitations to the service include the Red Cross’ inability to accommodate passengers under the age of 18.

Accessible, Door-to-Door Transit Provided by Route Deviations: Prince George Route 91

In Prince George, BC, the Carefree Society provides dedicated specialized transit in Prince George, BC and also operates one conventional bus route (#91) that uses route deviation to provide door-to-door service to residents with disabilities. Route 91 has been in operation since 2006. The operational policy for the route approved by the city permits one deviation per 1-hour cycle. The schedule for route 91 includes 6 minutes for deviation and recovery. The vehicle used is an Arboc with ramp access, which speeds up the loading/unloading process (vs a lift) for persons with a disability using a wheelchair. This means 2 to 3 minutes to load/unload, plus travel time for route deviation.

5.2 Peer Review of Fixed Route, Fixed Schedule Transit

In order to inform Innisfil on what can reasonably be expected of public transit in the region, MMM Group

reviewed the existing transit systems of a number of similar sized municipalities across Ontario. The peer

review consisted of two separate comparisons: one focused on conventional transit and another on



42

specialized transit. Section 5.2 focuses on conventional transit, which can be defined as fixed-route

scheduled service. This kind of service is the most common type of transit service, and can be found in

both Barrie and Bradford West Gwillimbury.

The peer review uses data from the Ontario Urban Transit Factbook (2013 Operating Data). From the

Ontario Urban Transit Factbook, MMM Group chose municipalities with small service area populations that

are similar to Innisfil’s 2011 population of 33,080. Bradford West Gwillimbury is also included in the peer

review, using data from the 2014-2015 year-end report after its first year of operation.

Figure 16 through Figure 21 outline key transit indicators that frame the level of service that can be

provided for a given level of investment. Despite attempting to choose relevant and similar municipalities,

a wide range can be seen within most indicators. This variety can be a result of many factors, including but

not limited to: population density, topography, demographics, service delivery strategy and the maturity of

the transit system. Innisfil should expect an implemented system to perform within the range of the

compared municipalities, and it should further expect the system’s performance to most closely reflect the

median of each indicator.

The first statistic that is highlighted is Transit Revenue Service Hours per Capita. This statistic is an

indicator of how extensive a transit system is, and can be reflective of the age of the system. For instance,

at the high end of the spectrum, Cobourg’s transit system has been operating since 1976, while Bradford

West Gwillimbury’s system is at the low end of the spectrum having only recently been implemented. As

shown in Figure 16, the values range from a high of 0.95 in Collingwood, to a low of 0.18 in Leamington.

Niagara-on-the-Lake represents the median at 0.45.

Figure 16 Conventional Transit Revenue Service Hours per Capita (2013)

*2014-2015 data

While Transit Revenue Service Hours per Capita is reflective of how extensive a transit system is, Transit

Trips per Capita shown in Figure 17 is more reflective of how well used a transit system is. The values

*



43

range from a high of 12.1 in Owen Sound, to a low of 0.7 in Bradford West Gwillimbury. Port Hope

represents the median at 3.8.

Figure 17 Conventional Transit Trips per Capita (2013)

*2014-2015 data

Conventional Transit Trips per Revenue Service Hour shown in Figure 18 is indicative of how well used a

transit service is. The values of Transit Trips per Revenue Service Hour are intuitive to decipher. For

instance, a bus operating for an hour in Owen Sound would accommodate 19 boardings. In contrast, a bus

operating for an hour in Niagara-on-the-Lake would only accommodate 2 transit trips, which indicates a

bus that is often empty. Tecumseh represents the median at 8 trips per revenue service hour.

Figure 18 Conventional Transit Trips per Revenue Service Hour (2013)

*2014-2015 data

*

*



44

Cost per Vehicle Hour shown in Figure 19 is the operating cost per hour in service. This includes direct

operating expenses (e.g. contracted service delivery) as well as administration, maintenance and auxiliary

operating expenses. A large part of this cost is the cost of labour, which can vary significantly across

Ontario. The values range from a high of $100 in Kawartha Lakes, to a low of $42 in Deseronto.

Orangeville represents the median at $61.

Figure 19 Conventional Cost Per Vehicle Hour (2013)

*2014-2015 data

Total Operating Expenses are shown in Figure 20. The values range from a high of $1.6 million in

Kawartha Lakes, to a low of $206,000 in Leamington. Port Hope represents the median value at $516,000.

Owen Sound’s high expenses translate in to good ridership numbers as seen in Figure 17 and Figure 18,

while Kawartha Lakes has high expenses with average ridership indicators.

Figure 20 Conventional Transit Total Operating Expenses (2013)

*2014-2015 data

*

*



45

The last indicator highlighted for conventional transit is Revenue-to-Cost Ratio shown in Figure 21.

Revenue-to-Cost Ratio shows what portion of total operating costs is paid for by revenue (primarily fare

revenue). The remaining portion of costs is subsidized. The values range from a high of 45% in Deseronto,

to a low of 9% in Kawartha Lakes. Cobourg represents the median at 21%.

Figure 21 Conventional Transit Revenue-to-Cost Ratio (2013)

*2014-2015 data

5.3 Peer Review of Specialized Transit Service

Specialized transit can be defined as a reservation-based door-to-door service that uses wheelchair

accessible vehicles and can accommodate people with disabilities. As previously stated, all transit

providers must provide specialized transit that meets the standards for accessible service provision as

provided by the Ontario’s Accessibility for Ontarians with Disabilities Act (AODA) (2005).

The peer review uses data from the Ontario Specialized Transit Services Factbook (2013 Operating Data).

From the Specialized Transit Services Factbook, MMM Group chose municipalities with small service area

populations that closely match Innisfil’s 2011 population of 33,080. Figure 22 through Figure 27 outline key

transit indicators that frame the level of service that can be provided for a given level of investment. As

with conventional transit, a wide range of values can be seen within most indicators. This variety can be a

result of many factors. In addition to the factors of population density, geography and demographics

mentioned for conventional transit, specialized transit may be affected by the various operating models

under municipalities, not-for-profit societies, or contractors. It may also be affected by the level of visibility

of the specialized transit service, the promotion and publicity provided, and the eligibility criteria.

The first statistic that is highlighted is Specialized Transit Trips Per Capita. This statistic is an indicator of

how well used the specialized transit system is. As shown in Figure 22, the values range from a high of

1.01 in Perth East, to a low of 0.13 in Cramahe. Port Hope represents the median at 0.40.

*



46

Figure 22 Specialized Transit Trips Per Capita (2013)

The Specialized Transit Active Registrants per Capita statistic shown in Figure 23 is a function of

demographics, and may also reflect the level of promotion and ease of use of the registration process. The

values range from a high of 0.078 in Perth East, to a low of 0.004 in West Elgin. Midland represents the

median at 0.017.

Figure 23 Specialized Transit Active Registrants / Capita (2013)

Specialized Transit Trips per Active Registrant shown in Figure 24 represents the number of times per

year that a registered user of the specialized transit service makes a trip by specialized transit. This metric

of frequency of use is a key driver of total ridership and total costs. Dysart has the lowest number of trips

per active registrant at 10, and Port Hope represents the median at 20.



47

Figure 24 Specialized Transit Trips / Active Registrant (2013)

Total Specialized Transit Operating Expenses are shown in Figure 25. The values range from a high of

$366,000 in Brockville, to a low of $22,000 in Dysart. Prince Edward County represents the median with

operating costs of $137,000. High operating costs in Brockville, Pembroke and Perth East may be the

result of high ridership, with over 10,000 passengers per year in each of these service areas.

Figure 25 Specialized Transit Total Operating Expenses (2013)

Figure 26 presents expenditures per passenger. Expenditures per passenger range from a low of $14 per

passenger in Collingwood, to a high of $37 per passenger in Cramahe. Prince Edward County represents

the median cost at $20 per passenger.



48

Figure 26 Specialized Transit Expenditures / Passenger (2013)

The last indicator highlighted for specialized transit is Revenue-to-Cost Ratio shown in Figure 27. As with

conventional transit, Revenue-to-Cost Ratio (R/C ratio) shows what portion of total costs are paid for by

revenue (primarily fare revenue). The values range from a high of 38% in Perth East, to a low of 5% in

Port Hope and Fort Erie. Bancroft represents the median with a 20% R/C ratio.

Figure 27 Specialized Transit Revenue-to-Cost Ratio (2013)

5.4 Transit Ridership in Innisfil

Based on the peer review and analysis of the transportation context, MMM Group has developed an

estimated range for several key ridership metrics. In the tables below and throughout the study, we have

used conservative ridership estimates. Table 13 and Table 14 present the anticipated ranges for

conventional and specialized transit, respectively, and the factors that influence these ridership ranges.



49

For conventional transit service, two primary metrics are used to estimate potential ridership:

► Boardings per hour – the number of passengers in an average revenue vehicle hour. It is calculated

by dividing the total annual ridership by the total number of revenue vehicle hours (also known as

transit service hours).

► Annual trips per capita – the average number of one-way transit trips that residents make each year.

It is calculated by dividing the total annual ridership by the service area population.

It is very difficult to estimate ridership in the absence of a specific transit service, with routes and service

hours. The estimates below are thus very broad; specific ridership estimates are developed for each

transit network and route option in Section 6, based on the service option in question.

Table 13 Anticipated Ridership Ranges – Conventional Transit

Metric Anticipated

Range Discussion

Annual trips per capita 1 to 5 Higher trips per capita with more transit service hours and in areas of higher population density

Boardings per hour 4 to 7

Higher boardings per service hour in areas with higher population density; higher boardings per service hour when frequencies and routes make transit an attractive mode of travel

Estimated annual ridership: service for residents of Alcona, Stroud, Sandycove

20,000-100,000

Wide range as ridership is closely linked to route design and service levels/service hours; estimated ridership will be provided for different routes based on boardings per service hour

Estimated annual ridership: service for all of Innisfil

30,000-150,000

Wide range as ridership is closely linked to route design and service levels/service hours; estimated ridership will be provided for different routes based on boardings per service hour

For specialized transit, service design plays a less significant role in determining ridership. Ridership

varies based on demographics, geography, eligibility criteria, and also to a significant extent based on

branding and promotion of specialized transit services. Demand also varies significantly from municipality

to municipality and increases over time as awareness of the service grows and a ridership base builds.

The estimates below are for a “standard” specialized transit service: a dedicated, door-to-door transit

service that is well publicized by the municipality, well-established and that is eligible to all people who

have difficulty using conventional transit.



50

Table 14 Anticipated Ridership Ranges – Dedicated, Specialized Transit Service (Long-Term)

Indicator Anticipated Range

Active registrants per capita 0.015 to 0.025

Annual trips per active registrant 16 to 20

Annual trips per capita 0.25 to 0.5

Estimated ridership: service for residents of Alcona, Stroud, Sandycove 4,000 to 8,000

Estimated costs: service for residents of Alcona, Stroud, Sandycove $70,000-$150,000

However, in the first few years of service it is expected that ridership will be significantly lower than for a

well-established specialized transit service. The financial plan (section 14.4) accounts for the anticipated

ramp-up in specialized transit ridership over the first five years of service.



51

6.0 SHORT-TERM TRANSIT SERVICE OPTIONS

MMM Group developed and analyzed a number of options to address Innisfil ’s priorities for transit in the

immediate future. These transit options were designed to be meet transit needs cost-effectively.

6.1 Service to Priority Destinations

Priority Destinations

Based on the analysis of Innisfil’s population and employment, travel patterns and consultation results, the

priority destinations for transit were identified as follows, in order of priority:

► Alcona (along Innisfil Beach Road and through the urban area to Nantyr Shores Secondary School);

► Innisfil Recreational Complex and Town Hall; and

► South end of Barrie, with a connection to Barrie Transit.

All of the short-term transit service options connect these three destinations. All of the short-term options

also enable connections with the GO Bus on Yonge Street. Several of the short-term transit service

options also connect Sandycove Acres, for two reasons. First, Sandycove’s proximity to Alcona means

that it can be added into several of the route options at no additional cost (maintaining the same number of

vehicles and frequencies). Second, residents of Sandycove Acres expressed a strong interest in a transit

service; though Parkbridge already offers a service twice a week, some residents expressed a desire for

additional flexibility in their trips.

Within Alcona, several of the short-term service options include a loop south of Innisfil Beach Road, along

Webster Jans Boulevard, Anna Maria Avenue and St. Johns Boulevard. This loop provides service to

Nantyr Shores Secondary School and residential areas within Alcona. A stop at the corner of Webster

Boulevard and Innisfil Beach Road would allow Alcona Glen Elementary School students to board and

alight the bus approximately 300m (five minute walk) from the school.

At the Recreational Complex and Town Hall, it is anticipated that the bus would travel close to the building

entrances, entering and exiting the complex from Yonge Street and Innisfil Beach Road. A recommended

stop location will be identified and illustrated in the next phase of the project.

Regarding the connection to Barrie Transit in the south end of Barrie, two possible locations were

considered: Barrie South GO Station and Park Place shopping mall. The Barrie South GO Station is closer

to Alcona and the Innisfil Recreational Complex, therefore it is easier to connect with transit. However, it is

not a destination for most of the day, as trains only depart in the early morning and return in the evening.

By comparison, Park Place provides retail, employment and recreation destinations that may draw Innisfil

residents at all times of the day. It is therefore seen as a preferred destination and connection point, given



52

the target trips and audience for the transit service (youth, seniors and others who may not always have

access to a vehicle, with a focus on discretionary trips).

Service Model

Fixed route, fixed schedule transit was identified as the preferred service model for a short-term transit

service connecting the priority destinations. The priority destinations are well located relative to one

another for fixed route, fixed schedule transit; they can be connected with routes ranging from 30 minutes

to one hour, enabling good frequencies with minimal vehicles. Furthermore, residents expressed a clear

preference for fixed schedule transit, rather than service models that require advance reservation. Finally,

Alcona features population densities that support fixed route, fixed schedule transit; and this will be

increasingly the case in the future as Alcona continues to grow.

Route Options

Four short-term route options were developed based on these priority destinations and a fixed route, fixed

schedule service model. Two of these options can provide hourly service with only one transit vehicle; the

other two options require two vehicles to provide hourly transit service. The four options are as follows:

► Option 1. Alcona to Barrie South GO: This route is less than 30 minutes in length; hourly frequencies

can therefore be provided using only one vehicle. A loop through Alcona’s residential neighbourhoods

south of Innisfil Beach Road can also be provided in one of the two directions, thus providing service

to additional households and to Nantyr Shores Secondary School.

► Option 2. Loop - Alcona to Barrie South GO via Mapleview: This route is less than an hour in length;

hourly frequencies can be provided using only one vehicle if service operates in one direction only; two

vehicles are required to operate the service in both directions. Service along 25th Side Rd and on

Lockhart Rd to Sandycove Mall provides service to certain households within Sandycove Acres;

service along Mapleview Drive does not serve many Innisfil households or destinations.

► Option 3. Sandycove to Barrie South GO via Alcona: This route is less than an hour in length in each

direction; hourly frequencies can be provided using two vehicles. The route serves Sandycove Acres

and includes a loop within the residential neighbourhoods that passes by the clubhouses. A loop

through Alcona’s residential neighbourhoods south of Innisfil Beach Road can also be provided in both

directions, providing service to additional households and to Nantyr Shores Secondary School.

► Option 4. Sandycove to Park Place via Alcona: This route is less than an hour in length in each

direction; hourly frequencies can be provided using two vehicles. The route serves Sandycove Acres

and includes a loop within the residential neighbourhoods that passes by the clubhouses. A loop

through Alcona’s residential neighbourhoods south of Innisfil Beach Road can also be provided in both

directions, providing service to additional households and to Nantyr Shores. The route terminates at

Park Place and Barrie Molson Centre, providing residents with shopping and recreation opportunities.

Finally, the route serves the Huronia/Lockhart neighbourhood in Barrie, which is current not served by



53

Barrie Transit. There may be opportunities for cost-sharing of this portion of the route with Barrie

Transit.

These routes are illustrated and further described in Table 15, Table 16, Table 17 and Table 18.

Table 15 Short-Term Service Option 1

1. Alcona to Barrie South Go (1 bus - hourly service)

Description of Route:

- Departs from the Barrie South GO Station - Travel southbound on Yonge Street through the Town of Stroud to Innisfil Beach Road. - Serves Town Hall / Recreational Complex and travels eastbound on Innisfil Beach Road through

Alcona to Webster Boulevard. - Turn left onto Jans Boulevard to serve the residential area and Nantyr Shores Secondary School

then turn right onto Webster Boulevard. Travel north along Webster Boulevard and turn left to get back to Innisfil Beach Road.

- Turn right onto Innisfil Beach Road and travel eastbound to Lakelands Avenue and use the roundabout to return westbound on Innisfil Beach Road.

- Travel westbound on Innisfil Beach Road through Alcona to Town Hall / Recreational Complex at Yonge Street.

- Turn right onto northbound Yonge Street and return back to the Barrie South GO Station.

Service Design:



Note that service through Alcona is via a one-direction loop. Service in two directions cannot be provided via the Alcona South loop as it would increase the round trip travel time to 60 minutes. It would be difficult to sustain the hourly service without any recovery time. An additional vehicle would therefore be required in service. Similarly, it would be difficult to accommodate any other route deviation for example to serve a potential future GO Station at 6

th Line Road.



54

Table 16 Short-Term Service Option 2

2. Loop (1 or 2 bus - hourly service/ direction)


- Departs from the Barrie South GO Station - Travel southbound on Yonge Street through the Town of Stroud to Innisfil Beach Road. - Serves Town Hall / Recreational Complex and travels eastbound on Innisfil Beach Road through

Alcona to Webster Boulevard.

- Turn right on Webster Boulevard and travel southbound, then turn left onto Jans Boulevard to serve the residential area and Nantyr Shores Secondary School. Travel north along Jans Boulevard and turn right to get back to Innisfil Beach Road.

- Turn right onto Innisfil Beach road and travel eastbound to 25th Line Road. Turn left onto 25

th Line

road and travel northbound to Lockhart Road.

- Travel westbound on Lockhart road to the Sandycove Mall. Return eastbound on Lockhart Road to 25

th Line Road and travel northbound to Mapleview Drive.

- Travel westbound on Mapleview Drive to Yonge Street and return to the Barrie South GO. - This loop service could also be operated in the reverse direction, or in both directions.

Service Design:

Hourly service can be provided for a one direction loop with a single vehicle in service.

The total round trip travel time is 52 minutes long which provides 8 minutes for recovery between trips in the same direction.

Service in two directions could be provided with a second vehicle in service.

It is possible also to operate service in two directions with a single vehicle but the service would be reduced to a two-hour headway per direction. Also, the bus would no longer operate as a loop and would need to turn around for undertaking the return trip. This would not serve the through passengers that access the bus on one side of the turn around and are destined to the other side.

It would be difficult to accommodate any route deviation for example to serve a potential future GO Station at 6

th Line Road or to better serve the Sandycove community.



55

Table 17 Short Term Service Option 3

3. Sandycove to Barrie South GO via Alcona (2 bus - hourly service)


- Departs from the Barrie South GO Station - Travels southbound on Yonge Street through the Town of Stroud to Innisfil Beach Road. - Serves Town Hall / Recreational Complex and travels eastbound on Innisfil Beach Road through

Alcona to Webster Boulevard.



th Line


- Continue northbound on 25th Side Road to access Sandycove Main Street where the bus would

turn left and travel through the development serving the residential area and Clubhouse. - The bus would exit the development onto Lockhart Road and would serve the Sandycove mall. - The bus then would return eastbound on Lockhart Road to 25

th Line Road to undertake the return

trip (southbound on 25th Side Road, westbound on Innisfil Beach Road to St Johns Road, serve

the Alcona south residential area and secondary school, westbound on Innisfil Beach Road to Yonge Street. Northbound on Yonge Street to the Barrie South GO Station.

Service Design:

Hourly service cannot be provided with a single vehicle in service; Two vehicles are required.


It is possible to accommodate route deviations to serve a potential future GO Station at 6th Line

Road or to serve the Sandycove Main Street in two directions without requiring additional vehicles in service.



56


4. Sandycove to Park Place via Alcona (2 bus - hourly service)


- This alternative does not serve the Barrie South GO Station, however it does serve the Park Place shopping and employment node on Mapleview Drive west of Yonge Street.

- Buses would depart Park Place and travel eastbound on Mapleview Drive to Huronia Road, southbound on Huronia to Lockhart Road and eastbound on Lockhart Road serving the emerging residential development on the north side. The bus would continue eastbound on Lockhart Road to Yonge Street.

- The bus would then travel southbound on Yonge Street through the Town of Stroud to Innisfil Beach Road. Serves Town Hall / Recreational Complex and travels eastbound on Innisfil Beach Road through Alcona to Webster Boulevard.



th Line


- Continue northbound on 25th Side Road to access Sandycove Main Street where the bus would

turn left and travel through the development serving the residential area and Clubhouse.

- The bus would exit the development onto Lockhart Road and would serve the Sandycove mall. - The bus then would return eastbound on Lockhart Road to 25

th Line Road for the return trip

(southbound on 25th Side Road, westbound on Innisfil Beach Road to St Johns Road, serve the

Alcona south residential area and secondary school, westbound on Innisfil Beach Road to Yonge Street. Northbound on Yonge Street to Lockhart Road, westbound on Lockhart Road to Huronia Road, northbound on Huronia to Mapleview Drive, westbound Mapleview Drive to Bayview Drive, northbound on Bayview Drive to access the Park Place internal roadway system and connections to other Barrie Transit Bus routes.)

Service Design:

Hourly service cannot be provided with a single vehicle in service; Two vehicles are required.


It is possible to accommodate route deviations to serve a potential future GO Station at 6th Line Road without requiring additional vehicles in service.

It is also possible to serve the Barrie South GO Station with northbound buses on Yonge Street continuing northbound to the Barrie South GO Station instead of turning onto Lockhart Road. After serving the station buses could travel southbound to Lockhart Road in order to complete the



57

4. Sandycove to Park Place via Alcona (2 bus - hourly service)

remaining of the route. This would require that the routing through Alcona be revised with the route staying on Innisfil Beach Road instead of serving the Alcona south residential area and secondary school. An alternative routing would have buses using Mapleview Drive from Yonge Street to Park Place, but this would impact the service provided for the residential development on Lockhart Road near Huronia Road.

6.2 Comparison of Options for Priority Destinations

Table 19 compares the short-term transit service options based on the following criteria:

► Service area: The comparison table highlights the destinations that each route serves. All of the

routes operate between Alcona and the Innisfil Recreational Complex along Innisfil Beach Road. In

addition to these “core” destinations, the comparison identifies the following additional destinations:

► Alcona South Loop, with a short (5-minute) loop in either one or two directions through Alcona’s

residential neighbourhoods south of Innisfil Beach Road, providing service to additional

households and to Nantyr Shores Secondary School;

► Barrie South GO and/or Park Place in Barrie;

► Sandycove Acres, on 25th Side Road and Lockhart Road only, or looping into the residential area;

► Stroud, served in either one direction or two directions; and

► A future GO Train Station on Sixth Line. (Note: while none of the routes currently serve this

location, the comparison table identifies the routes that could make a detour to the proposed

location without reducing frequencies or requiring additional vehicles. This criteria is a long-term

rather than a short-term consideration.)

► Schedule and reliability: The comparison table identifies the frequencies provided by each route. It

also identifies the recovery time per trip. Recovery time affects service reliability, or the likelihood of

the bus remaining on schedule even with storms or unforeseen delays. Recovery time is also required

if the Town chooses to provide door-to-door AODA service using conventional transit vehicles

deviating from fixed routes when eligible riders make reservations; more recovery time means that

more door-to-door trips could be accommodated before a dedicated specialized transit service is

required.

► Ridership: Boardings per hour are estimated conservatively for each route based on the density of

households and destinations along the route, and based on the convenience of using the service. In

general, one-way loop service is expected to generate fewer trips per hour than two-way service,

though the short (5-minute) loop through Alcona South is not expected to have a negative impact on

ridership.

► Capital and operating costs: Service options that require only one vehicle to be operating at any

given time are significantly less expensive than those that require two vehicles. Potential contributions

from Barrie Transit for service to the Huronia and Lockhart area are also considered.



58

Table 19 Comparison of Short-Term Options

1. Alcona to

Barrie S GO (1 bus)

2a. 1 Direction

Loop (1 bus)

2b. 2 Direction

Loop (2 buses)

3. Sandycove to Barrie S GO

(2 buses)

4. Sandycove to

Park Place (2 buses)

NOTES

SERVICE AREA

Alcona South Loop

Option 1 & 2a serves Nantyr Shores Secondary School in one direction

Sandycove (SC)

Option 2 serves SC Mall while 3 & 4 serve Main Street (1-way)

Stroud

Option 2a serves Stroud in one direction on Yonge Street

GO Train: Barrie South

Option 4 could also serve Barrie S GO (remove Alcona South or Sandycove loop)

GO Train: Future Alcona

Can additonal service to future GO station be provided? (+13 min to&from Alcona South Loop)

Park Place Barrie

Service to Park Place offers retail and employment opportunities

SCHEDULE AND RIDERSHIP

Frequency 60 min 60 min – one-

way service only 60 min 60 min 60 min

All options provide houly service; Option 2b only provides service in one direction which makes trips significantly longer for riders

Recovery / trip 8 min 8 min 8 min/dir 34 min 18 min Total recovery time available between trips

Reliability

Based on recovery time available

Ridership Anticipated

6-7 boardings per hour





Based on population density, destinations and travel times

COST

Capital / Operating

1 vehicle versus 2 vehicles; Option 4 may have an opportunity for cost-sharing with Barrie Transit

MORE BENEFIT

LESS BENEFIT



59

6.3 Service to Additional Destinations

The telephone survey and online survey clearly identified the Tanger Outlet Mall as residents’ next priority

for transit, after connecting the “core” destinations and the south end of Barrie. However, the demand for

transit to the Tanger Mall is expected to be significantly lower than for the transit services identified above.

The MMM team has identified two short-term service options to connect Tanger Outlet Mall with Alcona: a

fixed schedule limited service, and an on-demand service. These service options are also designed to

increase the service area coverage. In addition to connecting Alcona and Tanger Outlet Mall, these

services would connect Lefroy-Belle Ewart residents to Alcona and Tanger. Either transit service option

could be delivered using small vehicles, such as taxis, or with larger vehicles such as community buses.

Table 20 describes the fixed schedule option. Table 21 describes the on-demand service option.


5. Alcona to Tanger Outlet Mall via Lefroy (fixed route, fixed schedule, limited service pilot)

A fixed route, fixed schedule transit service could connect the western edge of Alcona to Tanger Outlet

Mall with a stop in Lefroy-Belle Ewart. This route could be operated at an hourly frequency.

Due to the lower anticipated levels of demand, this route could be introduced as a pilot and operate for

approximately six hours of the day (six trips in each direction). Based on conversations with Tanger Mall

management staff, the peak shopping hours are from 10am to 5pm. Many staff work shifts from 9am to

5pm. Service hours of 8:00am to 11:00am and 3:00pm to 6:00pm are therefore proposed. Transit service

hours can be extended at a later date if justified based on demand, or reduced/revised based on

ridership and feedback from riders.


- Depart from the western edge of Alcona (No Frills plaza) via 20th Sideroad and Innisfil Beach Rd.

- Turn left on 20th Sideroad and travel southbound to Killarney Beach Road.

- Travel eastbound on Killarney Beach Road to Ewart Street. - Turn around via Barry, Cumberland and Ewart Street - Travel westbound on Killarney Beach Road to 20

th Side Road

- Travel south on 20th Side Road to Shore Acres Drive

- Travel west on Shore Acres Drive and turns around via Tanger Mall Road



60

Service Design:


The total round trip travel time is 54 minutes long including dwell time, which provides 6 minutes for recovery between trips.

With six trips per day, anticipated ridership is 2 to 4 trips per hour (10 to 20 trips per day).

It is possible to extend the route to Cookstown and to extend the route further into Alcona along Innisfil Beach Road by increasing the frequency to an hour and 30 minutes. However, this would be expected to reduce service quality and ridership; in section 7.3, one hour is recommended as the minimum frequency. Increasing the route length would also increase the cost of the service, if still providing four trips per day and per direction.


6. Alcona to Tanger Outlet Mall and Cookstown via Lefroy (on-demand service pilot)

An on-demand transit service could connect the core of Alcona to Lefroy-Belle Ewart, Tanger Outlet Mall

and Cookstown. There would be no scheduled departure times; trips would be provided based on

reservations from riders.

With this type of on-demand service option, it is recommended that pick-ups and drop-offs occur at

designated locations on or near the route. Residents could request trips between any two designated

stops. They would not be guaranteed the most direct route as routes would be planned to pick up as

many riders as possible on a given trip. Drivers would be able to deviate from the route in the absence of

ride requests from a particular area (e.g. the Lefroy area). All residents would be able to request trips;

however, the service would likely only be used by residents who live within 1 km of the route.

Given the anticipated ridership levels, it is expected that most trips could be accommodated with one taxi

in service throughout the day. At many times of the day, it is likely that no trips would be booked and no

vehicles would be required, thus reducing the cost of providing the service. At peak times, a second taxi

could be added if needed to meet additional demand. Like with the fixed schedule transit service option

between Alcona and Tanger Outlet Mall, the service could be introduced as a pilot to gauge demand.


- Route determined based on trip reservations; designated stops located along the route below.

Service Design:

Based on travel times, trip requests can be accommodated at least every 1.5 hours.



61

The on-demand transit service could be offered between the hours of 8:00am and 6:00pm.

Anticipated ridership is 15 to 20 trips per day, distributed over an estimated six service hours.

Note: It is recommended that this on-demand transit service be operated through delegated service

delivery with a local taxi company. This would enable the Town to only pay for the transit service at times

of the day when rides have been requested, and would provide flexibility for scaling service levels up or

down throughout the day based on demand. If justified based on demand, a fixed schedule fixed route

service could be introduced at a later date.

6.4 Specialized Transit Service

The Town of Innisfil’s conventional transit service will be fully accessible, in line with Accessibility for

Ontarians with Disabilities Act (AODA) requirements, reducing demand for door-to-door transit and making

it easier for residents with disabilities to travel within the Town. In addition, under the AODA and Integrated

Accessibility Standard Regulation (IASR), the Town is committed to providing either a specialized transit

service in the conventional transit service area or an alternative accessible method of transportation for

people with disabilities who are unable to use the conventional service. It is recommended that the Town

define the service area as within 800m walking distance of the conventional transit route. 3

The following accessible transit service models are options for further consideration.

► Alternative accessible method of transportation. The Town of Innisfil could provide accessible taxi

service as an alternative accessible method of transportation. The IASR does not have requirements

regarding fares for alternative accessible methods of transportation. As fare parity is not required, this

option could be implemented with market rates for accessible taxi service. This would involve minimal

cost to the City, but with minimal benefits for riders with disabilities.

► Dedicated, specialized transit service. As discussed in Section 4.4, a dedicated, specialized transit

service that is well publicized by the Town would expect between 5,000 and 10,000 riders per year, at

an estimated cost of $70,000-$150,000 per year. However, in the first few years of service, demand

would likely be significantly lower.

► Specialized transit service through route deviations by conventional transit vehicles and taxi

supplement. This option (also discussed in Section 4.4) would be designed to minimize use of door-

to-door transit and encourage all residents who are physically capable of using conventional transit to

do so; the eligibility requirements would therefore focus on providing door-to-door service to those

3 The more common walking distance standard in urban areas with dense transit networks is 400m. However, this

would provide very limited coverage in the Town of Innisfil given the proposed transit routes. The result would be that

some people with disabilities who live within the core area of Alcona would not qualify for specialized transit, while their

neighbours who live a few blocks closer to Innisfil Beach Road would qualify for specialized transit. Furthermore, in

areas that are less densely served by transit, there is evidence that people will walk further to transit, with 800m being a

commonly cited walking distance.



62

most in need. With this option, the Town would want to enter into an arrangement with a taxi company

or other service provider to accommodate any “overflow” requests during high-demand time periods.

This option is expected to attract fewer riders and minimize costs. Route deviations would not require

any additional costs, and it is anticipated that overflow requests could be accommodated for

approximately $25,000 per year. Note: This option could accommodate more riders with conventional

Service Option 4 (23 minutes of recovery time) than with Service Option 1 (8 minutes of recovery

time). Factoring in two to three minutes of wheelchair loading/unloading time, Service Option 1 could

accommodate one door-to-door trip per hour. Service Option 4 could accommodate two door-to-door

trips per hour.

Recommendation: Given the focus on seniors and people with disabilities, it is recommended that the

Town implement a specialized transit service rather than an “alternative accessible method of

transportation”. Furthermore, a dedicated specialized transit service is recommended due to the significant

projected demand for specialized transit in the longer-term.

While less costly, the route deviation option may detract from the ability of the conventional transit service

to meet riders’ needs, facilitate transfers to Barrie Transit and GO Transit, and remain on schedule.

Furthermore, it requires additional management and coordination capacity by the service delivery

provider(s), and is not an effective long-term option as ridership increases and the transit service expands.



63

7.0 SHORT-TERM TRANSIT SERVICE RECOMMENDATIONS

7.1 Service Plan

Conventional Transit Service

Based on this comparison of the options, the following two conventional transit routes are recommended

for further consideration by the Town of Innisfil:

► One bus only: Short-Term Service Option 1, Alcona to Barrie South GO. This option connects the

three core destinations in a cost-effective way, with two-way service at an hourly frequency. Higher

ridership is expected given the higher population and destination densities along the route. Higher

ridership (measured as boardings per hour) is also expected as the one-way travel time is only 30

minutes.

► Two buses: Short-Term Service Option 4 – Sandycove to Park Place via Alcona. This option

goes beyond the core destinations. It serves Sandycove Acres and Park Place, providing larger

numbers of Innisfil residents with direct access to retail, recreation and employment opportunities.

There may also be an opportunity to share the cost of service provision between the Innisfil border and

Park Place, as the service connects the Huronia/Lockhart neighbourhood to the Barrie Transit system.

The choice between these routes will depend on whether the Town is looking to provide a minimal core

service or whether there is funding available to connect additional destinations. The one bus versus two

bus options are compared with services in other municipalities in Table 22, assuming that the service

operates Monday to Friday from 7am to 7pm and Saturday from 9am to 5pm. Service hours are further

discussed in section 7.2.

Table 22 Short-Term Recommended Service Options: Service Option 1 or Service Option 4

Metric Option 1 – One

Bus Option 4 – Two

Buses Median in Other Peer

Municipalities

Service Hours 2,490 4,980 7,400

Service Area Population 16,109 19,514 18,300

Service Hours Per Capita 0.15 0.26 0.45

Vehicles Costs $200,000 $400,000 Unknown

Annual Operating Costs $320,000 $520,000 $525,000

If the Town would like to provide transit service to Tanger Outlet Mall and Lefroy-Belle Ewart as part of the

short-term service plan, the service levels and additional costs of Short-Term Service Options 5 and 6 are

identified in Table 23. For the on-demand service (Option 6), costs are estimated based on the delivery

costs of Taxi-to-GO in Bradford West Gwillimbury.



64

Table 23 Short-Term Additional Service Options: Service Option 5 or Service Option 6

Metric Option 5 – Alcona to Tanger via

Lefroy Fixed Route Option 6 – Alcona, Lefroy, Tanger &

Cookstown On Demand

Service Hours 1,848 3,080 (available)

Additional Population Served (Compared to Option 1 and 4)

2,450 3,595

Vehicle Costs $200,000 n/a

Annual Operating Costs $100,000 $92,000

Specialized Transit Service

The Town of Innisfil’s conventional transit service will be fully accessible, in line with AODA requirements,

reducing demand for door-to-door transit and making it easier for residents with disabilities to travel within

the Town. In addition, the Town is committed to providing accessible transportation in the conventional

transit service area, in line with the requirements of the Accessibility for Ontarians with Disabilities Act.

MMM Groups recommends that the Town implement a dedicated specialized transit service, and define

the service area as within 800m walking distance of the conventional transit route. Delivery methods and

costs for specialized transit service are further discussed in sections 9.0 and 13.1.

7.2 Service Hours and Schedule

It is recommended that the Innisfil transit service begin with service hours from 7:00am to 7:00pm on

weekdays and 9:00am to 5:00pm on Saturdays. Initially, the highest ridership is anticipated in the mid-day

period, based on the target audience for the transit service. However, it is expected that use of transit for

commuting trips within Innisfil and to and from Barrie will increase over time. As demonstrated by the

Transportation Tomorrow Survey data, the highest rates of trip-making occur in the morning and evening

peak periods. Providing transit service during these peak hours will help to establish transit as a viable

transportation alternative and will enable students and non-drivers to access a broader range of

employment opportunities. Over time, it is expected that the Town will want to adjust service hours based

on ridership levels and feedback from riders, as discussed in section 7.3.

The Innisfil transit service schedule should be easy to use, and aligned with the Barrie Transit and GO

Transit schedules to the extent possible. A proposed schedule for Short-Term Service Option 1 (one bus)

is provided as Table 24. This schedule times the arrival at the Barrie South GO Station to minimize wait

times when transferring to and from Barrie Transit buses. Routes 8A Northbound, 8B Southbound, 3A and

4A all serve the Barrie South GO Station. All of these routes arrive and depart from Barrie South GO at 21-

25 minutes past the hour and 51-55 minutes past the hour. The proposed schedule for Innisfil Transit

therefore includes a layover at Barrie South GO Station to enable Innisfil riders to transfer to these buses

without waiting. (Alternatively, the Innisfil bus could arrive and depart at 35-40 minutes past the hour or at

5-10 minutes past the hour, for an average wait time of 15 minutes). The proposed schedule also

considers the transfer to the GO Bus at Victoria Street or Innisfil Beach Road, where GO Buses travel



65

south at 15 minutes past the hour. Innisfil riders traveling south to Bradford, York Region or Toronto will

generally be able to transfer to the GO Bus with only a 5-10 minute wait time.

Table 24 Proposed Weekday Schedule for Initial Implementation of One-Bus Service (Option 1)

IRC (Depart Eastbound)

Lakelands Ave Turnaround

Nantyr Shores IRC (Depart

Northbound) Barrie South GO (Arrive)

Barrie South GO (Depart)

IRC (Arrive)

7:35 7:49 7:57 8:07 8:17 8:25 8:34

8:35 8:49 8:57 8:59 9:09 9:25 9:34

9:35 9:49 9:57 9:59 10:09 10:25 10:34

10:35 10:49 10:57 10:59 11:09 11:25 11:34

11:35 11:49 11:57 11:59 12:09 12:25 12:34

12:35 12:49 12:57 12:59 13:09 13:25 13:34

13:35 13:49 13:57 13:59 14:09 14:25 14:34

14:35 14:49 14:57 14:59 15:09 15:25 15:34

15:35 15:49 15:57 15:59 16:09 16:25 16:34

16:35 16:49 16:57 16:59 17:09 17:25 17:34

17:35 17:49 17:57 17:59 18:09 18:25 18:34

18:35 18:49 18:57 18:59 19:09 19:25 19:34

Note: The proposed service hours and schedule are not designed for commuters traveling by GO Train

from Barrie South GO Station. Given the long travel time by GO Train to York Region and Toronto, it is

unlikely that residents will want to add a 30 minute local transit trip at the start or end of their journey.

There are therefore no connections to the morning GO Trains with the proposed schedule. However, the

proposed schedule does enable riders on the first three evening GO trains to return to Innisfil by transit.

A proposed schedule for Short-Term Service Option 4 (two buses) is provided as Table 26. This schedule

is timed to accommodate the transfer to the GO Bus at Victoria Street or Innisfil Beach Road, where GO

Buses travel south at 15 minutes past the hour. Transfers to and from Barrie Transit buses at Park Place

are easier for riders than at the Barrie South GO Station because Barrie Transit bus schedules are better

distributed over the course of the hour. Time points at Park Place are as follows: Route 8A NB departs at 4

and 34 minutes past the hour; Route 8B NB departs at 12 and 42 minutes past the hour; Route 1A departs

at 15 and 45 minutes past the hour; Route 2A departs on the hour and at 30 minutes past the hour. The

Innisfil bus’ arrival at 28 minutes past the hour and departure at 38 minutes past the hour will facilitate a

variety of connections to Barrie Transit with minimal wait times.



66

Table 25 Proposed Weekday Schedule for Initial Implementation of Two-Bus Service (Option 4)

IRC (Depart

EB)

Nantyr Shores (NB/EB)

Sandycove Mall

Nantyr Shores

(SB/WB)

IRC (NB)

Huronia/Lockhart (NB)

Park Place

(Arrive)

Park Place

(Depart)

Huronia/Lockhart (SB)

IRC (Arrive)

7:05 7:15 7:41 8:00 8:10 8:20 8:28 8:38 8:46 8:56

8:05 8:15 8:41 9:00 9:10 9:20 9:28 9:38 9:46 9:56

9:05 9:15 9:41 10:00 10:10 10:20 10:28 10:38 10:46 10:56

10:05 10:15 10:41 11:00 11:10 11:20 11:28 11:38 11:46 11:56

11:05 11:15 11:41 12:00 12:10 12:20 12:28 12:38 12:46 12:56

12:05 12:15 12:41 13:00 13:10 13:20 13:28 13:38 13:46 13:56

13:05 13:15 13:41 14:00 14:10 14:20 14:28 14:38 14:46 14:56

14:05 14:15 14:41 15:00 15:10 15:20 15:28 15:38 15:46 15:56

15:05 15:15 15:41 16:00 16:10 16:20 16:28 16:38 16:46 16:56

16:05 16:15 16:41 17:00 17:10 17:20 17:28 17:38 17:46 17:56

17:05 17:15 17:41 18:00 18:10 18:20 18:28 18:38 18:46 18:56

18:05 18:15 18:41 19:00 19:10 19:20 19:28 19:38 19:46 19:56

Before service begins, the Town of Innisfil should work with the Operator to test the routes and schedules

and make any adjustments as needed to provide reliable service and smooth transfers.

7.3 Service Standards and Bus Stops

The characteristics of good service planning standards for a Town of Innisfil transit service are as follows:

► They draw on data that is (or will be) readily available to the Town;

► They are simple enough for Town staff to use regularly;

► They provide direction on which to base decisions without restricting the Town’s flexibility; and

► They reflect the Town’s goals and objectives.

The proposed service standards in Table 26 address service coverage, hours of service, frequency of

service, route design, bus stops and bus shelters. They also address performance standards, which link to

several other service standards.



67

Table 26 Proposed Transit Service Standards

Category Proposed Service Standard

Service Coverage

In larger municipalities, standards for service coverage specify the percentage of the population that should be within walking distance of a transit route. Service coverage standards sometimes conflict with performance standards; they require that transit service be maintained even where minimum performance standards are not achieved.

A service coverage standard is not recommended for the Town of Innisfil at this point. Once the transit service is well established and all key destinations are served by transit, the Town may wish to develop a service standard that can guide further service expansion; for example, at least 90% of households in the Alcona Primary Settlement Area should have less than an 800m walk to a transit route. Alternatively, the Town can use ridership to guide transit service expansion.

Hours of Service

The initial weekday service hours of 7:00am to 7:00pm are proposed for the transit service. The first trip should begin service at or after 7:00am and no later than 8:00am, with the specific schedule determined to consider transfers to Barrie Transit and GO Transit service. The last trip should end at or after 7:00pm and no later than 8:00pm. On Saturday, service hours of 9:00am to 5:00pm are proposed.

Frequency of Service

Frequencies of at least 60 minutes should be provided on all fixed schedule transit routes during all service hours, if possible. Frequencies of 30 minutes should be considered for routes that achieve the proposed performance standards.

Route Design All routes should be provided in both directions and should be as direct as possible. Routes should primarily be located along arterial and collector roads.

Bus Stops

Fixed bus stops should be placed at passenger generators and transfer points in urban areas. Bus stops should be at least 250 metres apart and should be maintained year-round.

Fixed bus stops should gradually be upgraded for accessibility. The Town should consult with the municipal accessibility advisory committee in developing accessible design criteria for bus stops. Bus stops should be prioritized for upgrades based on factors such as: proximity to senior citizen residences; use by riders with disabilities; and use as a transfer point.

“Flag” bus stop service should be used along rural sections of transit routes.

Bus Shelters and Benches

Bus shelters and benches should be prioritized for installation based on factors that include: boarding levels; proximity to senior citizen residences and other institutions; use as a transfer point; and exposure to inclement weather.

Performance Standards

A minimum performance standard for fixed schedule, fixed route transit of 3 trips per revenue service hour is proposed for the Town of Innisfil. Service should be revised or discontinued for service hours and routes not meeting the minimum performance standard.

The Town should consider increasing service frequencies from 60-minute to 30-minute service for service hours and routes that meet the performance standard of 13 to 15 boardings per hour.

Performance standards for the initial transit service should be evaluated only after two full year of transit service, based on the second full year of ridership data.



68

7.4 Bus Stops and Shelters

Based on the proposed standards for bus stops, the MMM team identified a series of bus stops for the

proposed routes. The one-bus Service Option 1 includes 40 fixed stops (Figure 28), while the two-bus

Service Option 4 includes 60 fixed stops (Figure 29).

Figure 28 Proposed Fixed Bus Stops, Service Option 1



69

Figure 29 Proposed Fixed Bus Stops, Service Option 4



70

“Flag stop” service is recommended for the following rural sections of the transit routes: Innisfil Beach

Road between the IRC and the GO rail line; Yonge Street between the IRC and Stroud; and along

Lockhart Road. Flag stop service allows passengers to board and alight from the bus at any point along

the route; passengers flag the approaching bus and request their stop when they board. This style of

operation reduces the need for the installation and maintenance of fixed stops along rural roads without

sidewalks. It is also minimizes walking distances to transit, making the use of the service more attractive

for passengers in low density and rural areas who would be located further from a fixed stop.

Note: The Town is not required to upgrade or construct accessible bus stops under the Accessibility for

Ontarians with Disabilities Act (AODA). The AODA requirements are as follows:

► Ensure that persons with disabilities are able to board or deboard a transportation vehicle at the

closest available safe location, as determined by the operator, that is not an official stop, if the of ficial

stop is not accessible.

► Consult with the municipal accessibility advisory committee in developing accessible design criteria for

bus stops and shelters.

However, it is recommended that the Town aim to increase the accessibility of bus stops over time by

upgrading a few stops each year. Similarly, shelters can be provided at priority locations. The use of an

advertising agreement to provide transit shelters is discussed further in section 14.2.



71

8.0 LONG-TERM TRANSIT NETWORK

Destinations

The telephone survey and online survey clearly identified the Tanger Outlet Mall in Cookstown as

residents’ next priority for transit service, after connecting the “core” destinations with short-term transit

service options. Innisfil’s long-term transit service plan should also look to connect the larger communities

within the Town, the communities that are expected to experience significant growth and the future

employment areas. The key destinations for the long-term service plan therefore include the following:

► Tanger Outlet Mall;

► Lefroy – Belle Ewart;

► Cookstown;

► Innisfil Heights Employment Area and Georgian Downs; and

► Big Bay Point.

Like the short-term service options, the long-term transit service options also enable connections with the

GO Bus on Yonge Street for travel to and from Bradford West Gwillimbury, York Region and Toronto.

Transit service options have not been developed for the village settlements that are not expecting

significant growth (Gilford – Degrassi Point, Big Cedar Point, Leonard’s Beach, Churchill and Fennel’s

Corner), unless they are located along the route between transit destinations.

Additional fixed route transit within Alcona may also be desirable as Alcona continues to grow. It is

expected that a route such as Short-Term Service Option 4 will remain the core route through Alcona.

Other routes to serve new and existing neighbourhoods north and south of Innisfil Beach Road may also

be developed in the future, based on ridership levels and rider feedback.

Service Models and Recommendations

The destinations included in the long-term service plan are lower density and more dispersed than the

core destinations connected by the short-term route options. A broader range of transit service models

should therefore be considered. The following options were considered as options to connect the

destinations that are included within the long-term service plan:

► Fixed schedule, fixed route transit;

► Fixed schedule transit with route deviations; and

► On-demand transit service.

Based on the analysis of options, three additional transit routes/services are recommended as part of the

long-term service plan. These will supplement the fixed route transit service connecting Alcona, Barrie and

the Innisfil Recreational Complex, discussed as short-term service options.



72

1. Cookstown to Alcona via Lefroy and Tanger Outlet Mall

If the Town does not implement a transit service connecting Alcona to Tanger Outlet Mall as part of the

short-term service plan, then this connection should be the priority for transit system expansion. Short-

Term Service Options 5 and 6 are two options to connect these destinations. An on-demand taxi service

(Service Option 6) would be a good starting point for evaluating demand. Thereafter, the Town could

transition to a limited-hour fixed schedule service if justified based on demand (Service Option 5).

Eventually, service levels could be increased to provide all-day service, to serve Cookstown and to extend

further into Alcona. Request stops or route deviations could also be considered to increase the service

coverage without increasing the route length.

2. Alcona to Innisfil Heights and Georgian Downs: Peak Hour Fixed Route Service

There are already a significant number of jobs at the Georgian Downs slot machines and racetrack. Once

the Innisfil Heights Employment Area begins to develop, it is expected that there will be significant

additional demand for transit for trips to and from work. Given the narrow geographic area and proximity to

Alcona, a fixed schedule, fixed route service is recommended to connect Alcona residents to these jobs.

The route would connect the core of Alcona to Georgian Downs and Innisfil Heights via Innisfil Beach

Road, with the option of adding loops in Alcona and in the Innisfil Heights area to connect more residents

and jobs This service would not need to operate all day; service hours could be focused on the peak hours

when shifts change and employees are arriving and departing. Hourly service could be provided with one

vehicle.

3. Alcona to Big Bay Point/Friday Harbour: On-Demand Service

Once the Friday Harbour resort community is developed, there may be a demand for transit for trips to and

from Alcona, or to and from Barrie. Friday Harbour is advertising that there will be a shuttle provided to

and from Barrie South GO Station. The Town of Innisfil should also consider offering an on-demand transit

service to and from Alcona.

An on-demand transit service will enable Innisfil residents to work, shop or recreate at Friday Harbour. It

will also enable Friday Harbour community members to travel to Innisfil and support local Alcona

businesses. The service would be designed to pick up and drop off riders at a variety of locations in the

Friday Harbour/Big Bay Point area; Sandycove Acres residents could potentially also be accommodated.

All trips would either start or end at a fixed pick-up/drop-off location in Alcona. This service could be

introduced on a pilot basis using small vehicles (e.g. taxis); it is anticipated that one vehicle would be

sufficient to accommodate all trip requests. The service could be modeled on Bradford West Gwillimbury’s

Taxi-to-GO and Bond Head taxi shuttle pilot programs.

Once the demand for this transit connection is proven, Innisfil could extend the core fixed route, fixed

schedule transit service past Sandycove Acres north to Big Bay Point/Friday Harbour Resort. An additional

vehicle will be required to maintain hourly frequencies.



73

9.0 SERVICE DELIVERY

9.1 Service Delivery Options

Transit service delivery is not a one-size-fits-all approach. For some municipalities, contracting may be the

most cost-effective way to provide service, because they can benefit from access to certain technologies

or reduced labour, fuel, and insurance costs. For other municipalities, contracting may be impractical

because of additional costs incurred from the bidding process and contractor oversight so in-house service

delivery makes sense. It may also be feasible to only contract certain elements of a transit service (such

as operations and maintenance or paratransit) and retain other functions in the municipality (such as asset

ownership and management).

Four service delivery models are proposed for assessment:

► Contract Service Delivery

► Delegated Service Delivery - Taxi

► In-house Municipal Service Delivery – Town of Innisfil

► Municipal Partnership – City of Barrie

Each model will be described in summary and its key differentiating characteristics will be highlighted. The

discussion does not detail the conflicting advantages and disadvantages of contracted (options 1, 2 and 4)

and in-house (option 3) service delivery. Debates over the service quality, customer orientation, flexibility,

control and accountability, risk and liability and safety attributes of contracted vs. in-house service delivery,

to name a few, can be addressed equally well with thoughtful contract or organizational development.

The service plan components are assessed at the end of this section for best fit with the service delivery

options and service delivery recommendations are made.

Contracted Service Delivery

Structured procurement and resulting contract with the successful proponent to operate and

maintain Innisfil Transit Service.

Contracted operation of transit service is very common in smaller municipalities and regions. Canadian

Urban Transit Association (CUTA) statistics show that about one-third of its member transit systems have

some or all of their service delivered by private companies. The contract scope of the private company can

vary:

► OMV – Operate, Maintain vehicle, Vehicle provision

► OM – Operate, Maintain vehicle only (Vehicle owned by municipality)

► O – Operate (Vehicle owned and maintained by municipality)



74

The OM model for contracting is most typical. The vehicle type can range from a sedan (taxi) to a

community bus/van to a full-size standard bus. When contracting transit service, the municipality maintains

ownership of the service and authority over setting policies, such as fares and schedules

Key distinguishing characteristics:

► Regulatory authority – Operating authority is held by the municipality as fleet owner. Vehicle safety

inspection, health & safety and environmental regulation responsibility is assigned to the contractor,

with oversight and due diligence exercised by the municipality

► Asset ownership and management – Municipal, eligible for senior government infrastructure funding.

Asset ownership by the contract company is a less common option that can be considered on a short-

term basis (fast-track start-up of a new transit service) or on a more permanent basis (supported by

cost-benefit analysis)

► Competition, qualified firms – A competitive environment with several qualified firms is beneficial to

exploit the full potential of service contracting. There are a number of bus companies operating in the

Innisfil/Barrie area delivering transit, student and charter services.

► Operational cost-efficiency, Cost-effectiveness – contracted bus companies are widely used to contain

costs (compensation, work rules, IT innovation, performance management systems), but which incur

contract administration expenses (procurement, oversight).

► Value-added services (access to contractor resources - performance management systems, IT, fleet,

specialized training) – private companies often offer specialized recruitment & training, performance

management systems, supply chain management economies of scale (for larger companies), IT

innovation to support efficiency and effectiveness.

The plan’s fixed route / fixed schedule service and dedicated on-demand paratransit service, in the

immediate term and long term, are suitable candidates for contract service delivery assessment.

Delegated Service Delivery - Taxi

Agreement with a taxi company(s) licensed in the Town of Innisfil to deliver all or segments of the

Innisfil Transit Service

Taxis in Canada are most often used to deliver paratransit (specialized transit for persons with a mobility

disability); integrated with a van-based paratransit service or as supplemental (user-side subsidy) service.

The increasing numbers of accessible taxis, capable of transporting passengers with mobility devices,

being introduced into Canadian taxi fleets are also providing market-based travel options to persons with a

disability and to transit operators seeking accessible fleet options.

Shared-ride taxi service is also an emerging transit service delivery option for the general population.

These services are expanding in Canada with branding like Trans-Cab (Milton, ON), Taxi-to-Go (Bradford

West Gwillimbury, ON) or taxi bus (Rimouski, QC). The services are varied, but generally serve areas



75

where it is not feasible to establish a regular bus service. These latter services may also be more formally

contracted, as in section (a) above.


► Regulatory authority – Operating authority is the taxi license and associated tariff. Taxis may be used

for transit under contract with a municipality or dispatched (on-demand or subscription) by a

municipality or its designee, both under authority of the taxi company’s license. The ‘designee’ can be

the larger transit bus contractor or a transit broker (non-profit community organization). Vehicle safety

inspection, health & safety and environmental regulation responsibility is held by the taxi company,

with prudent, oversight and due diligence exercised by the municipality

► Asset ownership and management – Taxi company (eliminating senior government infrastructure

funding)

► Competition, qualified firms – Problematic in areas with limited taxi service and due to industry

challenges (standardized training and discipline, fraud mitigation). There are four primary taxi

companies operating in the Town of Innisfil: Innisfil Taxi and Global Taxi, based in Innisfil, and Barrie

Taxi and Deluxe Taxi, based in Barrie.

► Operational cost-efficiency, Cost-effectiveness – Taxis are widely used to contain costs for select,

lower-volume services, offset by contract administration expenses (oversight).

► Value-added services (access to contractor resources - performance management systems, IT, fleet,

specialized training) – larger fleet to address spikes in passenger demand, longer hours of operation

to support extended services approved by a Municipality, established call centre, dispatching IT.

This option will be assessed for fit with the plan’s specialized transit service. It’s worth emphasizing that

the option is based on taxi license authority/tariff and not contract service delivery by a taxi company

discussed in subsection (a), above. In general terms, delegated service delivery by taxi is best suited to

supplement core transit service.

Municipal Partnership – City of Barrie

Inter-municipal services agreement with the City of Barrie to extend Barrie Transit service to the

Town of Innisfil.

City of Barrie staff have been receptive to discussing service provision for Innisfil and for other area

municipalities under their contract with MVT. The City of Barrie has a 20-year term contract with MVT

Canadian Bus for the provision of conventional and specialized transit service. The contract was the result

of a rigorous procurement process administered by the City, with support from P3Canada and technical

and legal advisors. The contract is performance-based with clearly defined service levels for on-time

performance and customer service with penalties to motivate the service provider to meet the prescribed

service levels. Under this same contract, Barrie Transit operates public transit service for the Township of

Essa through an inter-municipal service agreement. This type of inter-municipal service delivery



76

arrangement offers benefits to the Town of Innisfil related to Ontario Gas Tax funding, fare integration with

Barrie Transit and service integration with Barrie Transit. Other benefits include availability of standby

vehicles and existing capacity and technology to meet AODA requirements. Similarly to delegated service

delivery by a taxi company, regulatory authority would be retained by the City of Barrie.


► Regulatory authority – This could be most directly structured so all authority is retained in the Barrie /

MVT Canadian contract

► Asset ownership and management – Municipal (Barrie or Innisfil)

► Competition, qualified firms – n/a

► Operational cost-efficiency, Cost-effectiveness – embedded in the Barrie / MVT Canada contract and

subject to negotiation of the terms and conditions of the inter-municipal services agreement

► Value-added services (access to resources - performance management systems, IT, fleet, specialized

training) – embedded in the Barrie / MVT Canadian contract

The plan’s fixed route / fixed schedule service (with route deviation) and dedicated on-demand paratransit

service, in the immediate term and long term, are suitable candidates for contract service delivery

assessment.

In-House Municipal Service Delivery – Town of Innisfil

Municipal department for operation and maintenance of the Innisfil Transit Service.

In-house operation of transit service is very common in larger municipalities and regions. CUTA statistics

show that about two-thirds its member transit systems have some or all of their service delivered by a

municipality/transit agency, representing over 85% of transit service delivered in Canada (smaller transit

systems predominantly contract for service delivery). Transit services in a municipality or region are

usually organized in either a fully integrated transit department/utility/commission or a transit department

with specialized, organization-wide ‘centres of excellence’ support functions (HR, Supply Chain

Management, etc.).

In-house municipal transit service delivery includes conventional bus, community bus and paratransit.


► Regulatory authority – Operating authority is held by the municipality as granted by legislation. Vehicle

safety inspection, health & safety and environmental regulation responsibility is held by the

municipality

► Asset ownership and management – Municipal, eligible for senior government infrastructure funding

► Competition, qualified firms – n/a



77

► Operational cost-efficiency, Cost-effectiveness – Town employee compensation levels and work rules

set basic operating costs, while the lack of economies of scale in a small municipality typically leads to

higher cost.

► Value-added services (access to resources - performance management systems, IT, fleet, specialized

training) – sophisticated organizational support in a municipality (HR, LR, financial, supply chain

management, safety, environmental systems, etc.

The plan’s fixed route / fixed schedule service (with route deviation) and dedicated on-demand paratransit

service, in the immediate term is not suitable for in-house service delivery.

9.2 Conventional Transit Service Delivery Recommendations

MMM assessed the options for conventional transit service delivery based on factors that include:

municipal strategic direction and service plan, municipal vs contractor capacity, delivery costs, and

revenue possibilities4. Based on this assessment, the contracted service delivery model is recommended.

The potential financial and operational benefits for the Town to contract transit service include the

following:

► Benefits of market competition – best price and quality.

► Savings in operating costs – competitive wages and benefits, more efficient use of labour and assets

(integration with other company operations).

► Shift appropriate risk to the private sector.

► Flexibility to modify or cancel service more easily.

The MMM team also identified potential operators for the conventional transit service (Table 27). Three of

the organizations were contacted regarding the delivery of an Innisfil transit service (MVT, Switzer Carty

and Sinton Landmark), and all three organizations expressed an interest. Other potential service providers

include coach bus companies, charter bus services and shuttle operators.

4 As part of the assessment, the MMM team conducted a preliminary evaluation of the likely costs and benefits of

delivering the service through an inter-municipal partnership with the City of Barrie. With the City of Barrie as the

service operator and “host municipality”, the Town of Innisfil would not be limited by the requirement that Ontario Gas

Tax funding not exceed 75% of municipal contributions (including passenger revenues and grants). Furthermore, there

are anticipated benefits related to fare integration, service integration and reduced administrative requirements.

Based on the Barrie-Essa service agreement, the hourly operating costs for service delivered by Barrie/MVT may be

higher than other potential service providers. With maximum annual Ontario Gas Tax Funding of $200,000

(conservative estimate), the increased hourly costs would outweigh the gas tax funding benefits for both the one-bus

and two-bus transit service.

Before issuing a RFP for transit service delivery and after finalizing service levels, the Town should obtain an up-to-date

estimate of costs for conventional transit service delivery from the City of Barrie. If costs are roughly equal for service

delivery by the City of Barrie versus by a third-party, then delivery by Barrie is recommended due to the benefits related

to fare integration, service integration and administration.



78

Table 27 Potential Conventional Transit Service Providers

Potential Conventional Transit Service Providers

MVT Provides conventional transit service within the City of Barrie, and operates transit service

through their City of Barrie contract to Essa Township between Angus and Barrie.

Switzer Carty Operates conventional transit service in Bradford West Gwillimbury

Sinton Landmark Operates conventional transit service in the Town of Colllingwood, Town of Wasaga Beach,

and between the towns of Collingwood, Wasaga Beach and Blue Mountains

First Canada Operates conventional transit service in Orillia, Tecumseh and Orangeville

Parkview Transit Operates school bus service in Simcoe County and Peel Region

A competitive procurement process using a publicly advertised request for proposal (RFP) is

recommended to obtain the best price and quality for contracted service delivery. It is recommended that

Innisfil contact potential service providers before it releases the Request for Proposal for the transit

services contract. Notifying these companies of the Request for Proposal would increase the likelihood of

these companies submitting a proposal. With a more competitive procurement process, Innisfil is more

likely to obtain a high quality service at a competitive price.

Before soliciting bids, the Town may want to obtain an updated quote for conventional transit service

delivery through an inter-municipal agreement with the City of Barrie.

Recommendations:

1. Contracted service delivery is recommended as the best fit for the Town’s short-term and long-

term conventional transit service plans.

2. A competitive procurement process is recommended to obtain the best price and quality.

3. Additional recommendations on contract scope, term, payment model, procurement process and

roles and responsibilities are included in the sections that follow.

Contract Scope, Term and Payment Model

Scope: The Operate-Maintain (O-M) model for contracting is most typical and is recommended for Innisfil,

for the following reasons:

► Cost: Based on a comparison of the costs of purchasing vehicles versus leasing them from the

operating company, purchasing vehicles is more cost-effective over a five-year period. However, the

operating company is better positioned to perform vehicle maintenance, as they already have the staff,

equipment and capacity for these activities.

► Potential service providers: The market is also usually more competitive when capital infrastructure

requirements are excluded from the contract scope. Innisfil is more likely to obtain numerous

proposals if vehicles are not included in the scope.



79

► Minimizing conflict: OM bundles operations and maintenance under a single organization and

management, thereby minimizing conflicting priorities that may arise between these functional groups.

OMV also provides this benefit.

► Protection against disruption: If for any reason, Innisfil needs to terminate its relationship with one

contractor and find another contractor, they could do this more quickly and without service disruption if

they own the transit vehicle.

Contract Term: The contract term is usually a combination of a fixed term plus contract extension options.

A shorter contract term is recommended for Innisfil as a new transit system – for example, a three-year

fixed term and fixed pricing with two one-year contract extension options at the sole discretion of the

municipality. With experience, a longer contract term may be considered in future procurements. A

minimum fixed contract term of two years is recommended to ensure competitive pricing.

Payment Model: Under the majority of OM contracts, operating companies are paid based on the number

of service hours delivered. This payment model is recommended for Innisfil due to its simplicity and

widespread use. The operator will provide the hourly rate for service delivery in each year of their contract

as part of their proposal. The operator will develop this hourly rate based on Innisfil’s planned revenue

service hours. The hourly rate will factor in the operator’s fixed costs (e.g. management, facilities,

overhead expenses and “deadhead” kilometres) as well as the variable costs (e.g. drivers’ wages and

vehicle maintenance costs). Annual increases in operating costs can be linked to inflation, as measured by

the Consumer Price Index.

The payment model should also address changes in service levels. Recognizing that the operator’s hourly

rates are based on the planned number of revenue service hours, the contract should also enable

adjustment of hourly rates when service levels change dramatically. For example, if service hours increase

or decrease by more than 20%, the operator’s hourly rates can be re-negotiated. Payment can also be

renegotiated if necessary based on audited costs.

Reporting Requirements: It is recommended that the contractor be asked to track and provide regular

reports on key activities and indicators (e.g. on-time performance, service hours provided, training and

maintenance activities conducted).

Procurement Process

The most common method of procuring transit services is a publicly advertised request for proposal (RFP).

Under an RFP, the municipality describes the service it is seeking and openly solicits proposals from

qualified companies. Responding proponents have the opportunity to be innovative and convincing about

their capabilities. The RFP is not a tender and the transit agency typically asks the proponent for a

proposal with two components:

1. Technical proposal that describes the company’s relevant experience and its business plan –

operating history and capabilities, key management personnel, startup and operational plans,



80

personnel hiring and retention programs, vehicle inspection and maintenance programs and

customer service and communication plans.

2. Price proposal with hourly rates for years 1, 2 and 3 of service delivery, and total costs for the first

three years of service based on the planned number of revenue service hours.

Each component is scored sequentially based upon a two-stage evaluation process, with evaluation

criteria published in the RFP document. Typically, the technical component must meet a minimum number

of evaluation points in order to proceed to evaluation of the pricing proposal. Proposals that do not meet

this minimum are not evaluated further and the proponent’s price proposal is returned unopened. The

evaluation criteria reflect a mix of quality and cost considerations, hence, the proposal with the lowest

price is not necessarily the winning proposal. A 50/50 assignment of evaluation scoring to technical and

price is common. There are systems with higher and lower assignments of technical/ price points but

50/50 represents a majority. A sample set of evaluation criteria is provided in Appendix B, Table A-1.

Procurement documents should include the following:

► RFP document issued by the Town of Innisfil to procure an operating company; and

► Draft transit contract(s) and associated schedules between the Town of Innisfil and the Operating

Company. The final transit contract will be negotiated with the operating company selected to deliver

the service.

Recommended Contractor and Town Responsibilities

A clear assignment of responsibilities between the contracting parties is important. The RFP and contract

should clearly identify the responsibilities of the operating company and of the municipality. The details of

each type of responsibility should be established by Innisfil as part of the development of the RFP and

draft contract. Appendix B includes a detailed list of contractor and Town responsibilities for an Operate-

Maintain (OM) contract model. Key recommended contractor responsibilities are identified in Table 28.

Table 28 Key Recommended Contractor Responsibilities

Recommended Contractor Responsibilities

Management ► Operate and oversee conventional transit service according to the route and schedule identified in the RFP

► Provide a local supervisor responsible for the system who can be reached during the transit operating hours and make decisions

Vehicles and

Facilities

► Provide insurance for the Town’s transit vehicle and transit service to the levels prescribed in the contract

► Provide a standby vehicle that can deliver service in the event that the Town vehicle is unavailable during service hours

► Provide an indoor storage facility or area where the transit vehicle will be stored year-round



81

Technology and

Fare Collection

► Supply two-way radios or other equivalent communication technologies

► Supply GPS, AVL or other system to track vehicle location

► Deliver locked fare box canister with fares to the Town Office as specified in the contract

Maintenance ► Maintain buses to peak efficiency in accordance with the manufacturer’s recommendations

► Pay for all maintenance activities including but not limited to: replacement and repair of engine and transmission items caused by normal wear; lights; brakes; tires; upholstery; windows; mirrors etc.

► Recommended exception: For major components, the Town should establish the expected life for each component with proper maintenance, and should pay the contractor for replacement of these components at the end of their useful life. This will limit disputes and enable the Town to operate the vehicles for their full useful life.

► Plan maintenance to minimize the use of the standby vehicle

Customer

Service

► Respond to customer questions or complaints (forwarded by the Town) within 24 or 48 hours

► Report questions or complaints received from customers directly to the Town

► Offer a polite, courteous and professional service

► Be familiar with the route and schedule and provide customers with accurate information

Contract

Administration

and Performance

Monitoring

► Use a reliable and efficient accounting system to deliver timely and accurate billing

► Track on-time performance / schedule adherence and other key performance indicators

► Provide quarterly or annual reports on key activities and indicators (e.g. on-time performance, service hours provided, training and maintenance activities conducted)

► Work with the Town to deliver the best possible service (e.g. provide recommendations regarding routes, stops and schedules)

9.3 Specialized Transit Service Delivery Recommendations

As discussed in section 5.4, the demand for specialized transit in the Town will likely be low in the initial

years of service, and will grow in subsequent years as awareness of the service increases and the

ridership base grows. To limit the costs of providing specialized transit service in the first five years of

service, a scalable service delivery model is recommended with costs based on the actual service

delivered (vehicle hours or kilometres).

In line with this recommendation, the Town should delegate or contract service delivery to one of the

organizations in the area that already operates wheelchair-accessible transit service and that has the staff,

vehicles and capacity to meet varying levels of demand for specialized transit service. There are a number

of organizations that would be well positioned to deliver specialized transit in Innisfil, as identified in the

table below. The MMM team communicated directly with Barrie Taxi, Global Taxi, CHATS and the Red

Cross about specialized transit service delivery, and all three organizations expressed an interest in a

contracted or delegated service delivery arrangement.



82

Table 29 Potential Specialized Transit Service Providers

Potential Specialized Transit Service Providers

Barrie Transit Provides Barrie Accessible Community Transportation Service (BACTS) within the City of

Barrie, with service delivery contracted to MVT; Barrie Transit owns a fleet of 13 accessible

vehicles

Barrie Taxi Operates taxi service in Barrie and Innisfil; owns three accessible minivans

Global Taxi Operates taxi service in Barrie and Innisfil; owns several accessible vehicles

Red Cross Operates specialized transit service in the Town of Colllingwood; provides transportation to

medical appointments for clients in the Town of Innisfil; owns and operates accessible vehicles

CHATS Will be operating specialized transit service for the Town of Georgina; provides transportation

to medical appointments for clients in York Region and Bradford West Gwillimbury; owns and

operates accessible vehicles

Parkbridge Operates a bus service for Sandycove Acres residents; owns and operates one accessible

vehicle three days a week

Lakeshore Retirement

Home

Operates a bus service for Lakeshore Retirement Home residents; owns and operates one

accessible vehicle a few days a week

To better establish the capacities of these organizations and their interest in delivering specialized transit

service in Innisfil, the Town could issue a Request for Expressions of Interest. This could be used as the

basis for subsequent negotiations with qualified providers and a potential sole source agreement.

Alternatively, it could be followed by a Request for Proposal or Request for Quote targeted at qualified

potential service providers.

The Request for Expressions of Interest would be designed to enable creative service delivery methods

and partnerships. For example, Barrie Transit could propose an extension of BACTS service into Innisfil,

using the established BACTS application process to minimize administrative costs. Parkbridge and

Lakeshore Retirement Home could propose a partnership where each would provide service on the days

of the week when their vehicles are not in use.

Recommendations:

1. It is recommended that the Town issue a Request for Expressions of Interest to identify

organizations with the required capacity for delegated or contracted service delivery.

2. The Town should avoid purchasing dedicated vehicles for specialized transit in the first few years

of service. Instead, it is recommended that the operator provide the required vehicles.

3. A payment model based on vehicle kilometres or vehicle hours is recommended, so that costs are

proportional to the service provided.



83

9.4 Regulatory Requirements and Risk Management

The Ontario regulatory environment includes a number of requirements for an organization delivering

public transit related to vehicle safety, worker safety, environmental responsibility and accessibility.

Appendix B describes these regulatory requirements.

In addition to complying with relevant regulations, the Town has a responsibility as the owner of a

contracted service to exercise appropriate contract oversight and due diligence to ensure safety and

environmental protection provisions are upheld by the transit contractor. Recommendations related to due

diligence are also provided in Appendix B.



84

10.0 VEHICLES AND TECHNOLOGY

10.1 Vehicles

Primary Vehicle(s)

The short-term service recommendations require one or two vehicles to be in operation during service

hours. The preferred vehicle will be one of the many types of approximately 18- to 24-passenger vehicles

currently available on the market, and will preferably be a low-floor bus.

The vehicle specifications should address the following AODA requirements for transit vehicles, including

those that come into effect in 2017:

► Allocated mobility aid spaces: Vehicles manufactured in 2013 or after must have two or more

allocated mobility aid spaces (1.2 metres by 0.7m).

► Lifting devices: Vehicles manufactured in 2013 or after must be equipped with lifting devices, ramps

or portable bridge plates; vehicles must be equipped with lights that illuminate the lifting device when

the door is open.

► Storage of mobility aids: Ensure safe storage of mobility aids and devices within reach of the person

who uses the aid.

► Courtesy seating: Provide clearly marked courtesy seating as close as practical to the entrance.

► Boarding and deboarding: Ensure that adequate time is provided to persons with disabilities to

safely board and deboard transportation vehicles and that assistance be provided, upon request.

► Grab bars: Vehicles must be equipped with grab bars, handholds, handrails or stanchions at

entrances and exits, courtesy seating areas, fare payment locations and mobility aid securement

positions.

► Pre-boarding signage and announcements: Vehicles manufactured in 2013 or after must have

signage displaying the route or direction or destination or next step. By 2017 – Provide electronic pre-

boarding announcements of the route, direction, destination or next major stop.

► On-board announcements: By 2017 – Ensure that all stops or destination points are audibly

announced through electronic means, and visually displayed through electronic means.

Costs for 18- to 24-passenger low-floor vehicles range that meet these accessibility requirements range

from approximately $175,000 to $250,000, depending on the specific features requested (e.g. air kneeling

versus ramps). High-floor vehicles with rear-entry wheelchair lifts can be purchased for $100,000 to

$140,000. However, these are not recommended for Innisfil due to the large number of seniors that will be

using the transit service. Fare boxes, bicycle racks and panels for advertising/signage can also be

included in the vehicle specifications.



85

The Town of Innisfil can issue a tender for the purchase of the vehicle(s). The tender will include the

specifications, including: seating capacity; accessibility requirements; and fuel type. As part of the tender,

Innisfil may wish to request prices for a more basic vehicle as well as for a more expensive vehicle.

Alternatively, the Town can take advantage of the Metrolinx joint procurement initiative. This option is

administratively efficient but may result in less flexibility with regard to vehicle specifications. The joint

procurement initiative may also offer benefits including cost savings, extended warranty periods and

access to fleet management services.

Standby Vehicle(s)

Spare vehicles will also be required in order to ensure service reliability in the event of vehicle mechanical

failure, accident and for vehicle maintenance. The majority of transit systems that own their transit vehicles

also own a standby vehicle. However, for a small transit system with only one or two vehicles, purchasing

a standby vehicle in the first years of service is not recommended due to the high capital costs.

Instead, the contractor can be asked to provide one or more spare vehicles that meet the AODA

requirements for accessible vehicles. The Town would only pay for the hours or kilometres that the vehicle

is in service, which means that the vehicle costs would be distributed over a long time period. The

requirements for provision of an acceptable spare vehicle for occasional use would be included in the RFP

and contract.

After the first year or two of service, the Town can evaluate the pros and cons of buying their own standby

vehicle based on the annual costs of the contractor-provided standby vehicle, the costs of purchasing an

additional vehicle, and the availability of funding for the purchase of an additional vehicle.

Standby Vehicle Provided by Contractor: Collingwood/Wasaga Beach Transit Link Service, Ontario

An example of this model can be found in the nearby municipalities of Collingwood and Wasage Beach. The transit contractor, Sinton-Landmark Transportation, provides a standby vehicle for the Collingwood/Wasaga Beach Transit Link service, a one-bus service running on an hourly frequency. The Town pays only for the hours or kilometres that the vehicle is in service, which means that the vehicle costs are distributed over a long time period. The standby vehicle goes out into service least once a month so that maintenance can occur on the regular vehicle during normal business hours. For the most part, the standby vehicle is dedicated to the Collingwood/Wasaga Transit Link service. However, Sinton-Landmark occasionally uses the standby vehicle for other purposes in the evening and on weekends when transit service is not running.

Sample contract wording: “Have available and immediately supply at the Operator’s expense one (1) standby vehicle of a type and condition approved by the Town to provide and maintain regular service in the event that one or more of the vehicle fleet is out of service. The standby vehicle shall be used by the Operator while Town owned vehicles are temporarily out of service for repairs.” (Town of Wasaga Beach and Colllingwood)



86

Use of Georgian Downs’, Sandycove Acres’ or other Organizations’ Vehicles

The MMM team evaluated the option of making use of vehicles that are already owned by organizations

within the Town of Innisfil. These options are not recommended for conventional transit service.

The Georgian Downs shuttle is provided using coach buses that are not accessible. These buses

therefore could not be used as Town of Innisfil public transit vehicles.

The Sandy Cove residents conveyed during consultation that their primary interest is in maintaining the

customized service that brings them to and from destinations such as Royal Victoria Hospital (RVH) in

Barrie. The options for use of the Sandy Cove bus would include:

► To maintain the existing Sandycove service and to limit the Town transit service to days of the week

that the Sandycove service does not operate. This is not recommended as it would severely

compromise the Town’s transit service.

► To replace the existing Sandycove service with a Town service, with potential sale of the transit

vehicle to the Town and a small annual Parkbridge contribution to transit operating costs. This is not

recommended, since Sandycove residents would likely be unhappy with a Town transit service that

required a transfer to get to RVH and other Barrie destinations.

However, the recommended service delivery model for specialized transit service may provide an

opportunity for use of the Sandycove and/or Lakeshore Retirement Home vehicle by a Town transit

service.

10.2 Technology

An Automated Vehicle Location (AVL) system and Automated Passenger Counting system (APC) are

recommended for the Town of Innisfil transit service. These can be included in the vehicle specifications

as part of procurement, and are included in the estimated vehicle cost.

The APC system will provide the Town with valuable information on ridership at different times of day and

along different sections of the route. This information can be used to modify and enhance transit service

(e.g. service hours, routing, bus shelter location). The AVL system will enable the contractor and Town to

track on-time performance. Once the service is established, the AVL system can also be used to provide

web-based or mobile information to customers on the precise location of the bus, resulting in better

customer service.

Pre-boarding signage and announcements and on-board announcements are other technologies that

should be included in the vehicle specifications to comply with AODA requirements (discussed above).

If the Town proceeds with an on-demand service within the next five years (e.g. between Alcona, Lefroy,

Tanger and Cookstown or between Alcona and Big Bay Point), mobile applications for trip booking and for



87

dynamic routing should be investigated (e.g. RideCo, the Waterloo-based company providing Milton’s GO

Connect service).

Within the next five years, the Town should also prepare to transition to an advanced smart card or mobile

payment technology. Barrie Transit is researching advanced technology for implementation within the

next two years. The Presto system is already being used by GO Transit and is in the process of being

updated for greater flexibility. Innisfil should track these efforts and be prepared to participate when

feasible. This will also allow for fare integration opportunities with Barrie Transit and/or GO Transit.



88

11.0 MUNICIPAL ORGANIZATION AND STAFFING

Municipal transit management has dual roles: day-to-day transit service operations and contract

administration. The transit service operations role requires open communications (phone, email, in-person)

between the designated contacts for each party on an on-going basis. Contract administration includes

oversight of contract compliance and payment.

The municipal staffing requirement and supervisory structure is modest with a well-structured service

delivery contract. The contract management focus of the function could be incorporated in existing

positions. The associated Transit Coordinator and Transit Clerk positions are described in Figure 30. The

On-Street Operations Coordinator role is typically incorporated in an existing position within Roads

Services. The Transit Coordinator can work with the Manager, Communications on marketing and

communications, discussed further in section 12.0.

Figure 30 Municipal Organization and Staffing

Estimates of full time equivalent (FTE) staff requirements are provided for launch-related activities

(implementation planning, procurement and launch) and for on-going operations (starting approximately

three months after launch). These estimates are based on experiences in other municipalities, including



89

Cobourg (total of 0.5 FTE), Niagara-on-the-Lake (total of 0.5-0.7 FTE), Leamington (total of 0.3 FTE) and

Bradford West Gwillimbury (total of 1.0 FTE, increased since the launch of service).

A joint transit management committee comprised of the Town’s Transit Coordinator and the operating

company Supervisor is also recommended. This committee can meet monthly or quarterly to address

operational and contractual issues.



90

12.0 MARKETING AND COMMUNICATION

12.1 Launch Marketing

Before and after the launch of the service, Innisfil will need to conduct significant marketing and

community outreach to ensure that residents are aware of the service. In addition to raising awareness,

these marketing activities will establish a positive brand and image for the Innisfil transit service. Marketing

materials should convey that transit can benefit a variety of users – seniors, students, people with

disabilities and general residents. Finally, these activities will provide residents with all of the information

they need to use the service. A dedicated email address (e.g. [email protected]) and phone number

should also be established to answer residents’ questions about the new transit service.

Table 30 presents the recommended launch-related marketing activities. Marketing efforts should begin

two to three months in advance of the launch and continue for three to four months after the launch. Innisfil

may also want to consider a “launch event” shortly after the launch date to generate excitement, potentially

waiving fares for riders for the first day of service – and for up to two weeks after the launch of the service.

Table 30 Recommended Launch-Related Marketing

Material/Activity Purpose Content Distribution Media

Printed posters ► Raise awareness

► Establish brand and image

► Provide high-level information

regarding the route and

schedule

► Route map (high-level)

► Schedule and hours of

service (high-level)

► Launch date

► Website and contact

information

Post at the following locations:

► Government facilities (Town Hall,

libraries, Recreational Complex,

etc.)

► Other facilities (grocery stores,

local businesses, seniors’

communities and retirement

residences, schools, etc.)

► Community events

Printed

brochures/

handouts

► Raise awareness


► Provide detailed information

regarding the route, schedule

and fares

► Route map (detailed)


service (detailed)

► Launch date

► Fares and fare media

► Where to purchase tickets

and passes


information

Distribute at the following locations:

► Government facilities (Town Hall,

libraries, Recreational Complex,

etc.)

► Other facilities (grocery stores,

local businesses, seniors’

communities and retirement

residences, schools, etc.)

► Community events

► Include in mailings (e.g. water bills

or property tax bills)

mailto:[email protected]



91

Material/Activity Purpose Content Distribution Media

Website ► Raise awareness



re. route, schedule and fares

► Provide service alerts (e.g.

delays, route changes, etc.)

► Solicit community sponsors*

► Route map (detailed)


service (detailed)

► Launch date

► Fares and fare media

► Where to purchase tickets

and passes

► FAQs

► Service updates

► Contact information

Website to be included in all

marketing materials

Booth at

community

events

► Raise awareness



re. route, schedule and fares

► Answer questions from

residents

► Solicit community sponsors*

► Posters

► Brochures/handouts

► Potential distribution of one

free ticket to interested

residents

Community events of all types

Social media ► Raise awareness


► Generate discussion


residents

► Provide service alerts (e.g.

delays, route changes, etc.) -

near real-time




► Launch date


information

► Twitter

► Facebook

Advertisements

and news stories

► Raise awareness


► Provide high-level information

regarding the route and

schedule

► Provide background info re.

history, delivery model, etc.

(stories only)




► Launch date


information

► Local radio

► Local newspapers

Transit email

address and

phone number


residents

As required Contact information to be included in

all materials

In advance of the launch date, Innisfil will also need to design and print tickets and monthly passes. Innisfil

should also design and print decals for the transit vehicle so that it can be easily recognized.

The Transit Coordinator should work with the Town’s Manager, Communications to develop and

implement the launch-related marketing materials and activities. Either the Transit Coordinator or the

Communications Manager can lead the effort, depending on workload. In most of the municipalities



92

interviewed as part of the peer review, the Transit Coordinator plans and manages the marketing and

communications activities with support from the Communications staff. These staffing arrangements would

also apply to ongoing marketing and communication.

12.2 Ongoing Marketing and Communication

Once the service is well-established, Innisfil will be able to scale back the initial marketing activities.

Ongoing marketing and communications efforts will service multiple purposes:

► Communication regarding service changes;

► Responses to customer inquiries; and

► Recruitment of new riders.

Communication Regarding Service Changes

Ongoing efforts will focus on keeping riders informed regarding changes to schedules or routes, and

providing timely service alerts when routes are experiencing delays. The primary tools for ongoing

communication with rider are as follows:

► Information regarding planned route, schedule and/or fare changes should be posted on the Innisfil

transit website, in printed material on buses, and on social media platforms;

► Unplanned delays and service changes should be posted on the website and on social media

platforms; and

► Alerts regarding service delays can be phoned into the local radio station by the contractor and posted

on appropriate social media platforms.

When introducing new routes and transit services, the launch-related marketing approaches should be

employed again to generate excitement and recruit riders from the areas that benefit from the new service.

Responding to Customer Inquiries

Innisfil staff will monitor the transit email address and phone number on an ongoing basis. Innisfil should

develop a customer service policy of acknowledging all questions and inquiries within 24 business hours.

When responses require contractor input, Innisfil staff can liaise with the contractor and solicit the required

information from them (the contractor’s response period should be specified in the contract). Innisfil staff

can then share the appropriate information with the customer.

Recruitment of New Riders

Efforts to recruit new riders should be continued at a lesser scale after the service is well-established. The

launch-related marketing activities that are deemed most successful at attracting riders should be

continued, with a particular focus on recruitment in the late spring and early fall of each year.



93

13.0 FARE STRUCTURE AND RIDERSHIP PROJECTIONS

13.1 Recommended Fares

Based on a review of fares in other jurisdictions, a cash fare of $3.00 is recommended for all riders and

destinations. The following discounts are recommended for other fare classes and fare media:

► 17% discount for adult ride cards, as compared to cash fares;

► 20% discount for senior and student ride cards, relative to adult ride cards;

► 40% discount for child ride cards, relative to adult ride card; and

► ~30% discount for monthly passes relative to ride card prices for all fare classes, based on 35 rides

per month (approximately 8 rides per week).

The recommended fares for all fare classes and fare media are illustrated in Table 31. The fare class

definitions are consistent with those of Barrie Transit. The recommended discounts are aligned with

industry standards and with discounts in other small transit systems, as demonstrated in Table 32. Multi-

ride cards are recommended rather than individual tickets to reduce sorting costs.

If possible, the Town of Innisfil should work with the City of Barrie to enable riders transferring between the

Barrie and Innisfil transit systems to pay a single fare for the full journey. Barrie Transit would recognize

Innisfil’s fares and transfers, and Innisfil’s transit service would recognize Barrie’s fares and transfers. This

fare policy is expected to increase regional ridership, to the benefit of both municipalities’ transit systems.

Fare integration with GO Transit is not recommended for the Innisfil transit service at this time due to the

challenges of implementation/enforcement and the low number of riders who are expected to transfer

between systems. In the longer term, Innisfil may want to investigate the potential for co-fare

arrangements with Metrolinx/GO Transit using a smart card fare system. With other operators in the

region, Metrolinx covers 75% of the local fare when customers transfer to or from GO services. This is

typically implemented through the PRESTO fare system.

Table 31 Recommended Fares

Rider Eligibility Cash Fare Ride Card (10) Monthly Pass

Adult n/a $3.00 $2.50 $60.00

Senior 65+ with valid ID $3.00 $2.00 $50.00

Student With valid ID $3.00 $2.00 $50.00

Child 6 to 13 (children 0 to 5 ride free) $3.00 $1.50 $35.00

Transfer Transfer or proof of purchase from

Barrie Transit Free n/a n/a



94

Table 32 Recommended Discounts Compared to Averages in Other Canadian Transit Systems

Discount Canada Population <50,000 Recommended Notes

Adult Tickets/Ride Cards as % of Adult Cash Fare

83% 82% 83% Consistent with average

Student and Senior Ticket/Ride Card as % of Adult Ticket/Ride Card Price

79% 74% 80% Consistent with average

Child Ticket/Ride Card as % of Adult Ticket/Ride Card Price

74% 71% 60% Below average; encourages parents to use transit, little influence on RC ratio

Monthly Pass as % of Ticket/Ride Card Price (35 Rides Per Month)

90% 82% 69% Below average; encourages frequent use of transit (e.g. for commuting)

13.2 Ridership and Fare Revenue Projections

Ridership projections were developed based on observed ridership levels in other peer transit systems. As

discussed in section 6.2, Innisfil can expect 4 to 7 trips per revenue-service hour in the first five years of

the proposed transit service. With 3,488 annual service hours, year 1 ridership is projected to be

approximately 17,000 for a one-bus service or 28,000 for a two-bus service. The associated 1.3 and 1.7

trips per capita are in line with ridership levels observed in other municipalities. By year 5, ridership is

expected to increase to 25,000 to 40,000 annual trips.

Fare revenue projections were developed based on the ridership within each fare class. The proportion of

adults (40%), seniors (30%) and students (30%) was estimated based on ridership data from other small

municipalities. The use of monthly passes, tickets and cash fares varies significantly from place to place;

as a conservative estimate, each fare media was assumed to account for one-third of trips. This yields an

average fare of $2.25. Table 33 and Table 34 illustrate the projected ridership and fare revenue, along with

average fares and trips per capita for the one-bus and two-bus service.

Table 33 Ridership and Fare Revenue Projections – One Bus


Revenue service hours 3,488 3,488 3,488 3,488 3,488

Trips per revenue service hour 5 6 7 7 8

Total trips 17,000 21,000 23,000 24,000 26,000

Trips per capita 1.3 1.6 1.7 1.8 1.9

Average fare $2.24 $2.24 $2.24 $2.24 $2.24

Revenue total $38,000 $47,000 $52,000 $54,000 $58,000



95

Table 34 Ridership and Fare Revenue Projections – Two Buses


Revenue service hours 6,976 6,976 6,976 6,976 6,976

Trips per revenue service hour 4 5 6 6 6

Total trips 28,000 35,000 38,000 42,000 42,000

Trips per capita 1.7 2.2 2.4 2.6 2.6

Average fare $2.24 $2.24 $2.24 $2.24 $2.24

Revenue total $63,000 $78,000 $85,000 $94,000 $94,000



96

14.0 FINANCIAL PLAN

14.1 Capital Costs

Capital costs include the cost of purchasing vehicles, estimated at $200,000 per vehicle, and include all

required accessibility features and fare boxes (section 10.1).

Capital costs also include the purchase and installation of bus stop signs ($150 per sign). It is

recommended that Innisfil install bus stop signs at fixed stop locations described in the previous sections.

The signs need to have an appropriate design and size to be clearly visible to both customers and drivers.

The estimated capital cost of each bus stop sign is $150, for a total cost of $6,000 (one-bus service) or

$9,000 (two-bus service). Finally, capital costs include infrastructure upgrades to priority bus stops, such

as construction of new sidewalks and curbs, installation of concrete pads and/or construction of bus bays

where required.

Bus shelters and benches may be purchased by the Town of Innisfil in year 2 or 3 for priority stops, based

on observed demand and rider feedback. Shelters and benches may also be provided through community

and corporate sponsorship or through advertising agreements.

The total estimated capital costs for a one-bus and two-bus service are identified in the Five-Year

Financial Plan.

14.2 Operating Costs

Total operating costs of $300,000 to $400,000 and $500,000 to $650,000 are anticipated in years 1 to 5 of

service delivery for the one- and two-bus services, respectively. The breakdown of these costs is

described below and presented in the Five-Year Financial Plan.

Service Delivery and Standby Vehicles

Hourly operating costs for contracted service delivery were estimated based on operating costs for other

small transit systems in the area, including Bradford West Gwillimbury ($51 per hour) and Wasaga Beach

($47 per hour). Based on this analysis, a cost of $55 per hour of contracted service delivery was estimated

for Innisfil in the first year of service. This cost includes fuel, mileage and vehicle storage facilities. A 2%

rate of inflation was applied for the subsequent years.

Costs for contractor-provided standby vehicles were also estimated based on information from other small

transit systems. A conservative hourly cost of $25 per hour was estimated based on standby vehicle costs

in Bradford West Gwillimbury ($20 per hour) and Essa Township ($16 per hour). Usage of standby

vehicles was estimated at three days per month per permanent vehicle in year 1, and an additional half

day per month per vehicle in each subsequent year, based on information received about the Wasaga

Beach/Collingwood Transit Link service.



97

Staffing Costs

Section 11.0 presents the recommended staffing plan for the Town of Innisfil. Approximately 0.4 FTE will

be required to manage the service on an ongoing basis. Additional staff time will be required during the

first-year of operation (0.6 FTE). This includes significant effort on the part of the Manager,

Communications to develop marketing and communication materials. The estimated salary of $70,000 per

year accounts for the more senior Transit Coordinator position, the more junior Transit Clerk position and

the Communications position. Again, a 2% rate of inflation was applied to salaries for the subsequent

years.

It is also recommended that Innisfil seek external support for the preparation of the Request for Proposal

and contract documents; the suggested budget of $10,500 is based on 2 weeks (75) hours of external

support at a rate of $140 per hour.

Marketing Costs and Launch-Related Costs

In most transit systems, marketing costs account for approximately 2% of total operating costs. The

ongoing marketing and communication costs ($5,000 per year) for the one-bus service are estimated

based on this rule of thumb. The two-bus service may require some additional ongoing marketing due to

the increased service coverage.

However, in the first year of service, launch-related activities will require significant additional investment –

estimated at an additional $10,000, or 4% of operating costs. This will cover the costs of designing and

printing posters, brochures, decals and transit tickets and passes. (In small municipalities, transit tickets

and passes are generally designed in-house and printed by an external company, with minimal security

features.) This additional budget will also cover the costs of advertising with local media outlets, setting up

booths at community events and any other launch-related activities or promotions.

In the first year of service, there will also be minor costs to obtain license plates and permits, including a

Public Vehicle Operating License for inter-municipal service.

Vehicle Refurbishment

The contractor will be responsible for all preventative maintenance and minor vehicle repairs. For major

components, the Town should establish the expected life for each component with proper maintenance.

The Town would then pay the contractor for replacement of these components at the end of their useful

life. This will provide the contractor with a financial incentive to maintain vehicle components so that they

meet the lifetime expectations. Establishing agreed-upon expected lifetimes for each component will also

help to limit disputes with the contractor and enable the Town to operate the vehicles for their full useful

life.

No annual maintenance costs linked to refurbishment are anticipated in the first year of service. In the later

years of service, annual vehicle refurbishment costs averaging up to $15,000 per vehicle are anticipated.



98

Bus Stop and Infrastructure Maintenance

Annual bus stop maintenance costs of $5,000 per year are estimated for the one-bus service, and costs of

$7,500 are estimated for the two-bus service. This includes snow clearing and the occasional replacement

of bus stop signs. It is anticipated that some of the bus stop locations (e.g. on existing sidewalks) are

already being cleared of snow; maintenance costs are therefore estimated based on new maintenance

requirements for 20 to 30 bus stops.

Facilities

No new facilities will be required in connection with the transit service, as the contractor will be asked to

provide storage facilities for all transit vehicles. It is not anticipated that any park-and-ride facilities or

transit hub facilities will be needed in the first five to ten years of service.

Capital Reserve Contribution

Given the estimated 5 to 7-year lifespan of the vehicle, it is recommended that Innisfil allocate $25,000

(one sixth of the vehicle cost) to a capital reserve fund in years 2, 3 and thereafter. This will enable Innisfil

to replace the vehicle at the end of its lifespan.

14.3 Revenue and Funding

The following funding sources may be available to help the Town of Innisfil with the costs of a transit

service.

Ontario Gas Tax Funding

Ontario’s Dedicated Gas Tax Funds for Public Transportation (Gas Tax) Program was launched in 2004 to

provide a long-term, sustainable source of funding for Ontario municipalities that contribute towards a local

public transit system. The purpose of the program is to increase municipal transit ridership through the

expansion of public transportation capital infrastructure and levels of service. Ontario Gas Tax funding can

be used by municipalities for either capital costs or operational costs.

Gas Tax allocations are based on a formula of 70% ridership and 30% population. A municipality that is

not currently providing public transportation services, but decides to begin providing such services, may be

eligible for funding. Notification of the municipality’s intent to provide public transportation services and

specific commitment to annually fund such public transportation services is generally required prior to

October 1, along with a municipal by-law indicating its intent to provide public transportation services.

Based on the allocation parameters for the 2014/15 program, the Ministry of Transportation has indicated

that a population of 30,000 would translate into an allocation of approximately $240,000. This figure is

meant to be illustrative only, based on the 2014/15 program year. Gas Tax funds provided to each

municipality cannot exceed 75% of municipal own spending on transit. Municipal own spending includes



99

passenger revenues, donations if applicable, and municipal contributions to operating and capital

expenses, and is derived from data reported to CUTA.

As a conservative estimate, an annual Ontario Gas Tax allocation of up to $200,000 has been included in

the Five-Year Financial Plan. For the one-bus service, the Town would receive approximately $150,000

annually based on the cap at 75% of total municipal expenditures.

County of Simcoe Funding

In recent years, the County of Simcoe has provided grants for public transit to several local municipalities.

The Town of Innisfil obtained a grant of $38,000 from the County to conduct the Transit Feasibility Study.

The Township of Essa and the Town of Penetanguishene also received $50,000 in funding in 2015 for

transit systems that are in operation. The County of Simcoe transit funding is intended for capital costs and

studies. The Township of Essa has received this funding annually for three years; however, annual funding

is not guaranteed. The availability of funding for implementation of a Town of Innisfil transit service in 2016

will depend on the County’s 2016 budget and the number of local municipalities that apply for transit

funding. County funding has been included as a potential revenue source in the first year of the Five-Year

Financial Plan.

Cost-Sharing with the City of Barrie

The recommended two-bus service option travels within the City of Barrie for approximately 20 minutes

and serves a neighbourhood within Barrie that is not currently served by transit (just east of the

intersection of Huronia and Lockhart Road). The City of Barrie is willing to discuss a cost-sharing

agreement for this section of the route. The cost-sharing agreement could involve the City of Barrie paying

for 50% of the contracted service delivery costs for this third of the two-bus service. A cost-sharing

agreement has been included as a potential revenue source in the Five-Year Financial Plan. However, like

the County of Simcoe Funding, it is not guaranteed.

Other Sources of Revenue

Three other potential sources of revenue have been identified and are as follows:

► Development charges. In Ontario, development charges are charges imposed by municipalities on

developers to pay for increased capital costs related to growth. Development charges provide

municipalities with a tool to help fund the infrastructure needed to serve new growth. They help finance

the growth-related capital costs of providing important services like roads, water and wastewater

services, police, fire and transit. The Town of Innisfil may choose to increase municipal development

charges to recover the capital costs of an Innisfil transit service.

► Advertising. Local municipalities such as the City of Barrie and Bradford West Gwillimbury have

successfully negotiated contracts with outdoor advertising companies for advertising space on transit

vehicles and at bus stops. Often, advertising companies provide and maintain shelters and benches in



100

return for the right to sell advertising space on these elements. The Town should investigate this

opportunity, keeping in mind that administrative resources are required to manage advertising

contracts. Advertising opportunities must be promoted, advertising agreements developed,

advertisements printed on sturdy media, and advertisements installed on transit vehicles.

► Community and corporate sponsorship. It is recommended that the Town of Innisfil solicit

sponsorship from local business and community organizations. In other municipalities, service clubs

and community organizations have made financial donations to local transit systems. Local

businesses have also made financial or in-kind donations (e.g. printing decals for the exterior of transit

vehicles). Municipalities have recognized these sponsors by including their logos on the website, on

marketing materials and on the exterior of transit vehicles. Sponsors receive visibility and are

recognized for their contribution to the community, while the Town receives additional funding and

support.

► Sponsorship or partnership with Tanger Outlet Mall. The Tanger Outlet Mall management staff

have indicated that there is a need for transit to serve the mall, and they are very interested in helping

the Town make transit service to Tanger a reality. If the Town chooses to pursue a transit service to

Tanger Outlet Mall in the short-term, Town staff should engage management staff in a discussion

about potential Tanger contributions to transit.

Potential revenues from development charges, advertising and sponsorship are not included in the Five-

Year Financial Plan.

14.4 Five-Year Financial Plan

This section provides five-year financial plans for the one-bus and two-bus transit services. The plans

incorporate the capital costs, operating costs, revenues and funding sources identified in the previous

sections. A summary of the total costs (capital and operating) and revenues for the one-bus and two-bus

services is included as Table 35.

Table 35 Summary of Costs and Revenues, One Bus and Two Bus Services

One-Bus Transit Service Two-Bus Transit Service

Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5

Total Costs $560,000 $355,000 $375,000 $400,000 $420,000 $980,000 $610,000 $640,000 $680,000 $710,000

Total Revenue $290,000 $200,000 $210,000 $230,000 $240,000 $375,000 $340,000 $350,000 $360,000 $360,000

Net Costs $270,000 $155,000 $165,000 $170,000 $180,000 $605,000 $270,000 $290,000 $320,000 $350,000

One-Bus Service

The five-year financial plan for the one-bus service is summarized in the tables that follow, incorporating

the estimates and assumptions described above. Table 36 identifies the total capital and operating costs.



101

Table 37 identifies the net costs, considering anticipated fare revenues and potential funding sources.

Table 38 presents the key performance indicators associated with these costs and revenues for

conventional transit only.

Table 36 Year 1 to 5 Total Costs – One Bus

Total Costs Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5

Capital Costs

Vehicles (1) $200,000 - - - -

Bus Stop Signs (40) $6,000 - - - -

Bus Stop Construction $25,000 $10,000 $10,000 $10,000 $10,000


Operating Costs


Conventional Transit Operating Hours 3,488 3,488 3,488 3,488 3,488

Hourly Cost - Operations $55 $56 $57 $58 $60

Conventional Transit - Annual Cost $192,000 $196,000 $200,000 $204,000 $208,000

Specialized Transit - Annual Cost $40,000 $48,000 $58,000 $70,000 $84,000

Standby Vehicle - Annual Cost $10,000 $12,000 $14,000 $16,000 $18,000

Total: Contracted Service Delivery $242,000 $256,000 $272,000 $290,000 $310,000

Staffing Costs

Staffing Level (FTE's) 0.6 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4

Salary Level $70,000 $71,000 $72,000 $73,000 $74,000

Internal Staffing Costs $42,000 $28,000 $29,000 $29,000 $30,000

Staff Benefits, Training, Cell, etc. $15,000 $12,000 $12,000 $12,000 $12,000

External Support $11,000 - - - -

Total: Staffing $68,000 $40,000 $41,000 $41,000 $42,000

Other Operating Costs

Launch marketing, licensing and permits $10,000 - - - -

On-going marketing $5,000 $5,000 $5,000 $5,000 $5,000

Vehicle refurbishment/major repairs $0 $5,000 $10,000 $15,000 $15,000

Bus stop maintenance $5,000 $5,000 $5,000 $5,000 $5,000

Capital Reserve Contribution - $33,000 $33,000 $33,000 $33,000

Total: Other Operating $20,000 $48,000 $53,000 $58,000 $58,000


Total Costs - Capital and Operating $561,000 $354,000 $376,000 $399,000 $420,000



102

Table 37 Year 1 to 5 Net Costs – One Bus


Total Costs



Total Costs - Capital and Operating $561,000 $354,000 $376,000 $399,000 $420,000

Revenue Sources

Fare Revenue $39,000 $47,000 $51,000 $55,000 $59,000

Ontario Gas Tax Funding* $200,000 $152,000 $161,000 $171,000 $180,000

Gas Tax as % of Municipal Spending* 62% 75% 75% 75% 75%

Simcoe County funding** $50,000 - - - -

Total Revenue $289,000 $199,000 $212,000 $226,000 $239,000

Net Costs $272,000 $155,000 $164,000 $173,000 $181,000

* Gas Tax funds provided to each municipality cannot exceed 75% of municipal own spending on transit. Municipal own spending includes passenger revenues and municipal contributions to operating and capital expenses. As a result of this 75% cap, the Gas Tax funding available to the Town would decrease after year 1 as total costs of the transit service would be lower.

**Potential revenue source; availability depends on 2016 budget and other municipal applications

Table 38 Year 1 to 5 Key Performance Indicators – One Bus, Conventional Transit




Net Cost per Passenger* $17 $14 $14 $14 $13

*Total operating cost minus fare revenues



103

Two-Bus Service

The five-year financial plan for the two-bus service is summarized in the tables below. Table 39 identifies

the total capital and operating costs. Table 40 identifies the net costs, considering anticipated fare

revenues and potential funding sources. Table 41 presents the key performance indicators associated with

these costs and revenues for conventional transit only.

Table 39 Year 1 to 5 Total Costs – Two Buses

Total Costs Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5

Capital Costs

Vehicles (2) $400,000 - - - -

Bus Stop Signs (60) $9,000 - - - -

Bus Stop Construction $30,000 $10,000 $10,000 $10,000 $10,000


Operating Costs


Conventional Transit Operating Hours 6,976 6,976 6,976 6,976 6,976

Hourly Cost - Operations $55 $56 $57 $58 $60

Conventional Transit - Annual Cost $384,000 $391,000 $399,000 $407,000 $415,000

Specialized Transit - Annual Cost $45,000 $54,000 $65,000 $78,000 $94,000

Standby Vehicle - Annual Cost $20,000 $24,000 $28,000 $32,000 $36,000

Total: Contracted Service Delivery $449,000 $469,000 $492,000 $517,000 $545,000

Staffing Costs

Staffing Level (FTE's) 0.6 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4

Salary Level $70,000 $71,000 $72,000 $73,000 $74,000

Internal Staffing Costs $42,000 $28,000 $29,000 $29,000 $30,000

Staff Benefits, Training, Cell, etc. $15,000 $12,000 $12,000 $12,000 $12,000

External Support $11,000 - - - -

Total: Staffing $68,000 $40,000 $41,000 $41,000 $42,000

Other Operating Costs

Launch marketing, licensing and permits $10,000 - - - -

On-going marketing $6,000 $6,000 $6,000 $6,000 $6,000

Vehicle refurbishment/major repairs $0 $10,000 $20,000 $30,000 $30,000

Bus stop maintenance $8,000 $8,000 $8,000 $8,000 $8,000

Capital Reserve Contribution - $67,000 $67,000 $67,000 $67,000

Total: Other Operating $24,000 $91,000 $101,000 $111,000 $111,000





104

Table 40 Year 1 to 5 Net Costs – Two Buses


Total Costs




Revenue Sources

Fare Revenue $67,000 $84,000 $92,000 $101,000 $101,000

Ontario Gas Tax Funding $200,000 $200,000 $200,000 $200,000 $200,000

Gas Tax as % of Municipal Spending 26% 49% 45% 42% 39%

Simcoe County Funding* $50,000 - - - -

City of Barrie Cost-Sharing* $58,000 $59,000 $60,000 $61,000 $62,000

Total Revenue $375,000 $343,000 $352,000 $362,000 $363,000

Net Costs $605,000 $267,000 $292,000 $317,000 $345,000

*Potential revenue sources; availability unconfirmed

Table 41 Year 1 to 5 Key Performance Indicators – Two Buses, Conventional Transit

Performance Indicators Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5



Net Operating Cost per Passenger $17 $15 $14 $14 $14

*Total operating cost minus fare revenues



105

15.0 IMPLEMENTATION PLAN

Figure 31 on the next page illustrates the key activities and schedule for implementation of the Innisfil

transit service. Important elements of this schedule are as follows:

► A target launch date of August 1, 2016 has been used for planning purposes. This date would enable

the Town to figure out any final service delivery details before September, when school resumes and

transit demand tends to increase. It will also position the Town for a strong marketing push in

September. Launching transit services in the winter months is not recommended.

► Manufacturers have indicated that 18- to 24-seat, low floor cut-away transit vehicles can take up to six

months for delivery after they are ordered. The schedule illustrates the Town ordering the vehicle in

early January of 2016 and receiving the vehicle in late June of 2016. This will provide a month for

vehicle testing, driver training, decal application, etc. Tendering and ordering the transit vehicle is

expected to be the most time-sensitive element of the schedule. The Town will need to proceed with

tendering and ordering the vehicle promptly after Council approval in order to achieve a launch date of

August 1, 2016.

► It is recommended that the Town negotiate and finalize a contract with an operating company in April

or May of 2016. This will provide the operating company with several months to hire staff (if needed)

and prepare for service delivery in advance of the launch date.

► The Ontario Gas Tax program coincides with the fiscal year, running from April 1 to March 31. With a

projected transit system start-up of August 1, 2016, the Ministry of Transportation has indicated that

there will be adequate time for the Town of Innisfil’s transit service to be considered for inclusion in the

2016/2017 Gas Tax program. There are no firm deadlines for the Ontario Gas Tax program. Town

staff should contact the Ministry for advice on next steps after two decisions have been made: the

decision to proceed with a Town transit service, and the decision regarding whether the Town will

operate a system on their own or partner with a neighbouring municipality. To participate in the

program, the Town would need to pass a municipal by-law indicating its intent to provide public

transportation services and commit to annual funding of public transportation. The schedule on the

next page is based on Council approval of the transit service in November of 2015.

01-S

ep-1

5

01-O

ct-1

5

01-N

ov-1

5

01-D

ec-1

5

01-J

an-1

6

01-F

eb-1

6

01-M

ar-1

6

01-A

pr-1

6

01-M

ay-1

6

01-J

un-1

6

01-J

ul-1

6

01-A

ug-1

6

01-S

ep-1

6

1.0 Council Approval and Ministry Notification

Develop Service Level Change request for 2016 Operating Budget

Obtain Council approval, pass municipal by-law and notify the MTO

2.0 Vehicle Procurement

Develop vehicle specifications and issue tender

Select and order vehicle

Apply for required licenses

Receive vehicle and prepare vehicle for service

3.0 RFP Preparation and Contracting

Secure external support (if desired)

Prepare Request for Proposal, draft contract and schedules

Issue Request for Proposal and notify potential service providers

Evaluate proposals and select preferred proponent

Negotiate and finalize contract with preferred proponent

4.0 Service Planning and Infrastructure Preparation

Finalize route, schedule and stops with contractor

Prepare bus stops and install bus stop signs

5.0 Marketing and Communication

Prepare launch-related marketing materials

Design and print tickets and monthly passes

Deliver launch-related marketing

7.0 Transit Service Launch

Conduct pre-launch meeting(s) and test runs with operating company

Launch service and and work with operating company to refine service

Continue to deliver transit service

Legend: Activity Major Milestone

Activities

Innisfil Transit Feasibility Study

Implementation Schedule

Final Report | Innisfil Transit Feasibility Study

MMM Group Limited | September 2015 106

Appendix A includes the following:

► Telephone survey questionnaire and summary of responses; and

► Online survey summary of responses to close-ended questions.

AP

PE

ND

IX A

– S

UR

VE

Y Q

UE

ST

ION

NA

IRE

AN

D R

ES

UL

TS

Innisfil Transit Survey June 2015

2 Innisfil Transit Survey

Executive summary

• There is strong majority support (77%) for the introduction of a public transit service in Innisfil.

• Overall, there is a slight preference (expressed by 54% of residents) for costs to be covered by additional property taxes on households whose neighbourhoods are served by transit. However, the view that costs should be shared by all residents increases with support for public transit.

• Six in ten believe that an extra $25 a year in property taxes is reasonable to pay for transit; the proportion willing to pay more drops sharply. A minority (36%) don’t want to pay at all, and this skews to those opposed to transit.

• Residents are more likely to say they would use an hourly weekday bus service (37% very or somewhat likely) than a service that requires an advance reservation (21%). Among residents likely to use either option, a slight majority would find it difficult to plan trips around a schedule that had buses going to different destinations on different days.

• Barrie Transit is by far the most preferred destination for transit to serve (79%), followed by Tanger Outlet Mall in Cookstown (42%).


Methodology

• Environics conducted an Interactive Voice Recognition (IVR) telephone survey of 477 Innisfil residents on June 8, 2015.

• The data are statistically weighted by age and gender to reflect the demographic makeup of Innisfil according to the 2011 Census.

• The margin of error for a sample of 477 is plus or minus 4.5 percentage points (at the 95% confidence level). The reader is cautioned that margins of error are larger for subsamples of the population (e.g., for gender, age groups).

• In this report, results are expressed as percentages unless otherwise noted. Results may not add to 100% due to rounding or multiple responses.

Support for public transit


56%

21%

12% 9%

2%

Strongly support Somewhat support Somewhat oppose Strongly oppose dk/na

Most residents support the introduction of public transit in Innisfil

Q2. The Town of Innisfil is considering whether to introduce a public transit service that would connect key destinations in and around Innisfil. To what extent do you support or oppose public transit in Innisfil?

Support for introduction of public transit in Innisfil

Nearly eight in ten residents support introducing public transit in Innisfil, including nearly six in ten who strongly support it. Two in ten oppose the introduction of public transit in the Town. There is majority support for transit in Innisfil across all population segments, although strong support is particularly high among women (65%) and those under 60 (61%).

77% support 21% oppose

Paying for public transit


The view that all households should share in the cost of public transit increases with level of support for the transit plan

Q3. Introducing a transit service in Innisfil will require an increase in property taxes. Which households should pay additional property taxes to cover the costs of public transit? If you think the costs should be spread across all households, press 1. If you think households should only pay if public transit serves their neighbourhood, press 2.

Who should pay? By support for public transit

Overall, a slight majority (54%) believe residents should pay additional property taxes for transit only if it serves their neighbourhood, compared to just over four in ten (44%) who believe the costs should be spread across all households. However, this pattern varies by support for public transit, with residents who strongly support transit for Innisfil (representing 56% of residents) most likely to say all households should share in the costs (55%).

44%

55%

41%

18%

54%

45%

55%

75%

3%

1%

3%

7%

Total

Strongly support

Somewhat support

Oppose

All households Only if transit serves their neighbourhood Don't know


Six in ten say $25 is a reasonable amount to pay in additional property taxes, and this increases to eight in ten of strong transit supporters

Reasonable amount to pay for transit

Q4. What would be a reasonable amount for your household to pay in additional property taxes each year for public transit if it served your community?

Six in ten (63%) residents say $25 is a reasonable amount for their household to pay in additional property taxes each year for public transit. This drops to one in five (22%) who would be willing to pay $50 and only five percent who say $100 is reasonable. There is a minority of residents (36%) who don’t want to pay any additional taxes at all, which is highly skewed to those who oppose public transit for Innisfil (77%). The view that $25 is a reasonable tax increase is most widespread among strong supporters of public transit (80%), but is also held by a a majority (59%) of those who strongly support the plan (vs. only 20% of those who are opposed to public transit). Among strong supporters, only three in ten (29%) say it would be reasonable to pay $50 and seven percent would pay $100, and these proportions are even smaller among those who somewhat support or oppose transit.

36%

63%

22%

5%

$0 $25 $50 $100

Options for public transit


Residents are more likely to use an hourly weekday bus service than a service that requires an advance reservation

Q5. The Town is considering various options for public transit. How likely are you or someone else in your household to use a bus that runs through your community every hour on weekdays?

Q6. How likely are you or someone else in your household to use a service that requires you to make a reservation in advance of your trip?

Likelihood of using transit service

18%

6%

19%

15%

22%

34%

41%

40%

1%

4%

Runs every hour on weekdays

Requires a reservation in advance

Very likely Somewhat likely Not very likely Not at all likely Unsure

Close to four in ten (37%) residents say that someone in their household is very or somewhat likely to use an hourly weekday bus service, compared to two in ten (21%) who would likely use a service that requires an advance reservation. The likelihood (very or somewhat) of using an hourly weekday bus service is higher among women (42%) and residents under 45 years of age (45%), while likelihood to use an advance reservation service does not vary by subgroup. Not surprisingly, reported likelihood of using both service options is higher among strong transit supporters. Even among this group, preference is twice as high for a regularly scheduled bus service (61% vs. 29% who would use a reservation-based service).

Very/ somewhat

likely

37%

21%


A majority of residents who are likely to use public transit would find it difficult to plan trips around a varied destination schedule

Subsample: Very or somewhat likely to use either regularly scheduled transit or transit that requires an advance reservation Q7. Another option is for public transit to go to different destinations on different days of the week. How easy or difficult would it be

for you to plan your trips around this kind of schedule?

10%

32% 33%

22%

2%

Very easy Somewhat easy Somewhat difficult Very difficult Unsure

Perceived ease of planning trips around varied destination schedule Among those who are likely to use either public transit option (44% of total sample)

Among residents who are likely to use public transit (either regularly scheduled or by reservation), a majority (55%) would find it difficult to plan trips around a schedule that had public transit going to different destinations on different days of the week; four in ten (43%) would find it easy to plan around this type of scheduling. Residents aged 60+ are more likely than younger residents to say they’d find this type of scheduling easy to navigate (62%).

43% easy 55% difficult


Barrie Transit is the preferred destination for transit to serve, followed by Tanger Outlet Mall

Q8. The Town is considering various routes connecting Alcona and the Innisfil Recreation Complex to different destinations. In addition to Alcona and the Recreation Complex, which one of the following five places would you most want transit to serve?

Q9. Which one of the following five places would be your second pick for transit to serve?

60%

15%

10%

8%

2%

6%

32%

31%

13%

15%

2%

8%

Connect to Barrie Transit

Tanger Outlet Mall(Cookstown)

Sandycove Acres

Commercial lands at InnisfilBeach Rd/400

Lefroy

dk/naFirst choiceSecond choice

Destination preferences – 1st and 2nd choice

Barrie Transit is by far the preferred destination for transit to serve, with eight in ten (79%) indicating it would be their first and/or second choice. Tanger Outlet Mall in Cookstown is the next most preferred destination, by four in ten (42%) residents. About one in five each would like transit to serve the commercial lands at Innisfil Beach Road and the 400 (22%), or Sandycove Acres (21%). Few (4%) want to see transit service to Lefroy. Barrie Transit is the top destination across the board, but there is a greater preference for transit to Tanger Outlet Mall among those aged 16 to 59 (49%) and a greater preference for Sandycove Acres among those aged 60+ (40%). Residents most likely to use an hourly weekday bus service express greater preference for service to the commercial lands at Innisfil Beach Road and the 400 (36%, essentially equal to their preference for Tanger Outlet Mall at 35%), while those who are somewhat likely to use the service are more inclined to want service to Tanger Outlet Mall (57%).

79%

42%

22%

21%

4%

6%

Connect to Barrie Transit

Tanger Outlet Mall(Cookstown)

Commercial lands at InnisfilBeach Rd/400

Sandycove Acres

Lefroy

dk/na

Destination preferences – combined

Questionnaire


Sarah Roberton Senior Associate, Corporate and Public Affairs

[email protected] 613-230-5089

The Town of Innisfil is considering whether to introduce a public transit service that would connect key destinations in

and around Innisfil. To what extent do you support or oppose public transit in Innisfil?

135 out of 138 people answ ered this question

Introducing a transit service in Innisfil will require an increase in property taxes. Which households should pay additional

property taxes to cover the costs of public transit?


What would be a reasonable amount for your household to pay in additional property taxes each year for public transit if it

served your neighbourhood?


The Town is considering various options for public transit.

How likely are you or someone else in your household to use a bus that runs through your community every hour on

weekdays?


75 / 56%1

30 / 22%2

22 / 16%3

8 / 6%4

0 / 0%5

70 / 53%1

61 / 47%2

57 / 42%1

41 / 30%2

22 / 16%3

17 / 12%4

52 / 38%1

47 / 34%2

Strongly support it

Strongly oppose it

Somewhat support it

Somewhat oppose it

No opinion on the subject

The costs should be spread across all households in Innisfil

Households should only pay if transit serves their neighbourhood

I don't want to pay for transit

$25

$50

$100

Not at all likely

Very likely

How likely are you or someone else in your household to use a transit service that requires you to make a reservation in

advance of your trip?


Another option is for public transit to go to different destinations on different days of the week. How easy or difficult would

it be for you to plan your trips around this kind of schedule?


The Town is considering various routes connecting Alcona and the Innisfil Recreation Complex to different destinations.

In addition to Alcona and the Recreation Complex, which one of the following five places would you most want transit to

serve?


23 / 17%3

9 / 7%4

6 / 4%5

61 / 45%1

29 / 21%2

20 / 15%3

19 / 14%4

7 / 5%5

49 / 37%1

28 / 21%2

25 / 19%3

21 / 16%4

11 / 8%5

67 / 54%1

23 / 19%2

18 / 15%3

Somewhat likely

Not very likely

Unsure

Not at all likely

Somewhat likely

Very likely

Not very likely

Unsure

Very difficult

Somewhat easy

Somewhat difficult

Unsure

Very easy

Connect to Barrie Transit in the south end of Barrie

Other

Tanger Outlet Mall in Cookstown

Which of the following five places would be your second pick for transit to serve?


Last question of this type - what would be your third pick for transit to serve?


What is your age?


7 / 6%4

6 / 5%5

3 / 2%6

47 / 38%1

31 / 25%2

27 / 22%3

12 / 10%4

5 / 4%5

2 / 2%6

38 / 30%1

28 / 22%2

22 / 18%3

17 / 14%4

15 / 12%5

5 / 4%6

46 / 34%1

45 / 33%2

19 / 14%3

Sandycove Acres

Commercial lands at Innisfil Beach Road and the 400

Lefroy


Other



Sandycove Acres

Lefroy

Other




Sandycove Acres

Lefroy

45-59

30-44

60-74

What is your gender?


14 / 10%4

8 / 6%5

3 / 2%6

2 / 1%7

101 / 74%1

36 / 26%2

20-29

16-19

75+

Under 16

Female

Male

Appendix B provides the following additional information related to contracted service delivery:

► Recommended Contractor and Town responsibilities;

► Sample evaluation criteria for a competitive procurement process; and

► Information on regulatory requirements and risk management.

AP

PE

ND

IX B

– C

ON

TR

AC

TIN

G A

ND

PR

OC

UR

EM

EN

T

Recommended Contractor Responsibilities

The RFP and contract should also clearly identify the responsibilities of the contractor. With an O-M

contract model, it is recommended that Contractor responsibilities include the following:

► Operation and management

► Operate and oversee conventional fixed route and “flag stop” bus service according to the route

and schedule identified in the RFP

► Provide a local supervisor responsible for the system who can be reached during the transit

operating hours and make decisions

► Provide qualified drivers, maintenance staff and operations staff to operate the system

► Develop driver schedules and vehicle assignments

► Report all accidents or service disruptions immediately to the Town, insurance agent and police as

appropriate

► Vehicles

► Provide insurance for the Town’s transit vehicle and transit service to the levels prescribed in the

contract

► Fuel vehicles as per the contract terms

► Provide a standby vehicle that can deliver service in the event that the Municipal vehicle is

unavailable during service hours. (Optional: The Town may choose to pay the Contractor for each

hour of service provided by the standby vehicle. This will limit the risk for the Contractor

associated with provision of a standby vehicle.)

► Technology

► Supply two-way radios or other equivalent communication technologies for communication

between bus and a base station

► Supply GPS, AVL or other system to track vehicle location

► Fare collection

► Be familiar with fares and ensure that all passengers pay an appropriate fare

► Verify monthly passes and associated photo identification

► Deliver locked fare box canister with fares to the Town Office daily, or as specified in the contract

► Maintenance and cleaning

► Keep monthly maintenance records on file that can be made available at the Town’s request

► Clean buses inside at the end of each day; wash the outside of buses at least twice per week

► Plan maintenance to minimize the use of the standby vehicle

► Maintain buses to peak efficiency in accordance with the manufacturer’s recommendations

► Pay for all maintenance activities including but not limited to: replacement and repair of engine and

transmission items caused by normal wear; lights; brakes; tires; upholstery; windows; mirrors etc.

► Recommended exception: The Town should pay for any major repairs or vehicle refurbishments

(e.g. engine refurbishment) required to keep the vehicles in operation. This will limit disputes with

the contractor and enable the Town to operate the transit vehicles for their full useful life.

► Participate in annual vehicle inspections, or on an as needed basis

► Return vehicles in a repaired, serviced and maintained condition upon termination of the contract

(and potentially supply a Certificate of Fitness).

► Facilities and infrastructure

► Provide a storage facility or area where the transit vehicle will be stored year-round

► Licensing and training

► Ensure all drivers have received all necessary licensing and training under provincial and federal

legislation, regulation, standards and codes for the vehicles they are operating

► Ensure all drivers have received training in customer service and in Innisfil transit service provision

► Finance and contract administration

► Keep accounting and operating records and provide monthly billings and reports that indicate: the

vehicles operated, the hours of service, the distance travelled, the litres of fuel consumed and the

average cost per litre during the month

► Use a reliable and efficient accounting and invoicing system to deliver timely and accurate billing

► Service planning, system management and performance monitoring

► Take manual passenger counts during each shift, and provide monthly information on ridership

► Track on-time performance / schedule adherence and other key performance indicators

► Participate in quarterly meetings to review performance, address issues and ensure the system is

operating effectively

► Provide quarterly or annual reports on key activities and indicators (e.g. on-time performance,

service hours provided, training and maintenance activities conducted)

► Work with the Town to deliver the best possible service (e.g. provide recommendations regarding

routes, stops and schedules)

► Customer service, communications and marketing

► Respond to questions or inquiries from the Town and customers (forwarded by the Town) within

24 or 48 hours

► Document complaints or comments received directly from customers

► Offer a polite, courteous and professional service

► Be familiar with the route and schedule and provide customers with accurate information

► Contact the Town and/or local radio station immediately when the bus is experiencing delays

► Display or distribute notices, advertising or information provided by the Town on the transit vehicle

► Implement permanent or temporary service changes; provide service on new routes and/or

according to new schedules, provided enough notice from the Town, at the tendered hourly rate

► Compliance with all applicable legislation and regulations

► Comply with all applicable legislation and regulations. (Section 9.4 further describes the regulatory

requirements. The RFP and contract should list specific requirements and also include a blanket

statement such as, “The Contractor shall comply with all legislation and regulations which may be

applicable to the Services, including but not limited to the following…”)

Recommended Town Responsibilities

The RFP and contract should also clearly identify the responsibilities of the Town. With an O-M contract

model, it is recommended that Town responsibilities include the following:

► Operation and management

► Work with the contractor to ensure efficient and effective daily operations

► Notify the contractor of any planned activities that could disrupt service (e.g. construction)

► Establish traffic control by-laws, transit priority measures, etc. to support transit service

► Vehicles

► Provide the primary transit vehicle(s) with all vehicle specifications required to meet AODA

requirements

► Obtain all necessary vehicle licenses and permits

► Fare collection

► Provide fare boxes

► Establish fares and issue tickets and monthly passes

► Process and deposit fares delivered by the contractor

► Maintenance

► Perform annual vehicle inspection

► Pay for vehicle refurbishment and major repairs required to extend their useful life

► Service planning, system management and performance monitoring

► Prepare service plans (routes, schedules and stops)

► Participate in regular meetings to review performance and address issues

► Track key performance indicators (e.g. Revenue-Cost Ratio, boardings per hour)

► Report to Council on service plans and performance (ridership, KPIs, financial)

► Revise service plans in response to KPIs and customer and contractor feedback

► Customer service, communications and marketing

► Respond to customer questions and complaints; forward questions and complaints to the

contractor when their input is needed for response

► Develop marketing and information materials, including schedules, route maps, website, social

media accounts, etc.

► Finance and contract administration

► Review reported service hours and identify any issues or discrepancies

► Process monthly billings and pay contractor within an agreed-upon timeframe

► Establish annual operating agreements with the contractor

► Facilities and infrastructure

► Install, maintain and inspect bus stops and signs

► Provide a customer service facility where customers can obtain information, retrieve lost items,

and purchase tickets and monthly passes

Procurement Process - Sample Evaluation Criteria

Table A-1 provides sample evaluation criteria for a competitive procurement process to select a transit

service operator.

Table A-1 Sample Evaluation Criteria

RFP CRITERIA POINTS AVAILABLE

Part A: Technical Proposal 50

System Management and Supervision

(Organization chart, description and resumes for key management positions)

5

Operations and Service Delivery

(Plans for operations, customer service, technology, fare collection and security)

15

Facilities and Maintenance Plan

(Garage, standby vehicle, vehicle maintenance plan)

10

Performance Management , Cost Management & Reporting

(Billing, accounting and cost controls; performance tracking and reporting)

5

Staffing Training, Health and Safety and Regulatory Compliance

(Human resources management, System Safety and Training Plan, regulatory compliance)

5

Past Experience, Operating History and References 10

Innovation and Value-Added

(Proposed innovative services not stipulated in the RFP but deemed to be added value)

5

Minimum 35 points required for evaluation of Part B Costs

Part B: Price Proposal 50

The Proponent’s total combined Proposal costs for the first 3 years 50

Total Score 100

Regulatory Requirements

The Ontario regulatory environment includes the following requirements for an organization delivering

public transit:

► Vehicle Safety Inspection: The Carrier Safety and Enforcement Branch, a division of the Ministry of

Transportation Ontario (MTO), administers a comprehensive safety inspection program for public

transit vehicles with a seating capacity of 10 or more passengers and accessible buses designed or

modified to transport persons with disabilities. Requirements are monitored, audited (random and

scheduled inspections) and enforced by the MTO.

► A transit service delivery organization must register and hold a copy of a valid Commercial Vehicle

Operator's Registration (CVOR) certificate on all vehicles in its fleet. The CVOR system monitors

an operator's safety record over a 2-year period and the MTO may intervene and administer

sanctions for poor safety performance. (Note: a CVOR is not required by an organization operating

accessible vehicles designed to carry less than 10 passengers.)

► Annual and semi-annual safety inspections are prescribed by the MTO, each with an inspection

sticker that must be displayed in all public transit vehicles.

► Note: There is an exemption for public transit (operated within a municipality and within 25 kms of

its boundary) from regulatory daily (pre-trip) safety inspections required under Regulation 199/07

“Commercial Motor Vehicle Inspections” of the Act. Nevertheless, such inspections are a good

safety practice and should be part of a transit system’s policies and standard operating

procedures.

► Worker Safety Legislation: The Ontario Ministry of Labour enforces the Occupational Health & Safety

Act, and holds responsibility for the Workplace Safety and Insurance Board (WSIB):

► The Ontario Ministry of Labour (MOL) is committed to working with its workplace partners to

eliminate all workplace injuries. Its province-wide strategy is based upon enforcement, compliance

and partnerships. In the workplace, MOL requirements and best practices are designed to build a

strong workplace health and safety culture. The Ministry maintains that “workplace safety is

everyone’s business”. Relevant safety issues for transit include first aid, WHMIS, fall protection,

general safety and violence in the workplace.

► The Workplace Safety and Insurance Board (WSIB) is an agency of the Government of Ontario,

accountable to the Ministry of Labour. It is legislated to administer and enforce the Province’s no-

fault workplace compensation system under the Workplace Safety and Insurance Act (the

“WSIA”). WSIB promotes workplace health and safety and provides collective liability insurance

coverage to employers. If injury occurs, WSIB administers a timely return to safe and healthy work

for those injured. WSIB coverage is mandatory for the public transit industry.

► Environmental Legislation: The Ontario Ministry of the Environment and Climate Change (MOE)

administers the Environmental Protection Act which includes the care, management and control of

substances that are harmful if released in the environment (diesel fuel, other fluids). Reporting of any

release of a substance into the environment must be reported to MOE, as per the Environment Act.

► Accessibility Legislation: This is discussed throughout the report.

Recommendation: Include legislative requirements for licensing authority, vehicle safety, worker safety,

environmental protection and accessibility provisions in organizational structure, management processes

and business plans and/or procurement and transit contract documents.

Liability and Risk Management

The previous section outlined the key elements of the Ontario regulatory system for public transit. This

section presents a strategy for contract oversight if the transit service is contracted. The Town has a

responsibility as the owner of a contracted service to exercise appropriate contract oversight and due

diligence to ensure safety and environmental protection provisions are upheld by the transit contractor.

Due diligence objectives can be achieved with Operating Company reporting requirements in the transit

contract and follow-up contract management action, as required.

Table A-2 Due Diligence Reporting Framework

Due Diligence Report or Document

Up

on

O

ccu

rren

ce

Mo

nth

ly

Tw

ice

/ yea

r

An

nu

al

a. Written certification of insurance coverage X

b. Vehicle safety inspection reports X

c. Workplace Safety and Insurance Board (WSIB) clearance letter X

d. Occupational Health & Safety investigation reports and Orders X

e. Joint Health and Safety Committee (JHSC) minutes† X

f. Written notification of passenger/worker/general public/vehicle accidents and incidents

X

g. Environmental spill reports X

h. Accessibility Compliance Report

In addition to regulatory due diligence, the municipality can mitigate liability and risk by ensuring Operating

Company compliance of its key risk management plans - System Safety & Training Plan (SSTP) and the

Environmental Management Plan (EMP) - and stipulating higher insurance coverage than the regulatory

minimums. Contract compliance can be monitored on an annual basis.

Recommendation:Due diligence reporting by the Operating Company to the municipality is

recommended, as outlined in Table A-2.

MMM Group Limited - Innisfil · Final Report | Town of Innisfil Transit Feasibility Study MMM Group Limited | September 2015 | 1515009 i TABLE OF CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1.0 INTRODUCTION

Documents