bracebridge transit & mobility 5-year business plan

-

BRACEBRIDGE

TRANSIT & MOBILITY

5-YEAR BUSINESS PLAN

MOVING TRANSIT

FORWARD FROM

2021 THROUGH 2025

SUBMITTED BY:

LEFT TURN RIGHT TURN LTD.

To the attention of Geoff Carleton

Director of Public Works

Town of Bracebridge

February 26, 2021

Left Turn Right Turn

ii

TABLE OF CONTENTS 1 Overview .............................................................................................................................................................. 1

2 Background .......................................................................................................................................................... 2

3 Opportunities for the Future .................................................................................................................................. 5

3.1 Sustaining Ridership Growth ........................................................................................................................ 5

3.2 Improving Bracebridge Mobility .................................................................................................................... 7

3.3 Matching Transit Service to Demand ........................................................................................................... 8

3.4 Engaging with Riders and the Broader Community .....................................................................................10

3.5 Meeting the Needs of a Changing Community ...........................................................................................11

3.6 Ridership Impact and Recovery from the Coronavirus Pandemic ................................................................12

4 Proposed Transit Network ..................................................................................................................................14

4.1 Analysis of Network Alternatives ................................................................................................................14

4.1.1 High Frequency Service Where Warranted ....................................................................................15

4.1.2 Reducing Trip Duration ..................................................................................................................16

4.1.3 Maximizing Ridership Growth .........................................................................................................17

4.2 Recommended Two-Route Conventional Network .....................................................................................18

4.2.1 Route 1 Routing Details .................................................................................................................21

4.2.2 Route 2 Routing Details .................................................................................................................22

Town of Bracebridge Transit & Mobility Five-Year Business Plan

iii

4.2.3 Considerations for Future Routing ..................................................................................................23

4.2.4 Bus Stop Infrastructure ..................................................................................................................23

4.3 Integrating On-Demand Service with Bracebridge Mobility .........................................................................24

4.3.1 Bracebridge Mobility Expansion and On-Demand Rationale ...........................................................26

4.4 Operating Hour Extension ..........................................................................................................................27

4.5 Proposed Annual Network and Service Changes .......................................................................................29

4.6 Considerations for Service Delivery ............................................................................................................29

4.6.1 Clear Roles and Responsibilities ....................................................................................................30

4.6.2 Performance and Incentivization ....................................................................................................32

4.6.3 Contract Oversight and Service Monitoring ...................................................................................33

5 Operational Enhancement ..................................................................................................................................35

5.1 Service Standards ......................................................................................................................................35

5.2 Vehicle Operations and Maintenance .........................................................................................................39

5.3 Improved Operational Technologies ...........................................................................................................42

6 Customer Experience .........................................................................................................................................48

6.1 Transit Event Partnerships .........................................................................................................................48

6.2 Communicating and Marketing Service Changes to the Public ...................................................................49

6.3 New Fare Programs and Incentives ............................................................................................................50

6.4 Bracebridge Mobility Rider Handbook Update ............................................................................................52

6.5 Improve Customer Touchpoints Through Technology ................................................................................54

6.6 Bus Shelter Advertisements .......................................................................................................................57

7 Implementation Plan ...........................................................................................................................................58

7.1 Project Summary .......................................................................................................................................58

7.2 Project Staging and Implementation Highlights ..........................................................................................60

7.3 Implementation Roadmap ..........................................................................................................................61

8 Financial Impact Assessment ..............................................................................................................................63

8.1 Capital Budget Assessment .......................................................................................................................63

8.2 Operating Budget Assessment ..................................................................................................................64

8.2.1 Revenue Considerations for the Future ..........................................................................................65

Appendix .................................................................................................................................................................. 65


1

1 OVERVIEW

Since introducing a permanent public transit service in 2016, the Town of Bracebridge (Town) has begun to see the

increasing social and economic benefits of improving transportation options for residents who cannot or choose not to

rely on a car. The Town Council Priorities have further emphasized the importance of improving transportation options

as one of its Key Priorities. As the first five years of continuous operation of Bracebridge Transit and its companion

service, Bracebridge Mobility concludes, this strategic Business Plan proposes a bold vision for further improving

transportation options in Bracebridge as well as to improve access to opportunities and services for all residents.

Building on the foundation of Council’s Community-Based Strategic Plan, coupled with current and future ridership

desires, this document provides details for future improvements to Bracebridge Transit and Bracebridge Mobility

services to achieve the following vision over the next five years:

“A modern, flexible and accessible travel solution for the residents of Bracebridge, that responds

to the needs of those who depend on it while improving transportation options for all.”

Town staff built upon this vision by identifying the following six strategic priorities for transit (outlined in Figure 1) that the

Town seeks to address through this five-year plan:

Theme Details

1 Expand service Meet current demand, accommodate new growth and encourage transit use

Introduce a new route to provide better service coverage in the urban area

Strategically grow the service area to meet the needs of residents on the fringes of the urban area

Expand service hours to improve access to services and amenities during the evening and on

weekends

2 Improve the customer

experience Optimize service scheduling, routing and service delivery to improve the customer’s experience on

transit

Match routing and service delivery to the demand and specific needs of customers

Better understand the needs of the core ridership of Bracebridge Transit

Identify opportunities to reach new demographics and grow ridership

Work with other Town initiatives and community groups to promote transit to the broader community

3 Enhance accessibility Provide better service coverage to reasonably reduce walking distance between transit stops and

key destinations

Improve stop-level accessibility for individuals with limited mobility

Address the growing demands for more accessible service driven by the aging population

4 Harness modern

technologies Improve management and service delivery efficiencies through enhanced scheduling and booking

of Bracebridge Mobility trips

Provide customers with the modern technical features that they expect

5 Improve relationships

with operators Improve understanding of operations and technology contracts

Facilitate ongoing engagement with contractors, operators and drivers to build relationships and

improve customer service

6 Leverage the available

political and financial

opportunities

Leverage growing momentum for community improvement projects among residents and within

Town Council

Maximize return of grant funding from upper levels of government to support community

transportation projects in rural communities

Prepare for potential stimulus funding to support local communities in the COVID-19 pandemic

recovery

FIGURE 1: Summary of key themes in support of the Five-year vision for Bracebridge Transit and Bracebridge Mobility Service in Bracebridge


2

2 BACKGROUND

The present conventional and specialized transit services were in development since the late-2000s when the initial

Transit Service Feasibility study was completed in 2008. The conventional transit service was launched in August 2016

as Bracebridge Transit—Ride the Wave operated by Hammond Transportation Ltd. (Hammond), with specialized

services operating under the banner of Bracebridge Mobility launching the following year in January 2017. Challenges

with the original service contractor for Bracebridge Mobility resulted in early cancellation of the original contract and a

new contract established in 2018 with Hammond to provide specialized transit services.

Hammond and Town staff have been working collaboratively to ensure that transit services are meeting the needs and

expectations of its riders. Figure 2 illustrates the existing fixed-route service. Adjustments to the fixed-route service have

been made over the last three years to account for insufficient run time and requests from riders. Today, fixed-route

service covers much of the urban core of Bracebridge, with specialized service extending to the boundaries of this area

as defined in the Town’s Official Plan.

FIGURE 2: Existing Bracebridge Transit service map.


3

The current Bracebridge Transit conventional service encompasses a single route that operates in a continuous loop

on a one-hour cycle. Generally following a path between the Walmart Supercentre on Depot Drive across town to the

north-end Bracebridge Sportsplex, before following a path southward towards the south side of the Muskoka River via

the Ball’s Flats Retail Area, and then north-easterly back to Depot Drive. The route deviates several times to approach

key residential and commercial areas more closely, providing a relatively high level of service coverage despite the

complex topography and road network.

The Town joined the Metrolinx Transit Procurement Initiative in 2016 to purchase a vehicle to support the Bracebridge

Transit conventional service. The vehicle purchased is an Arboc Spirit of Mobility Low Floor, 8-metre bus with space for

20 seated customers, or 15 customers and up to 2 personal mobility devices (see Figure 3). The vehicle is equipped

with a ramp that can deploy down to street level, or to a raised curb at bus stops and is accessible by ambulatory

passengers as well as passengers with mobility devices. Hammond was contracted to operate the vehicle on behalf of

Bracebridge Transit, and provides a backup vehicle for instances when the primary vehicle is offline for maintenance.

All equipment on board the vehicle is owned by the Town, including the fare collection system and automatic stop

announcement system.

FIGURE 3: Existing Arboc Spirit of Mobility transit bus owned by the Town for Bracebridge Transit service. Photo taken by LTRT staff.


4

Bracebridge Mobility operates using fully accessible vans supplied by Hammond that enhances the conventional service

by providing an inclusive and fully accessible alternative within the urban core of Bracebridge. The vehicle is a Dodge

Promaster (see Figure 4) with a rear hydraulic lift and up to five seats for ambulatory passengers and support persons.

Bracebridge Mobility operates in accordance with Accessibility for Ontarians with Disabilities Act (AODA) requirements,

providing accessible transit service to any eligible individual who meets the stated criteria.

FIGURE 4: Dodge Promaster vehicle like the ones used by Hammond Transportation for Bracebridge Mobility service. Photo from Hammond

Transportation https://hammondtransportation.com/accessibility-fleet/.

https://hammondtransportation.com/accessibility-fleet/


5

3 OPPORTUNITIES FOR THE FUTURE

To best plan for the future of transit services in Bracebridge, a comprehensive study of the current state revealed several

opportunities for growth and risks that might hamper that growth if not mitigated against. Through a series of workshops

with Town staff, interviews with stakeholders and a town-wide survey collecting community feedback on potential transit

improvements, the following six key strategic goals were identified:

1. Foster and sustain long-term ridership growth;

2. Improve the capacity and operations of accessible transportation services;

3. Ensure that service matches the ridership demand within the urban boundary;

4. Engage with riders and the broader community; and

5. Meet the needs of a changing community.

These six strategic goals were identified through an assessment of strengths, challenges and opportunities conducted

in collaboration with Town staff. The details for each are presented in the following sections.

3.1 SUSTAINING RIDERSHIP GROWTH

The existing service has experienced steady ridership gains year-over-year and has grown a dedicated base of transit

riders who depend on the service for their daily activities around town, as shown above in Figure 5. Ridership on

Bracebridge Transit and Bracebridge Mobility services grew by over 70% from 13,996 riders annually in 2017 to 27,193

in 2019. Ridership has fallen considerably in 2020 on account of the COVID-19 pandemic, but January 2020 outpaced

the same month in 2019 by over 48% with 2,385 rides completed that month versus 1,600 the year before. Since March

FIGURE 5: Historical ridership since inception. Note that Bracebridge Transit service began in August 2016 while Bracebridge Mobility service

began in January 2017. At the time of writing, Bracebridge Mobility ridership figures were not available for 2020.


6

2020, Bracebridge Transit limited the number of passengers allowed on-board, which has resulted in several instances

where the bus has had to leave customers at the stop, which is further depressing ridership. Given normal

circumstances, it is likely that the conventional transit services in Bracebridge would have continued to experience

impressive growth, and likely will return to this pattern of growth after the pandemic emergency restrictions are lifted.

Efforts to grow ridership will be much more effective by concentrating service enhancements in existing high-demand

areas as compared to expanding service to new areas and destinations. Figure 6 below highlights the key ridership

nodes based on 2019 ridership data. Historical stop-based ridership information is found in Appendix A.

Transit Node

Daily Ridership by Node

Node Daily Boardings

Ball’s Flat

Retail Area

14

Sportsplex 12

Depot Dr.

Commercial

Area

10

Downtown 9

Pine Street 6

Oakwood

Heights

6

Ecclestone at

Beaumont

4

Cedar at

Muskoka

3

FIGURE 6: Daily ridership trends by stop clearly highlight nodes including the Balls Flats Retail Area, Bracebridge Sportsplex, and the

Depot Drive Commercial Area.


7

Added convenience in the form of faster, more frequent, reliable transit will open new opportunities for residents in

Bracebridge, improving overall access to services and the community for all residents. This enhanced service will

support growing ridership and economic activity as the world looks forward to the end of emergency health measures

imposed because of the COVID-19 pandemic and continues a trajectory of social and economic growth.

3.2 IMPROVING BRACEBRIDGE MOBILITY

Challenges with service delivery on Bracebridge Mobility in its first few years of operation make it more difficult to

understand the growth in demand for this service. In 2018, over 2,677 rides were recorded between April and December

(an average of 297 per month) after Hammond took over operations of the service. In 2019, 3,836 rides were recorded

or approximately 320 per month. This represents an annual growth of approximately 8%. An additional 1,556 trips were

offered to support persons or companions of the customer, a significant increase over the 127 offered in 2018. This is

important in the context of specialized services since, under the AODA, transit agencies are required to offer

complimentary travel for support persons of paying customers and must be accommodated on the vehicle.

2018 2019

Ridership 2,677 3,836

Vehicle-Service Hours 3,250 3,250

Trips per Vehicle-Service Hour 0.82 1.18

FIGURE 7: Bracebridge Mobility historical service efficiency expressed as Trips per Vehicle-Service Hour.

The Town developed an eligibility system for Bracebridge Mobility in accordance with the AODA and began accepting

clients in 2017. Community Living South Muskoka(CLSM), who provide social services and day programming for

individuals with disabilities, previously had an arrangement for transportation services with the original provider of the

Bracebridge Mobility service. After the company defaulted, their booking practices were grandfathered into the

Bracebridge Mobility service as operated by Hammond since 2018. One of the challenges observed is that CLSM trips

are usually booked well in advance for numerous clients and clustered at one time which can sometimes edge out other

trips requested on somewhat shorter timeframes.

Bracebridge Mobility, like many of its peer accessible transit services, struggles during peak times to accommodate all

trip requests from customers. After conducting our analysis of the current level of service, we determined that

unaccommodated trips are not likely due to insufficient operating capacity, but due to inefficient scheduling practices.

Bracebridge Mobility’s service efficiency (as expressed in trips per vehicle service-hour) is significantly lower than

comparable specialized transit service and what Canadian Urban Transit Association (CUTA) considers best practice.

Currently, Bracebridge Mobility delivers 1.18 trips per vehicle service-hour (see Figure 7). This is significantly below the

CUTA best practice of 2.5-5 trips per vehicle service-hour and below the mean for peer agencies 2.4 trips per vehicle

service-hour as shown in Figure 8.


8

Population Served Total Annual Trips

Total Annual Vehicle-

Service Hours

Trips per Vehicle

Service-Hour

Bracebridge, ON ~ 10,000

(Urban Core) 3,836 3,250 1.18

CUTA Pop Group 3

Population less than

50,000

952,787 1,292,249 258,048 5.01

CUTA Ontario Average

All specialized transit

providers in Ontario

11,496,153 8,717,681 3,536,448 2.47

Peers, ordered by decreasing Trips per Vehicle Service-Hour

Smithers, BC 8,500 16,711 4,012 4.17

Revelstoke, BC 7,420 17,873 5,978 2.99

Fort St. John, BC 22,410 24,074 8,097 2.97

Prince Rupert, BC 12,820 5,146 1,761 2.92

Terrace, BC 16,830 6,195 2,140 2.89

Renfrew, ON 27,250 39,982 15,023 2.66

Huntsville, ON ~ 6,800

(Service Area) 6,130 2,340 2.62

Cobourg, ON 19,440 13,431 5,285 2.54

Cornwall, ON 46,340 30,902 12,742 2.43

Stratford, ON 33,000 21,291 8,850 2.41

North Bay, ON 47,080 26,189 10,943 2.39

Timmins, ON 41,000 14,709 8,120 1.81

Yellowknife, NWT 19,590 7,011 3,870 1.81

Squamish, BC 19,670 5,494 3,295 1.67

Avg (Inc. Bracebridge) 22,540 15,930 6,380 2.50

FIGURE 8: Specialized transit service efficiency from comparable peer municipalities, based on available data from CUTA Factbook, 2019. Note that

Bracebridge Mobility completes significantly fewer trips per vehicle service-hour than peers across Ontario and Canada.

3.3 MATCHING TRANSIT SERVICE TO DEMAND

Ensuring that residents within the urban area of Bracebridge have equitable access to transit service that meets the

needs of the community is challenging due to a generally low demand distributed across a complicated topography and

complex road network. The existing transit service must make numerous, time-consuming deviations into isolated

neighbourhoods to provide some access to the service for demand pockets and key destinations. This happens at the

expense of travel speed and frequency, which dissuade individuals from using transit, directly reducing demand for the

service. The resulting trade-off is that, while all areas near the transit route have access to equivalent service, the total

level of service provided is limited, generally does not meet the needs of the users and limits overall customer satisfaction

and cost-efficiency.

As transit services mature within a community, they tend to concentrate on higher-demand corridors rather than

continuing to travel through isolated neighbourhoods. This allows for scarce transit service resources to be focused in

areas where the demand warrants it while providing a minimum or alternative service in other areas where the demand

is scarce. Over the long-term, this balance must be carefully considered and aligned with other activities such as active

transportation initiatives, higher-density zoning and other sustainable urban growth initiatives.


9

Through our community and stakeholder engagement we identified that one of the key drivers for transit in Bracebridge

was the desire to grow the service and serve more residents. To identify approximate guidelines for this expansion, we

began our analysis with a quick assessment of peers who provide urban transit services in relatively small rural

communities. The initial findings suggest that the Town, as well as the Town of Huntsville, provide a relatively low level

of service compared to similar operations elsewhere in Ontario and Canada.

Figure 9 highlights how Bracebridge Transit compares to conventional transit providers across key service

characteristics and indicators in communities of comparable sizes. In terms of the amount of transit service provision,

Bracebridge Transit is situated near the bottom amongst its peers. It is the only transit provider along with Huntsville to

provide only one fixed-route. These two Muskoka communities likewise provide the lowest level of service per capita.

Bracebridge Transit provides 0.36 Revenue Vehicle Hours per capita, which is significantly lower than the peer average

of 0.73. Bracebridge’s evening service is shorter than peers, with weekday evening service terminating at 6:30pm

(18:30) as compared to the peer average of 9:00pm (21:00). While three of Bracebridge’s peers also provide Sunday

service, the Town is more in line with peers in only providing service six-days per week.

Community

Municipal

Population /

Service Area

Population

No. of Routes Days of Service Weekday Hours

of Operation

Total Boardings

/ Boardings per

Service-Hour

Revenue

Vehicle-Hours /

Vehicle-Hours

per Capita

Bracebridge 16,010 / 9,230 1 6, M - S 7:30 - 18:30 23,350 / 7.1 3,290 / 0.36

Huntsville 19,815 / 6,800 1 6, M - S 8:00 - 18:00 19,270 / 8.1 2,390 / 0.35

Niagara-on-the-

lake 19,480 / 12,040 2 6, M - S 8:00 - 19:00 36,480 / 5.6 6,545 / 0.54

Wasaga Beach 20,675 / 11,560 2 6, M - S 7:00 - 21:00 91,165 / 8.5 10,682 / 0.92

Collingwood 21,790 / 21,790 5 7 Days 6:00 - 21:00 N/A** ~27,400 / 1.25**

Ontario Peer

Average 20,440 / 12,970 2 6, M – S ~7:00 – 19:00 ~ / ~ 7.3** - / ~ 0.73**

Dawson Creek,

BC 11,350 / 11,350 2 5, M - F 7:00 - 18:00 109,600 / 12.1 9,060 / 0.80

Miramichi, NB 17,500 / 17,500 3 6, M - S 7:00 - 18:00 60,000 / 6.7 8,890 / 0.51

Nelson, BC 16,070 / 16,070 7 6, M - S 6:00 - 23:00 390,450 / 33.2 11,775 / 0.73

Prince Rupert,

BC 12,235 / 12,235 7 7 Days 7:00 - 22:00 277,300 / 27.9 9,930 / 0.81

Squamish, BC 16,920 / 16,920 5 7 Days 6:00 - 2:00+ 341,410 / 17.7 19,240 / 1.14

Terrace, BC 14,210 / 14,210 5 6, M - S 7:00 - 23:00 197,540 / 23.7 8,325 / 0.59

Peer Average 3 6, M - S ~7:00 - 21:00 - / 12.1 - / 0.73

FIGURE 9: Summary of peer municipalities and the level of transit service they provide to their residents.

**Some agencies do not report to the Canadian Urban Transit Association (CUTA) and any values are approximated based on available data. Due

enhanced to the reporting capacity provided to smaller communities by BC Transit, smaller transit system data is more prevalent in that province..

+ Denotes the next day (i.e., 2:00am the next day).


10

Bracebridge Transit’s relatively recent introduction has been successful in attracting a strong base of riders. However,

our initial analysis indicates that the relatively limited level of service with a 60-minute frequency and long average trip

durations will limit future ridership potential and does not satisfy the long-term expectations of potential riders. This peer

comparison helps to support the need for an expanded and enhanced transit service that meets the needs and

expectations of Bracebridge residents. This is exemplified in results of a community survey which indicated that

increased frequency was clearly the greatest transit need in the community (see Figure 10).

Of customers who responded “Other,” many comments related to improvements in frequency or speed, either through

introducing a second bus in the opposite direction on the existing loop or by adding a new route. Additional common

themes included service hour extensions during weekdays, Saturdays and Sundays, improved shelters, and removing

stops from parking lots to improve travel time.

3.4 ENGAGING WITH RIDERS AND THE BROADER COMMUNITY

To realize positive benefits to the community, it is critical that engagement with riders and non-riders alike grow along

with the transit service. The Town has a strong understanding of their current riders and has conducted several

customer surveys prior to the one released as part of the development of this plan. However, there continues to be a

gap in understanding and awareness of the transit service among the broader population. Engaging with potential new

transit users requires a certain degree of pre-empting their needs for the transit service and educating them on its

FIGURE 11: Summary of survey responses indicating that most participants believe that improving the frequency of service is the most desirable

change that they would like to see in the Bracebridge Transit conventional service.

FIGURE 10: Summary of survey responses indicating that most participants believe that improving the frequency of service is the most desirable

change that they would like to see in the Bracebridge Transit conventional service.


11

benefits. It is possible that engaging the broader community of non-transit users is a result of the current service not

meeting their needs, and thus these individuals not seeing the value that transit can bring to their lives and the

community at large.

An additional challenge exists in communicating directly with riders about situations that may impact service. Customers

can access service alerts via the Town website and email alerts service and track the vehicle location using the Where’s

the Bus real-time map application available on the Town website. With operations managed separately by Hammond,

any disruptions to the transit service, such as vehicle breakdowns, traffic issues, or other disturbances must first be

communicated to Town staff, with service alerts outside of business hours simply not communicated. Customers who

call the Town for transit information can access service information only during business hours, or in instances where a

pre-recorded message is added to the voicemail system.

For transit service to be considered as a more viable alternative to other transportation modes in Bracebridge, it is

extremely important that the Town continues to build confidence in transit services by using opportunities to further their

communication with customers.

3.5 MEETING THE NEEDS OF A CHANGING COMMUNITY

Bracebridge and the District Municipality of Muskoka in general have commonly been considered holiday and retirement

communities. While there is a sizable influx of seasonal and elderly residents, it should not be discounted that younger

families and children make up a significant component of the new population growth in Bracebridge. Many of these

people, whether younger families or new retirees, are moving to Bracebridge from communities where transit service is

common. Additionally, there is a significant population of residents in Bracebridge who use community services and

depend on public transportation options to access these services and employment opportunities in town. As

Bracebridge continues to grow and change, these expectations are echoed among Councillors. Town Council has been

supportive of transit and complimentary programs including downtown revitalization and active transportation. It is

important that the Town capitalizes on this public and government support for transit and continues to invest in service

improvements that support growth.

One of the characteristics of the current ridership is that a large percentage of riders can be considered “captive” to

transit who otherwise would have few options to access services and activities in town. The transit survey conducted in

November 2020 indicates that most users do not have regular access to a personal vehicle and would otherwise not

travel if there was no transit alternative, as illustrated in Figure 12.


12

FIGURE 12: Results from community survey indicating that most current riders of Bracebridge Transit services do not have a driver’s license. Those

that do have a license have limited access to a vehicle. This indicates that most users are “captive riders” who are dependent on transit for most

or all of their transportation through town.

While existing users are likely to continue to rely on transit services for transportation in Bracebridge, it is unlikely that

this segment of the population can be relied upon to sustain ridership growth over the long-term. It is critical that

Bracebridge Transit works on improving its services for all potential customers to encourage new ridership growth

among demographics who might otherwise have regular access to a vehicle. This can be achieved through several

mechanisms that generally improve the speed, reliability and frequency of transit service as well as the overall comfort

and experience using transit.

3.6 RIDERSHIP IMPACT AND RECOVERY FROM THE CORONAVIRUS

PANDEMIC

The COVID-19 pandemic has resulted in strained resources and a drastically reduced ridership within transit agencies

and municipalities worldwide. While the challenge of emergency orders and transmission reduction is temporary, it is

likely that transit will feel long-term impacts of the pandemic through budgetary restrictions and a slow return of ridership.

The long-term impacts of increased awareness of public safety and cleanliness may impose ongoing expectations for

similar levels of sanitisation. The ability for many office-based jobs to work from home has become much clearer, and a

larger proportion of the workforce may continue to work from home after emergency orders are lifted, for part of the

work week or more. In communities where commuter travel is a vital source of transit ridership, this poses a serious

threat to revenues.

At this time, Bracebridge Transit ridership is not based on a commuting population of individuals with office jobs like

many larger cities and communities in Southern Ontario. Many previous riders who no longer take transit do so due to

cancellation of programming and other closures due to emergency orders. In fact, there is some speculation that towns

like Bracebridge may be benefactors of a population boom spurred on by an increased prevalence of working from

home. There will remain, however, an ongoing concern that public spaces, such as on board a transit vehicle, may be

vectors for illnesses, despite scientific evidence pointing to the contrary.


13

While ridership is anticipated to return slowly over several years to larger transit agencies across Southern Ontario, it is

likely that previous ridership in Bracebridge can materialize as soon as programming, community centres and

businesses reopen. The following table in Figure 13 presents the expected ridership growth based on the existing,

status-quo network between 2019 and 2025, considering the impact of COVID-19 pandemic on ridership.

2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025

Ridership Prior to COVID-19

pandemic 27,193 34,600 41,000* 41,700 42,400 43,200 43,900

Forecast Ridership post

COVID-19 pandemic 27,193 15,691 19,500** 33,400 38,800 39,400 40,000

FIGURE 13: Baseline ridership considering the impact of COVID-19 pandemic, given the status-quo of maintaining existing service levels into 2025.

Ridership values in italics are actual counts.

*Note that our estimate indicates that by 2021, latent demand for the transit service will level-off and ridership will grow at a more modest pace.

**Note that this forecast assumes a return to pre-pandemic services and programming by fall 2021, in line with government vaccination expectations.

To maintain confidence in the public, it is vital that the Town continues to emphasize the safety and cleanliness of transit

services. Some strategies that other organizations have employed and plan to continue for the foreseeable future are:

Leveraging media, including public signage, social media and print advertising, to explain the measures taken

to protect the public and their health and safety.

Gradually relaxing occupancy limits, recognizing that with limited resources it may not be possible to provide

customers with a physically-distant transit trip. The Town has recently relaxed occupancy restrictions from five

passengers to eight. Continued relaxation must be done sensitively as emergency restrictions ease and should

paired with clear communication of vehicle occupancy limits and expectations to provide customers with

advanced awareness to make decisions.

Similar initiatives will likely be necessary well into 2021 as customers gradually become more comfortable and confident

with public activities. However, improving transit service as discussed in the following sections of this report will continue

to have the greatest impact in rebuilding transit ridership after the COVID-19 pandemic.


14

4 PROPOSED TRANSIT NETWORK

Decisions related to the transit service delivery and the future design of the transit network in Bracebridge were

conducted after careful examination of current travel behaviour, community survey results, anticipated growth within

the town and tried-and-true methods for driving transit ridership in literature and peer best practices. This section details

the analysis undertaken as part of this assignment, culminating in the proposed transit service design and associated

network changes. Accompanying it is an explanation of the progressive changes that are required over the course of

this plan to successfully transition to the new network and service delivery.

The proposed network and service design is composed of six key recommendations:

Modify the Bracebridge Transit network to a two-route, bi-directional service

Provide service to all major destinations with the Bracebridge urban area, including the proposed Multi-

Use Community Centre off of the extended Salmon Avenue

Introduce an On-Demand service that leverages the expanded capacity of Bracebridge Mobility

Extend operating hours on weekday evenings

Introduce Sunday daytime service

Explore opportunities to expand the service boundary using the combined Bracebridge Mobility/On-

Demand service

4.1 ANALYSIS OF NETWORK ALTERNATIVES

The analysis considered three network alternatives that would allow for improved service in line with peer municipalities.

These alternatives were:

A. Improving the frequency of the existing vehicle by shortening the route and introducing a complimentary On-

Demand service.

B. Introducing a second vehicle operating in the clockwise direction around the existing loop, each operating on

a 60-minute frequency.

C. Introducing a second vehicle and creating two separate routes, each operating on a 32-minute frequency, and

introducing a complimentary On-Demand service.

Alternative A was screened out on the basis that there was no configuration of the service that could sufficiently reduce

the route length without requiring significant investment in On-Demand service to compensate for the loss of

conventional transit to high-demand destinations. The following subsections provide details of how Alternatives B and

C compare on several network performance criteria.


15

4.1.1 HIGH FREQUENCY SERVICE WHERE WARRANTED

Our ridership analysis identified several nodes in the community that can benefit from higher frequency service. While

60-minute frequencies are generally regarded as the bare minimum that should be provided for sustainable transit

service, higher frequencies were the clear priority to improving transit in Bracebridge amongst survey respondents. As

illustrated in Figure 10 on page 10, 53% of survey respondents indicated that having the bus come more frequently is

the one thing they would most like Bracebridge Transit to improve. A majority also indicated that they would be willing

to transfer buses if that meant a 30-minute frequency.

FIGURE 14: Map of the service frequency difference between the recommended network and the two-way

loop network. Service is calculated as being within 400m of a probable transit stop.


16

While Alternative B would ensure that there was a vehicle passing a stop every thirty-min (sixty-min in either direction),

the recommended network matches or exceeds this service frequency in nearly all areas of Bracebridge, and specifically

in the Ball’s Flats Retail Area and Downtown Bracebridge. The one exception is the area surrounding Stop 440 on

Tamarack Trail. This stop is the lowest performing location in town with an average of less than 0.02 daily riders (roughly

7 riders per year) in 2019. This location would be best served with On-Demand service on account of the very low

ridership volumes in this area. Figure 13 on the previous page shows the impact of the proposed recommended two-

route network on the stop service frequency relative to the bi-directional loop service, with the clear advantage of

significant service frequency improvements in Downtown Bracebridge and Ball’s Flats.

4.1.2 REDUCING TRIP DURATION

Trip duration is an important indicator of transit service quality and whether someone will choose to take public transit.

Lowering transit trip durations relative to car travel has a strong positive correlation with ridership growth. Lowering trip

duration also has strong correlation to increased customer satisfaction of transit.

One of the most prominent concerns with the current Bracebridge Transit route and schedule was the lop-sided trip

durations depending on the direction of travel. With the current loop, trips in one direction are often much longer than

trips in the other. While existing customers who were accustomed to the existing route suggested to introduce a bi-

directional loop, our analysis indicates that a loop-based service remains less-effective at reducing trip durations than

introducing a new route and reconfiguring the service to operate bi-directionally as per Alternative C. When compared

to travelling by car across the network, it is estimated that the recommended two-route network produces eight person-

hours (or 42%) of time-savings over the current service, while the bi-directional loop provides six person-hours (or 31%)

of time-savings. Figure 15 below summarizes the results of this analysis.

Transit Network Option

Total Daily Transit Passenger

Trip Duration in Excess of Car

Travel Time in Hours

Current 19

Two-way loop 13

Two-route (Recommended) 11

FIGURE 15: Daily transit passenger trip duration in excess of car travel time.

The following table illustrates the estimated per trip duration impacts of the recommended network compared to the

current travel times between major transit nodes in Bracebridge (Figure 16). As illustrated, the implementation of

Alternative C has significant improvements to existing transit travel patterns over the status quo. Figure 16 provides a

summary of the approximate percentage of riders who will experience longer and shorter travel times as a result of

these changes, with over 90% of all riders experiencing the same or faster trip durations over the status quo. Note that

this does not evaluate the travel time of riders in areas with new service (such as Kimberley Avenue) or where the

complimentary On-Demand service is introduced.


17

Change in average trip duration relative to the existing Bracebridge Transit Service

Trip End Location Ball’s

Flats Sportsplex

Depot

Drive Downtown

Pine

Street

Oakwood

Heights

Ecclestone

at

Beaumont

Cedar at

Muskoka

Tri

p S

tart

Lo

ca

tio

n

Ball’s Flats

Sportsplex

Depot Drive

Downtown

Pine Street

Oakwood

Heights

Ecclestone at

Beaumont

Cedar at

Muskoka

More than 15

min longer

Between 5 and

15 min longer

Approximately

the same

Between 5 and

15 min shorter

More than 15

min shorter

FIGURE 16: The average change in trip length of the proposed Two-Route Network versus the existing Bracebridge Transit service. Note that a

significant number of major trips will have shorter or equal travel time relative to today’s service. A detailed breakdown of the travel time savings by

trip is provided in Appendix C.

Percentage of Riders Average Travel Time Savings

Trips with a shorter travel

time 50.1% 14.8 min saved

Trips with a longer travel

time 9.7% 11.5 min lost

Trips that take

approximately the same

amount of time

40.2% N/A

FIGURE 17: The approximate number of trips that are impacted by the proposed changes in trip length, including

the average travel time difference relative to the existing Bracebridge Transit Service. A detailed breakdown of

the travel time savings by trip is provided in Appendix C.

4.1.3 MAXIMIZING RIDERSHIP GROWTH

Increasing service frequency and decreasing trip durations are generally the most effective means for a transit provider

to grow ridership. Research closely ties anticipated ridership with frequency of transit service and the total trip duration.

Given the location of frequency increases and the decreases in trip duration in the proposed two-route transit network,

initial estimates indicate that the recommended network could roughly double existing ridership with a growth of 55 to

75 daily riders. This is compared to an estimated growth of 35 to 55 daily riders for the two-way loop. Ridership growth

traditionally takes several years to fully materialize after a significant public transit service change.

Figure 18 illustrates the anticipated ridership growth for two-route and two-directional loop networks over the anticipated

adjustment period.


18

Launch Year 1 Year 2 Year 3

Percentage of Baseline

Ridership Growth 60% 85% 95% 100%

Alternative B:

Bi-Directional Loop 5,250 – 8,250 7,440 – 11,690 7,875 – 13,060 8,750 – 13,750

Alternative C:

Two-Route Network 8,250 – 11,250 11,690 – 15,940 13,060 – 17,810 13,750 – 18,750

FIGURE 18: Summary of annual ridership growth potential between the Bi-Directional Loop service and the Two-Route Network service based on the

status-quo service hours.

It should be noted that there is significant uncertainty with these projections, even more so in the recovery from the

pandemic. These factors are generalized based on leading research and historical trends that neglect the complexities

and site-specific conditions.

Other factors also point to the enhanced ridership growth potential of the recommended network as compared to the

two-way loop. Enhancing service for retail trips and trips to areas with strong pedestrian environments tend to have

greater ridership growth returns as compared to the average. The recommended network significantly enhances service

frequency for two major retail nodes, the Ball’s Flat Retail Area and Downtown Bracebridge. Additionally, Downtown

Bracebridge has a strong pedestrian environment and the potential for active transportation connectivity is strongest

here. Reductions in trip durations are also most significant at these two locations.

4.2 RECOMMENDED TWO-ROUTE CONVENTIONAL NETWORK

Project 1.2: New Route Introduction and Realignment and Project 1.3: Salmon Avenue Route Realignment

The analysis indicates the Alternative C, the two-route network provides the greatest benefit to existing riders and the

greatest potential to grow ridership moving forward. This network is based on the following three components

highlighted in Figure 18.

The routes would form an East-West axis and North-South axis that would cover the major ridership corridors and

destinations throughout the urban area. Route 1, which travels east-west across town, would be anchored by two major

trip generators at their extents, the Ball’s Flat Retail Area and the Depot Dr. Commercial Area. Route 2 travels north-

Introduction of an On-Demand

service co-mingled with

Bracebridge Mobility

Rerouting to a two-route

fixed network each on a 32-

minute frequency.

Expansion of the Bracebridge

Mobility service area to

encompass the entire Town.

FIGURE 19: Summary of key components of the proposed two-route network and complimentary On-Demand service.


19

south and would be anchored by the Sportsplex and provide looping service coverage south of the Muskoka River. Both

routes would converge through Downtown Bracebridge. Figure 19 illustrates the proposed routing.

FIGURE 20: Proposed Bracebridge Transit conventional route network.


20

The routes would operate on the same frequency in order to enable transfers at a scheduled meet and a brief layover

(referred to as a “pulse”) at the intersection of Manitoba Street and Kimberley Avenue (illustrated in Figure 20). Facilities

including a shelter and appropriate signage will be included in the vicinity of Memorial Park to serve as a transfer point

and transportation hub in Downtown Bracebridge. The eastbound Route 1 would stop adjacent to Memorial Park

southbound on Manitoba Street and the northbound Route 2 would stop next to Memorial park facing Manitoba Street.

Schedules would allow for recovery time scheduled for the intersection at the same time to facilitate transfers.

FIGURE 21: Stop locations and routing details near the proposed transfer point and transportation hub in Downtown Bracebridge. Note that scheduled

transfers would only be provided between eastbound Route 1 (stop at the southwest corner of Manitoba and Kimberley) and Northbound Route 2

(stop at southwest corner of Kimberley at Manitoba). Route 1 westbound (stop at Ida and Manitoba) would not have scheduled transfers.

Based on the anticipated travel times, it is recommended that the routes operate on a 35-minute frequency at the start

of service. This will provide for sufficient running time on both routes inclusive of transfer connection at Memorial Park,

while also providing some recovery time at the extreme ends of each route to facilitate schedule recovery, operator

breaks and mid-day changeovers.

While only representative, the following table in Figure 21 provides a suggested departure schedule for both Route 1

(Eastbound) and Route 2 (Northbound) at Memorial Park based on the planned 35-minute service frequency.

Proposed Memorial Park Departure Times

Morning Service Afternoon Service

7:30 am*

8:05 am*

8:40 am

9:15 am

9:50 am

10:25 am

11:00 am

11:35 am

12:10 pm

12:45 pm

1:20 pm

1:55 pm

2:30 pm

3:05 pm

3:40 pm

4:15 pm

4:50 pm

5:25 pm

6:00 pm

6:35 pm

FIGURE 22: Proposed departure times for routes 1 and 2 at Memorial Park. *Note weekday only trips are indicated with an asterisk. Saturday Service

would run from 8:40 am to 6:35 pm.


21

4.2.1 ROUTE 1 ROUTING DETAILS

Route 1 introduces service on the planned Salmon Avenue extension to the new Multi-Use Community Centre. However,

prior to the extension of Salmon Avenue to Highway 118 West, Route 1 would loop via Ball’s Drive. Route 1 should only

be rerouted to the Multi-Use Community Centre if Salmon Avenue is completed to Highway 118 West to minimize

negative travel time impacts. If the Multi-Use Community Centre is opened prior to the Salmon Avenue Extension, an

On-Demand stop should be placed there until completion of Salmon Avenue and Route 1 can be realigned to serve the

community centre. Demand and travel impacts will be reviewed once the Multi-Use Community Centre is operational

and transition to a permanent stop may occur.

Route 1 travels in a clockwise direction via Taylor Road, Depot Drive and Cedar Lane to accommodate a planned one-

way northbound roadway redesign along Manitoba Street between Entrance Drive and Taylor Road. Route 1 is planned

to continue direct to Walmart and Community Living South Muskoka service. However, as future development arises in

the area, more direct routing that avoids private property will be assessed. The implications resulting from these potential

changes are significant, as the service could achieve a 30-minute frequency with direct public road travel. It will be

important to monitor travel times on an on-going basis to inform future decision-making on this issue.

The following table in Figure 22 provides a summary of the routing details for Route 1.

Route 1

Timeline Routing Details

Preferred 2025

Routing

From Highway 118 West at Salmon Avenue/West Mall Road, travel southbound on

Salmon Avenue towards the stop at the Mult-Use Community Centre

Continue eastbound on Salmon Avenue toward Wellington Street

Turn left on Wellington Street

Turn right on Highway 118 West/Monck Road

Turn right on Manitoba Street towards the stop at the Memorial Park transfer point

Continue southeast-bound on Manitoba Street toward Taylor Road

Turn left onto Taylor Road to Dudley Drive

Turn left onto Dudley Drive

Turn right on Sander Drive

Turn Right on Pine Street toward the District offices and The Pines

Turn Left on Taylor Road, continuing through the roundabout toward Depot Drive

Turn right on Depot Drive, serving the Community Living South Muskoka location on

Depot Drive

Continue southbound on Depot Drive toward the stop at Walmart

Turn back northbound on Depot Drive, bypassing the Community Living South

Muskoka in the Northbound direction

Turn left on Taylor Road

Turn left on Cedar Lane via the roundabout

Continue south on Cedar Lane to Muskoka Road

Turn right on Muskoka Road, then left onto Queen Street

Turn right onto Entrance Drive

Turn right onto Manitoba Street toward Memorial Park

Turn left on Monck Road toward Highway 118 West at Salmon Avenue/West Mall

Road

~ 11.5km

22 km/h average speed

32 min round trip + 3-

minute recovery time

A 4-minute layover is

scheduled at Memorial Park

to facilitate transfers

Remaining recovery time

can be taken either at the

Community Centre on

Salmon Avenue or at

Walmart to facilitate driver

breaks


22

Alternative routing From Highway 118 West at West Mall Road, travel northbound on West Mall Road

toward Ball’s Drive

Turning right on Ball’s Drive

Turn left on Highway 118 West/Monck Road and continue as described

Estimated Route 1 Running Time

Time Point

Location

Memorial

Park McVittie Place Walmart

Entrance at

Manitoba

Hwy 118W at

Food Basics

Memorial

Park

Recovery

Time

Approximate

Running Time (min) Start 7 4 8 5

4 +

4 scheduled

layover time

3

FIGURE 23: Routing details for Route 1 through Bracebridge, with alternative routing proposed prior to the Salmon Avenue Extension to Highway 118

West. Proposed running time is approximate and includes up to 4 min of layover at Memorial Park to facilitate transfers with Route 2. Running time

should be verified with on-street testing.

4.2.2 ROUTE 2 ROUTING DETAILS

Route 2’s travel path on Ontario Street and Kimberley Avenue helps fill a large gap in the existing service area that is

projected to have higher ridership potential. This routing would also enable a transit stop to be located within 250m of

the Kimberley Avenue apartments, which has a high rate of requests for service. The following table in Figure 23 provides

a summary of the routing details for Route 2.

Route 2

Timeline Routing Details

Preferred 2025

Routing

From the Bracebridge Sportsplex, exit the parking lot and turn right on Clearbrook

Trail toward Douglas Drive

Turn left on Douglas Drive

Turn left on Manitoba Street, heading southbound on Manitoba Street toward Monck

Road/McDonald Street

Turn Right on Monck Road

Turn left on Wellington Street, heading southbound toward Santa’s Village Road

Turn left on Ecclestone Drive

Continue on Ecclestone Drive to Entrance Drive/Ontario Street

Turn left on Ontario Street

Turn right on Kimberley Avenue

Proceed toward Manitoba Street serving a stop at the Memorial Park transfer point

Turn left on Manitoba Street

Turn right on Ann Street

Turn left on Aubrey Street

Turn right on Liddard Street, then left on Oakwood Heights serving the residential

community on Oakwood Heights

Turn right on Liddard Street after serving Oakwood Heights

Turn left on Hiram Street

Turn right on McDonald Street

Turn right on James Street

Turn right on Manitoba Street

Continue on Manitoba Street toward McCrank Drive

Turn right on Clearbrook Trail

Continue on Clearbrook Trail to the Bracebridge Sportsplex

~ 12.9km

25 km/h average speed

34 min round trip + 1

minute recovery time

A 4-minute layover is

scheduled at Memorial Park

to facilitate transfers

Remaining recovery time

can be taken at the

Bracebridge Sportsplex to

facilitate driver breaks

Alternate Routing If sufficient time allows, it may be possible to continue the existing clockwise routing

through the Clearbrook Trail neighbourhood as follows:

From Manitoba Street and James Street, continue on Manitoba Street toward

McCrank Drive


23

Turn Right on Douglas Drive

Turn Right on Clearbrook Trail, continuing past the first driveway to the Bracebridge

Sportsplex

Turn left into the Bracebridge Sportsplex

Exit the Bracebridge Sportsplex parking lot and turn left on Clearbrook Trail toward

Rosemead Close

Turn Left on Manitoba Street and continue as described

Recovery time can be taken

at the Bracebridge

Sportsplex to facilitate

driver breaks

Estimated Route 2 Running Time

Time Point

Location

Memorial

Park

Oakwood

Heights

Bracebridge

Sportsplex

Wellington at

Monck

Ecclestone at

Southbank

Memorial

Park

Recovery

Time

Approximate

Running Time (min) Start 6 8 7 5

4 +

4 scheduled

layover time

1

FIGURE 24: Routing details for Route 2 through Bracebridge, with alternative routing proposed clockwise through Clearbrook Trail. Proposed running

time is approximate and includes up to 4 min of layover at Memorial Park to facilitate transfers with Route 1. Running time should be verified with on-

street testing.

The proposed alternative routing makes use of existing infrastructure but may pose timing challenges near bell times at

the Bracebridge and Muskoka Lakes Secondary School due to several left turn movements required to enter and exit

the parking lot during what is anticipated to be a busy traffic period.

4.2.3 CONSIDERATIONS FOR FUTURE ROUTING

The proposed routings for Route 1 and Route 2 limit vehicle travel through parking lots and cul-de-sacs to create more

direct travel patterns. Both factors decrease travel delays and enable Bracebridge Transit to operate more efficiently

and reduce trip durations which in turn enables frequency to be increased. However, as new development is introduced

in town, remaining detours to facilitate specific stops could be removed to speed up running time on both routes and

support a 30-minute frequency.

Additionally, Route 1 is proposed to be realigned in order to provide service to the future Multi-Use Community Centre

off of an extended Salmon Avenue.

It is strongly advised that the Town work with the contracted service provider to test and confirm the timings for the

proposed routings and adjust accordingly. This should be done approximately six to twelve months prior to service

launch so that routing, schedules and stop locations can be finalized.

4.2.4 BUS STOP INFRASTRUCTURE

In order to accommodate this route network, it will be necessary to install new bus stops along bi-directional segments

of the route and to accommodate routing modifications and to relocate existing bus stops where the direction of routing

is to be changed. Recommended bus stop locations are included in Appendix B. When possible, fixed-route bus stops,

apart from the transfer points stops and time point stops, should be located in the travel lane to minimize delays to the


24

bus re-entering traffic. Where infrastructure is currently not in place to do so, future roadwork projects should aim to

implement bump-outs to bus stops to facilitate efficient transit operations and effective transportation movement.

Efforts should be made to consolidate planned bus stop infrastructure work with planned roadway work. This would

include the pouring of stop and shelter pads for the new community centre in conjunction with the current Salmon

Avenue work.

Infrastructure changes at Memorial Park will help to improve the transfer experience between Routes 1 and 2. This

location should include, at a minimum, a shelter and large concrete pads to facilitate ramp deployments and mobility

devices. Removal of select street parking locations in this area is preferable to other locations along Manitoba Street

where local businesses may raise concerns. If possible, the town should consider installing public washroom facilities in

the vicinity of Memorial Park or negotiate with local businesses in the area to allow operators access to a washroom.

This would allow for all scheduled recovery time to take place at the Memorial Park transfer point, reducing the

requirement to lay over at a second location to provide break and washroom facilities for drivers.

4.3 INTEGRATING ON-DEMAND SERVICE WITH BRACEBRIDGE MOBILITY

Project 1.1: Introduce On-Demand and Project 1.4: Bracebridge Mobility Expansion

Recommendation: New On-Demand conventional service will be introduced that will integrate with Bracebridge

Mobility. Integrating On-Demand transit with specialized transportation increases the overall efficiency of the service by

allowing conventional riders to fill extra capacity while minimizing the impact on Bracebridge Mobility riders. This is

accomplished by leveraging advanced, dynamic scheduling software and on-board technology that combines pre-

booked trips from Bracebridge Mobility customers with On-Demand requests in near-real time. There are several key

distinctions between how the service will perform for the two different customer types, however, as illustrated in Figure

24.

One of the key benefits of utilizing a co-mingled service is that, by using the same accessible vehicles, it is possible for

Bracebridge Mobility customers to have the same degree of freedom if they live within the On-Demand service zone.

While pre-booked trips will always be ensured through the technology parameters, it is possible to offer Bracebridge

Bracebridge Mobility On-Demand Service

Will continue to provide door-to-door service for customers who qualify

under the existing, AODA-compliant eligibility criteria.

Will be provided on a stop-to-stop basis with at least one stop being a

designated On-Demand stop

Bracebridge Mobility customers will continue to have the ability to book

trips for a scheduled time in advance.

Can be accessed using virtual stops at strategic locations to ensure

consistent coverage beyond the 400m walking distance from fixed-

route service. On-Demand stop locations are identified in Figure 4.

On-Demand customers must request trip at the time they wish to travel

using a smartphone or web application, or by calling in to a booking

agent. Our initial analysis indicates that most requests can be

accommodated within a pickup window of approximately 30 min.

FIGURE 25: Summary of distinctions between Bracebridge Mobility and On-Demand service.


25

Mobility customers and conventional customers in the service area the same level of On-Demand service. Therefore,

co-mingling of service would allow Bracebridge Mobility customers to continue pre-booking their trips with the same trip

availability as before but also introduce the ability to book trips in real-time. Figure 25 on the following page illustrates

how the On-Demand service can drastically improve service coverage throughout the urban core of Bracebridge and

compliment the proposed two-route conventional transit network.

FIGURE 26: Proposed on demand transit stops throughout the Bracebridge Urban Core and select areas beyond in relation to the proposed

two-route transit network.


26

4.3.1 BRACEBRIDGE MOBILITY EXPANSION AND ON-DEMAND RATIONALE

Co-mingling an On-Demand conventional service with Bracebridge Mobility significantly enhances the efficiency of both

transit services. The enhanced efficiency in conjunction with Mobility/On-Demand scheduling software efficiencies

enables expansions of both the conventional transit and Bracebridge Mobility service areas with limited investment.

The service efficiency of Bracebridge Mobility is significantly lower than that of comparable agencies that offer

specialized transit service and what CUTA considers best practice. As noted in the analysis detailed in Section 3.2,

Bracebridge Mobility currently delivers significantly fewer trips per hour than comparable peers who report to CUTA. At

1.18 trips per hour, Bracebridge Mobility delivers less than half of those for comparable agencies, with peers across

Canada delivering 2.47 – 2.59 trips per service-hour on average.

Bracebridge Mobility’s low trips per hour rate can mostly be attributable to two factors; low demand relative to service

provision and inefficient scheduling practices. Demand for the service will likely increase with the introduction of

conventional On-Demand stops as indicated in Figure 25. Based on the requirements of the AODA, this will include

expanding Bracebridge Mobility to the areas within 400 metres of proposed On-Demand stops (see the Service Design

Standards described in Section 5). With the adaption of scheduling software with a robust algorithm and expanded

ridership due to a service boundary increase, demand for trips is expected to rise to 2.2 trips per hour. Service efficiency

would still be expected to be lower than peers due to the Town’s large service area and long average trip length beyond

the existing urban core.

The co-mingling of On-Demand trips with Bracebridge Mobility customers will further enhance the service efficiency of

Bracebridge Mobility due to two factors.

1. Trips by individuals who do not use mobility devices are generally faster than those by individuals who use

mobility devices due to faster boarding and alighting. The introduction of conventional trips increases the trip

rate by individuals who do not use mobility devices, which reduces average trip durations.

2. Conventional transit users of On-Demand service are consolidated at convenient locations, reducing the

number of stops and increasing overall efficiency.

Through co-mingling, Bracebridge’s On-Demand service demand will grow to roughly 5 trips per hour.

Through the introduction of On-Demand conventional service and the expansion of the Bracebridge Mobility service

area, trip requests for Bracebridge On-Demand/Mobility vehicles are expected to expand from 3,836 annual trips in

2019 to 13,200 annual trips by 2025. This translates to 4-4.8 trips per hour, which may require a second vehicle.

However, with advanced scheduling it may be possible to push the capacity of a single vehicle to 5 trips per hour (Figure

27).


27

Bracebridge Mobility Demand and Service Design

Current Mobility Trips per Hour: 1.18

Projected Trips per Hour Demand:

4 – 4.8

Proposed Mobility/On-Demand Vehicles: 2

Projected Trips per Hour: 2 – 2.4

FIGURE 27: Estimated 2025 demand for combined Bracebridge

Mobility and On-Demand service and associated vehicle

requirements.

4.4 OPERATING HOUR EXTENSION

A key aspect of growing transit ridership and making a transit service more reliable is the provision of service during the

diverse times that an individual requires transportation. The greater the span of a transit service’s operating hours covers

standard travel hours, the more likely an individual can rely on transit as their principle means of transportation. The

extension of operating hours was one of the most frequently requested improvements to transit in the survey. In terms

of specific requests to enhance the transit experience, it followed only increased frequency and enhanced routing. Only

37% of respondents agreed that Bracebridge Transit operated when they needed it, as indicated by those who slightly

or strongly agreed to the related question in the survey (illustrated in Figure 27).

Weekday evenings, Sundays and statutory holidays were highlighted as periods that experience relative high levels of

activity and travel but are not currently served by transit in Bracebridge. The survey asked how respondents might use

service during these periods. Weekday evenings and Sundays were more popular than holidays which corresponds to

general transit and travel patterns. Over 80% of respondents indicated that they would use a weekday evening service

or a Sunday service, compared to only 66% of respondents indicating interest in holiday service (see Figure 28 on the

following page).

13%

19%

17%19%

20%

13%

A. Strongly disagree

B. Slightly disagree

C. Neutral

D. Slightly agree

E. Strongly agree

F. Do not know / Not Applicable

FIGURE 28: 62% of survey respondents do not feel that the service is running at times that are convenient to them.


28

Project 1.5: Evening Service Expansion and Project 1.6: Sunday Service Introduction

Recommendation. To meet demand for service and to continue to expand transit and its reliability in Bracebridge,

operating hour extensions are recommended for weekday evenings and Sundays. At the start of the service extension,

it is recommended that Bracebridge Transit only operate Mobility and On-Demand services. This will allow the Town to

evaluate and respond to changes in demand much more rapidly than with a fixed-route service. For weekday evenings,

this would extend service from 6:30 pm to 9:00 pm. On Sunday, service would be introduced between 8:00 am and

2:00 pm. The flexibility of On-Demand transit model allows for adjusting service as demand is more clearly understood.

Proposed Extension Service Hour Impact

Weekday Evening Extension

6:30 pm to 9:00 pm

12.5 hours per week, 2 vehicles

~ 1,200 hours per year

Sunday Service Introduction

8:00 am to 2:00 pm

6 hours per week, 2 vehicles

~ 640 hours per year

FIGURE 30: Summary of proposed service extensions and the service-hour impact.

Based on our initial analysis, it is projected that the evening extension would see an additional 8-15 daily trips or

approximately 4-5 trips per hour. Sundays are projected to have 20-35 daily trips or 4-6 trips per hour. If demand

warrants fixed-route service (i.e. service grows beyond 6 trips per hour, and trip denials begin to accrue, see Section

5.1 for applicable Service Standards), the Town can consider adding the fixed-route services to address the strong

demand during these time-periods. The chart indicated in Figure 30 provides a summary of the annual impact on

service-hours for this service. Lastly, ridership during currently served Bracebridge Transit and Bracebridge Mobility

operating hours should grow further as individuals are able to better depend on transit as a transportation option and

are familiarized with the system.

19% 20%

34%

81% 80%

66%

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

Evenings after 6:30pm Sundays between 8am and7pm

Statutory Holidays between8am and 7pm

Perc

enta

ge o

f R

esponses

Some of the time

Not at all

FIGURE 29: Percentage of respondents who indicated some interest in expansion of service hours. Note that, among those who responded in favour

of evening service, the vast majority of respondents indicated that they would likely use the service at least once per week.


29

4.5 PROPOSED ANNUAL NETWORK AND SERVICE CHANGES

Delivery of the proposed service changes requires a staged approach to ensure that all prerequisite activities,

technology and infrastructure can be procured and completed. When determining the phasing of annual service

changes, focus was placed on maximizing ridership growth potential over the next five years following the relaxation of

pandemic-related emergency response measures.

The table in Figure 31 provides details of the annual service changes required to progressively introduce the proposed

network by 2025. A detailed implementation plan is discussed in Section 7, laying out the prerequisite projects that must

be completed before advancing the annual service changes.

2021 2022 2023 2024 2025

Service Hours

Bracebridge

Transit

3,250

1 vehicle

3,250

1 vehicle

3,250

1 vehicle

4,400

1 vehicle Jan – Aug

2 vehicles Sep - Dec

6,500

2 vehicles

Bracebridge

Mobility/On-

Demand

3,250

1 vehicle

3,250

1 vehicle

5,400

1 vehicle Jan – Aug

2 vehicles Sep - Dec

6,590

2 vehicles

6,590

2 vehicles

Prerequisites

Procurement of

demand-

response

scheduling

solution and On-

Demand transit

app

Procure and

receive two

Mobility vehicles

to support service

growth

New operating

contract for

Bracebridge

Transit and

Mobility

On-Demand

service launches

September

Procure and

receive two

Transit vehicles

to support service

growth.

Install necessary

stop

infrastructure for

two-route

network

Two-route

network launches

September

Ridership Impact

Baseline Ridership 19,500 33,400 38,800 39,400 40,000

New Ridership - 2,900 – 4,100 12,900 – 18,600 19,200 – 27,700 22,200 – 32,100

Total Ridership 19,500 36,300 – 37,500 51,700 – 57,500 58,600 – 67,100 62,200 – 72,100

FIGURE 31: Summary of the service hour changes and the impact on anticipated ridership growth as changes are introduced. Baseline ridership

represents current estimates of status-quo ridership growth post-pandemic.

4.6 CONSIDERATIONS FOR SERVICE DELIVERY

Contracting of local transit services remains the most preferable option for the Town and is expected to remain so for

the foreseeable future. This will allow the Town to continue to benefit from the experience of transportation service

providers without having to build up the necessary internal resources to provide the same level of service. When

considering the potential opportunities for future contract delivery, there are two primary contract styles that can be

considered:


30

1. A transit service provision contract, similar to the existing Bracebridge Transit contract with Hammond

Transportation; or

2. A turnkey service, similar to the existing Bracebridge Mobility service.

A high-level summary of the activities and responsibilities shared between contractors and the municipality is provided

in Figure 32.

Responsibility

Activity Service Provision Turnkey

Setting policy and planning guidelines Municipality Municipality

Planning transit service Municipality Municipality or Contractor

Providing vehicles Municipality Contractor

Providing vehicle maintenance Municipality or Contractor Contractor

Providing on-board technology Municipality and/or

Contractor Contractor

Providing and training operators Contractor Contractor

Delivery and oversight of day-to-day operations Contractor Contractor

Customer service, booking and fare media retail Municipality and/or

Contractor

Municipality and/or

Contractor

Maintaining on-route infrastructure Municipality or Contractor Municipality or Contractor

FIGURE 32: Summary of traditional responsibilities assigned to municipalities or contractors under different contracting scenarios.

Project 2: Prepare new contracts for Bracebridge Transit and Bracebridge Mobility Services

Recommendation: It is generally recommended that the Town consolidate their operations for both Bracebridge

Transit and Bracebridge Mobility into a single contract to realize operational efficiencies. Further benefits from the

service delivery can be achieved through the several considerations discussed in following subsections.

4.6.1 CLEAR ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES

At the present, the Town has built a positive working relationship with the existing contractor. It is important that the

working relationship continues to grow and is emulated in future contracts with the same or other contractors. One of

the key factors in maintaining and growing this relationship is through clear and mutual understanding of the roles and

responsibilities by each party. While this is particularly important in any singular contract, it is increasingly vital if multiple

contractual agreements come together to provide service. This may be the case if future contracts leverage a different

service provider for one or the other operation, or if vehicle ownership and maintenance agreements change.


31

It is important to compartmentalize functions to allow for competitiveness in the procurement and for clear definition of

roles and responsibilities. Drawing from the outlined list of activities above, it is advisable that the Town considers

grouping these activities and assigning them to the various parties as follows:

Activity

Responsibility

Conventional Transit Bracebridge Mobility and On-Demand

Pla

nn

ing

Setting policy and planning

guidelines Municipality

It should be clearly defined that

planning transit service levels and

policies is up to the Municipality

Municipality It should be clearly defined that

planning transit service levels and

policies is up to the Municipality Planning transit service Municipality Municipality

Ve

hic

les

Providing vehicles Municipality or

Contractor

If contracted, the municipality must

clearly stipulate the expected

features that would otherwise be

included if procured by the Town.

Municipality or

Contractor

If contracted, the municipality must

clearly stipulate the expected

features that would otherwise be

included if procured by the Town.

Tra

ns

po

rta

tio

n S

erv

ice

s

Providing and training

operators Contractor

Specific customer service standards

should be established within the

contract

Contractor

Specific customer service standards

should be established within the

contract

Delivery and oversight of day-

to-day operations Contractor

Specific performance standards

should be established in the

contract. Consider performance

incentivization, particularly on this

item.

Contractor

Specific performance standards

should be established in the

contract.

Consider performance incentivizes,

particularly on this item.

Te

ch

no

log

y

On-board technology

Municipality

We propose that Bracebridge

Transit own and operate all fixed-

route technologies. If vehicles are

not owned, it should be made clear

what technology contractors are

expected to integrate with

Municipality or

Contractor

This would be defined through the

vehicle contract should it be

identified as preferable. Note that it

is important that reporting

requirements are clearly identified Back-office technology

Cu

s.

Se

rvic

e

Customer service, booking

and fare media retail Municipality

Fare sales and customer service

inquiries should remain with the

Town to keep staff connected with

customers and users daily.

Municipality or

Contractor

Fare sales and general customer

inquiries (including eligibility

decisions) should remain with the

Town. Bookings may remain with

contractor.

Ma

inte

na

nc

e

Maintaining on-route

infrastructure

Municipality or

Contractor

It is likely best to build on-route

infrastructure into general

maintenance agreements for

roadworks and infrastructure.

N/A No fixed infrastructure expected

Providing vehicle

maintenance Contractor

Specific maintenance and service

standards should be established Contractor

Specific maintenance and service

standards should be established

FIGURE 33: Proposed functional groupings for consideration when contracting future services to support competitiveness in the bid and improve the

interfaces between the contractor(s) and the Municipality when handling different responsibilities.


Recommendation: Consider defining responsibilities as functional blocks, allowing the Town to develop appropriate

contracts that can be transferable either between the Municipality and the contractor (such as vehicle ownership) or


32

between multiple contractors. Regardless of whether these tasks end up being contracted out, defining the details of

these responsibilities will greatly improve relationships between the Town and future contractors.

4.6.2 PERFORMANCE AND INCENTIVIZATION

Performance monitoring is one aspect of successful contract management but new forms of contracting, including

performance-based incentivization, are becoming prevalent in public-sector contracts to encourage greater interest by

contractors in the broader goals of the municipality. Performance-Based Contracting is becoming prevalent in

healthcare services across Ontario and is perhaps best exemplified through the incentivization programs the Province

provides doctors for working in more remote areas and the payment structures based on consultations and patients

seen.

While contractors in public transportation prefer to have a clearly defined and predictable payment structure, it is

possible to introduce performance-based incentives to encourage mutual progress toward common goals. Some

examples of how performance-based incentivization can be included in public transit contracts are discussed below in

Figure 34:

Incentive Potential Contract Terms Application Impact

1 Increased

Ridership

The contractor, in consultation with the Town,

may suggest cost-neutral improvements to

service to increase ridership beyond the

established targets. If ridership growth is 5%

or greater than target ridership, the contractor

is entitled to 15% of any additional fare

revenues collected.

Bracebridge Transit

and/or


Encourages innovation by the contractor

mid-way through contract terms

Increased ridership in a cost-neutral way will

result in positive revenue returns

Establish a monitoring framework to ensure

that changes do not negatively impact

existing service

2 Customer

Service

The contractor is required to meet certain

standards for customer service and

encouraged to exceed those targets. The

Town conducts regular customer satisfaction

surveys with a target of X% satisfaction of

participants. Contractors that exceed this

target by 5% points or greater, on average,

over the course of a calendar/fiscal year, are

entitled to a bonus payment of $Y.

Bracebridge Transit

and/or


Encourages ongoing improvement in

customer service.

Payment amount should be clearly defined

and allocated in annual budgets and

withheld if targets are not achieved.

3 Vehicle

Condition

The contractor is required to meet the

following minimum standards for vehicle

condition and maintenance. The Town has

established a baseline maintenance target for

Mean Distance Between Failure and service

reliability. Contractors that exceed these

annual targets by 5% or greater are entitled to

a bonus payment of $Y.

Vehicle maintenance

contracts

and/or

Operations contracts

if they include the

supply of vehicles

Encourages proactive maintenance, which

will maintain vehicle condition and value if

owned by the Town. Improves service

reliability and reduces the impact of failures

on transit service.

Payment amount should be clearly defined

and allocated in annual budgets and

withheld if targets are not achieved.

FIGURE 34: Examples of potential contractual incentives that could be included in future contracts to support innovation within the terms of the contract

and drive mutual progress toward the business goals and objectives for transit in Bracebridge.


33


Recommendation: Identify opportunities to introduce performance-based incentivization within contracted services. It

is extremely important that guidelines and targets are fairly established and rooted in sound evidence. Lofty targets that

are unattainable will dissuade contractors from engagement, while targets that are too easily attained will result in

excessive payouts to contractors without achieving realistic benefits for the community. Ongoing monitoring and

oversight on these items are discussed further in Section 4.6.3.

4.6.3 CONTRACT OVERSIGHT AND SERVICE MONITORING

Including a set of expectations for monitoring service and overall oversight of performance within the Request for

Proposal (RFP) and embedding these expectations in the contract will firmly establish expectations, targets and

minimum standards while providing clear guidance on how these metrics will be measured and monitored. This allows

the Town to hold the contractor accountable and provides a stable and consistent method of evaluating contract

performance.

Oversight and service monitoring at the Town will likely rely on automated reporting tools and passive historical data

monitoring. This will require specific technologies that help to simplify this process, reducing or eliminating the need to

introduce roadside supervision. Presently, the Town leverages TransitFare & Systems (TransitFare) fare management

solutions for a significant number of their reports for fixed-route service and relies on manual reporting from Hammond

for monitoring Bracebridge Mobility. Figure 35 provides a summary of performance metrics that are frequently used for

monitoring service delivery.

Metric Description Current Approach Recommended Approach

1 Total

Ridership

The total number of riders counted as the number of unique

boardings. A trip that involves transferring between two or more

services/routes should be counted as a single rider.

Leverage to evaluate efficiencies in both Bracebridge Mobility and

Bracebridge Transit services as well as to support potential

performance incentives.

TransitFare reporting Fare collection system

reporting (no change)

2 Boardings

per Revenue

Service Hour

The ratio of total ridership to the total service hours provided.

Monitor this on an ongoing basis for both Bracebridge Mobility and

Bracebridge Transit services.

This metric should be evaluated for anomalous spikes or dips.

Such instances may warrant investigation into operations or on-

board technology.

TransitFare Reporting A modified and custom-built

on-time report in

TransitFare

Alternatively, may require

investment in a CAD/AVL

solution

3 On-time

Performance

The percentage of trips that arrive at key points (Time Points) on

the route within a defined deviation. Should align with service

standards discussed in Section 5.1

When on-time performance is low, work with the contractor to

assess causes of performance to remedy through schedule

adjustments (e.g., run time adjustments) or operations supervision.

TransitFare reporting

Unclear if “on-time”

range can be modified

to accommodate

reporting

A modified and custom-built

on-time report in

TransitFare



solution


34

Metric Description Current Approach Recommended Approach

4 On-time

Transfers

The percentage of successful, scheduled transfer connections at

the network transfer point. A successful, on-time transfer

connection is achieved if both vehicles are at the transfer point at

the same time. Should align with service standards discussed in

Section 5.1

When this metric is poor, work with the contractor to assess

causes of performance to remedy through schedule adjustments

(e.g., run time adjustments) or operations supervision

Not applicable A modified and custom-built

on-time report in

TransitFare



solution

5 Unaccommod

ated Rate

The total number of Bracebridge Mobility bookings denied as a

percentage of total requests. A target of 0% denied is desirable,

with best practice between less than 1% unaccommodated.

If this metric is high, work with the contractor to assess the causes

and to identify methods to improve accommodation rates.

Manual reporting from

Hammond

Demand response booking

and scheduling system

reports

6 Bracebridge

Mobility

revenue

operating

hours

The amount of time that a Bracebridge Mobility vehicle is actively

transporting a client or customer as a percentage of total operating

hours. This should be no less than 50%, but should strive for 70%

or greater, especially as On-Demand service is incorporated.

If this metric is low, work with the contractor to assess the causes

and to identify opportunities to minimize non-revenue time

Unclear if presently

monitored

Demand response

scheduling and dispatch

system

7 On-Demand

requests

granted

The total number of On-Demand requests granted within a

specified timeframe as a percentage of total requests.

It is recommended that all On-Demand requests granted within 30-

60 min of booking be considered successful. This metric can be

defined by policy and adjusted, as necessary.

A target of 100% is likely challenging to obtain if fully integrated

with Bracebridge Mobility bookings. A target of 80% that steadily

increases to 90-95% is likely more attainable.

Not applicable Demand response


system with On-Demand

system integration

8 Bracebridge

Mobility trip

duration

Average duration of pre-scheduled Bracebridge Mobility trips. It is

recommended that this be defined relative to average travel

speeds by conventional Transit service to ensure comparable

service.

For example, setting a target for 90% of all Bracebridge Mobility

trip durations within the urban core to be 30 min or less.

Unclear if presently

monitored

Demand response


system

9 Customer

Service

Percentage of respondents to a regular (annual or better) customer

survey that rank overall customer service as satisfactory or better.

Target at least 80%, but this should be progressively monitored

adjusted upward.

Surveys conducted on

a regular basis.

Unclear if satisfaction is

tracked and compared

on an ongoing basis

Establish a regular (annual

or bi-annual) customer

experience survey to track

overall customer service on

an ongoing basis.

FIGURE 35: Sample of recommended contractual metrics to support contract oversight and performance monitoring.


Recommendation: Develop a robust performance monitoring and oversight plan to include as part of the RFP. Make

sure that there is careful consideration for the mechanisms (technologies and business processes) to ensure that the

metrics monitored are fairly and accurately captured before committing to the oversight plan.


35

5 OPERATIONAL ENHANCEMENT

This section of the report discusses potential improvements to operations that can be achieved through defined service

standards, various vehicle ownership decisions and enhanced technologies. The recommendations form the basis of

projects which were assessed against the following evaluation criteria detailed in Figure 36 below.

Criteria DESCRIPTION

A: Transit Productivity Ability to contribute to growth in total ridership or riders per service-hour,

and improvements to transit mode-split

B: Access to Transit Service for the Broader Community Improving total service coverage, reducing average walking distance to

a stop and/or average waiting times

C: Responding to Demand Improving access to transit services that meets the needs of customers,

either through On-Demand access or improved service coverage

D: Access to Transit Service for Priority Resident

Communities

Improving available service in areas with a large proportion of priority

residents, or for specific types of service that support specific

communities of need.

E: Improving Operational Understanding Improves access to reliable reporting including real-time operational

metrics to better understand service and performance

0 No Meaningful

Impact 1 1 – Low impact 2 2 – Moderate

Impact 3 3 – Strong Impact 4 4 – Exceptional

Impact

FIGURE 36: Summary of the evaluation criteria identified and prioritized in collaboration with Town staff as well as the evaluation scale and legend.

Evaluation criteria are scored from 1 to 4 and presented using “Harvey Balls” that resemble pie-charts.

Recommendations that score well in addressing the evaluation criteria are assigned a high score while

recommendations that do not score well are assigned a low score. Recommendations that have little-to-no impact on

any evaluation criteria are assigned a score of 0, represented by an empty Harvey Ball.

In addition to these criteria, an assessment of the capital and operational cost implications is also provided. These capital

and operating cost implications are carried forward into the Financial Impact Assessment detailed in Section 8.

5.1 SERVICE STANDARDS

Service standards are critical for setting ongoing performance monitoring, defining how changes to service will be

handled and establishing how customers should expect to use the service. Service standards establish the minimum

acceptable levels of performance or criteria and form the baseline for performance monitoring targets, such as those

discussed in Section 4.6.3. Service standards can be broken down into the following categories:

Service Design Standards: outlines the criteria used for decisions related to service changes, route adjustments

and stop locations.

Performance Standards: outlines the criteria used to evaluating service performance, and identifying when

service designs and operating procedures may require review


36

Customer Service Standards: outline minimum acceptable standards for the customer service experience to

ensure that it is consistent and to strive for a positive and improved overall experience.

Service Design Standards

Figure 37 outlines the specific service design criteria utilized when defining this five-year plan, specifically the network

and service delivery plan outlined in Section 4.

Criteria Standard Application Notes

Coverage

(% of urban service area

population within 400

metres of a transit stop)

Fixed-route service: 75%

On-Demand & fixed service: 95%

Bracebridge Mobility service: 100%

For an area to be considered

covered by transit service it

must be within the standard

walking distance of a transit

stop.

This applies when

considering service

changes and when new

developments introduce

new areas beyond the

existing coverage of transit

service.

Stop spacing 200-400 metres for Fixed-route and On-

Demand services

Does not apply to Bracebridge Mobility

service, which operates as a door-to-door

service

All stops should aim to be

placed 200-400 metres apart

from one another. Stops

outside of that range may be

acceptable due to

discontinuous pedestrian

connectivity, with large gaps in

demand or to achieve service

coverage goals.

This applies when

considering stop locations

for fixed-route and On-

Demand services.

Boardings per Revenue

Service Hour

Minimum of 10 by Route

Minimum of 2-6 per vehicle-hour for

combined Bracebridge Mobility/On-Demand

Service

All fixed-route services should

achieve the Route standards.

If a service does not meet

the standard, it is likely that

a large segment of that

route would be better

served through an On-

Demand option.

Schedule Recovery Time 3 min or 10% of the total running time as

measured at the 70th percentile, whichever is

greater

When modifying schedules and

service, ensure that every trip

has the minimum specified

recovery time

Recovery time improves

overall schedule reliability. It

can be leveraged to provide

connection time at the

transfer location

Deviation Ridership

Demand

Minimum of 5-7 boardings per revenue

service hour along the deviation segment

A deviation is defined as a loop

branching off from the main

corridor of service to access

pockets of demand. Deviations

could include diverting into a

neighbourhood from a main

street (e.g., the Pine Street

deviation from Taylor Road).

Calculated by dividing the

total number of daily

boardings at stops along

the deviation, with the

amount of scheduled

service hours on the

segment (i.e., scheduled

travel time along the

deviation * number of daily

trips along the segment)

FIGURE 37: Recommended service design standards including those that were leveraged when developing the proposed transit network presented

in this plan.

Performance Standards

Figure 38 outlines recommended performance standards that should be applied to transit service in Bracebridge.

Performance standards are intended to provide feedback on how planned services perform in real-world conditions and

can be established as minimum standards for contracting purposes. They can also be leveraged in reporting to Town

Council.


37


Schedule Adherence A fixed-route vehicle is adhering

to schedule if it is no more than 1

minute early (ahead of schedule)

AND no more than 5 min late

(behind schedule) at a transit

stop.

Applies to fixed-route services

only.

Generally applied at specific key

stops known as “Time Points” to

account for variability in traffic

during the day and from day-to-

day.

This On-Time standard impacts

several following performance

standards

On-time Arrival A Bracebridge Mobility or On-

Demand vehicle is considered to

have arrived on time at a pickup

point if it is no more than 15 min

ahead of the scheduled pickup

time AND no more than 15 min

behind the scheduled pick-up

time

Applies to Bracebridge Mobility

and On-Demand services only.

Customers require sufficient

notice of when the vehicle is

going to arrive and should not be

expected to be ready precisely

when the vehicle arrives. Often

tied to a maximum waiting time

standard.

Adherence to Scheduled Run

Time

70% of all trips should complete

a round-trip within the scheduled

run time.

70% of all trips on a trip segment

(between time points) should be

completed within the scheduled

segment run time.


only.

This is a key metric in defining

schedules and monitoring overall

schedule adherence

Scheduled run times are

generally defined by the 70th

percentile expected run time.

This ensures that most vehicles

arrive on-time while minimizing

instances of vehicles running

early and being held back,

slowing total travel time for

customers.

Maximum Waiting Time A Bracebridge Mobility or On-

Demand vehicle will wait no more

than 5 min after arrival at a

pickup point for the customer. A

customer that does not arrive

before this time will be

considered a “No-Show”



Requires tracking of “No-Shows”

for both Bracebridge Mobility and

On-Demand customers.

Customers require sufficient

notice of when the vehicle is

going to arrive and should not be

expected to ready precisely the

vehicle arrives.

Unaccommodated Rate Bracebridge Mobility: Less than

1% of all trips requested at least

one day in advance

On-Demand: Less than 5% of all

trips requested



When a trip is scheduled and an

operator is assigned the trip, it is

considered “Accommodated”

Bracebridge Mobility service,

being scheduled ahead of time

for priority customers, should aim

for 100% accommodation.

On-Demand service is of a lower

priority than Bracebridge Mobility

but should aim for low

unaccommodated rates to give

customers confidence in the

service.

Trips Completed Fixed-route: Target 100% of trips

any given day

Bracebridge Mobility: Target

100% of trips accommodated

On-Demand: Target 100% of

trips accommodated

Applies to all services. Any

deviations below the target trip

completion rate MUST be

explained by extenuating

circumstances

Monitor this closely for patterns

as any frequent recurrence of

missed trips may indicate larger

network or service design issues.

On-Time Transfers 95% of trips connecting at the

transfer point should arrive no

more than 3 min after the

scheduled arrival time.


connecting at the transfer point.

Operating policies should

indicate that drivers are not to

depart the transfer point unless

instructed to do so by a

supervisor to minimise missed

transfers

FIGURE 38: Recommended performance standards that will support general service monitoring, the development of operating policies, contract

performance monitoring and future planning efforts.

Customer Service Standards

Customer service standards include general inquiries and support for customer requests ranging from fare purchase to


38

Bracebridge Mobility and On-Demand trip bookings. Figure 39 outlines customer service standards, several of which

may form policies for services such as Bracebridge Mobility and On-Demand.


Fare Payment All vehicles shall accept cash as

fare payment

Fare media (e.g., easyPASS and

waveCARD) shall be available for

purchase during business hours

at retail locations

Fare cards are presently only

available at the Municipal office

during business hours. Consider

opportunities to expand fare

media sales at locations that are

not town-operated such as

grocery stores.

This is somewhat dependent on

the fare system. Future systems

could offer an online or mobile

payment option to enable greater

self-serve options for customers

Customer Satisfaction Transit and Bracebridge Mobility

Services shall generate at least

85% overall satisfaction score in

annual customer service reviews.

Short surveys of riders should be

made available to Transit and

Bracebridge Mobility customers

on an annual basis for ongoing

monitoring

This survey will provide a regular

opportunity to engage with riders

on other issues, and solicit

feedback on upcoming changes

General Inquiries General inquiries will be

responded to within 2 business

days. To the extent possible,

telephone inquiries will be

responded to immediately, with

follow-up within 2 business days

This standard should apply and

be consistent regardless of who

is providing the service: Town

staff or the contractor

Ensure consistent

communication, and follow up

with all inquiries within 2 business

days to maintain customer

confidence

Booking Window Bracebridge Mobility trip

requests are accepted no further

than 14 days in advance and up

to 3 hours before the end of

service prior to the preferred day

of travel.

On-Demand trip requests are

accepted when requested. No

advance booking is permitted.


and On-Demand services

This standard for Bracebridge

Mobility is largely defined by

AODA requirements

Consider shifting all same-day

Bracebridge Mobility requests to

the On-Demand platform.

Booking window standards

become the basis for booking

and cancellation policies.

Pickup Time Customers should expect

scheduled Bracebridge Mobility

trips to arrive up to 15 min before

OR 15 min after the scheduled

time.

On-Demand customers should

expect a vehicle to arrive any

time and up to 30 min after

requesting the trip



Bracebridge Mobility pickup time

is tied to the “On-time Arrival”

standard

On-Demand pickup time is

dependent on vehicle availability

Bracebridge Mobility standard is

largely the same presently

implemented, but by adding a

fifteen-minute window after the

scheduled time it aligns with the

“On-time Arrival” standard and

makes it easier to fit in On-

Demand customers into the

schedule.

No Show Customers must be at the stop

within 5 min of the vehicle arrival

time.



Bracebridge Mobility standard is

largely the same presently

implemented.

No-show standards become the

basis of policies and penalties.

FIGURE 39: Recommended customer service standards that will guide the development of operating policies.

Bracebridge Mobility Booking Policies

In addition to the previously defined standards, consider aligning booking policies with industry best practices and peers

in Southern Ontario. This is critically important to ensure there is a clear distinction between the standards and

expectations of service for Bracebridge Mobility and On-Demand. A summary of the recommended policies for

Bracebridge Mobility is included in Figure 40 below. Note that the adjustments are generally minor and will support

enhanced operations in accordance with the recommended service standards discussed previously.


39

Booking window Cancellations Pick up times No show

14 days in advance and up to 3

hours before the end of service

on the day before preferred day

of travel.

Same day booking subject to

availability

24 hours in advance and no later

than 1 hour prior to scheduled

trip. Can be left on voicemail.

Same day cancellation up to 1

hour before will be subject to

$2.5 no show charge

15 min before pick-up at

designated accessible entrance.

Will wait for 5 min after arrival.

Client cancels within 1 hour of

trip or not at location within 5 min

of scheduled time.

Max of 3 no shows in 1 month will

result in a reminder letter. After

4th no show, may result in a 5-day

suspension of service

FIGURE 40: Summary of recommended Bracebridge Mobility Policies that align with the recommended service standards.

Monitoring and addressing these operating policies will require use of a more robust Demand Response Booking and

Dispatch Software discussed in Section 5.3. The technology is also capable of providing a call-out feature to support

the Bracebridge Mobility and On-Demand scheduler in preventing late cancellations and no-shows. This feature sends

trip confirmations and reminders to customers who have requested it or those who have multiple no-shows/late arrivals.

Project 3: Document service standards for Bracebridge Transit and Bracebridge Mobility

Recommendation: The Town should clearly document desired service standards to guide future service delivery.

These service standards can form the basis of operating and performance monitoring metrics discussed in Sections

4.6.2 and 4.6.3 while also supporting policy adjustments such as those described for Bracebridge Mobility.

5.2 VEHICLE OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE

The Town currently owns one ARBOC Spirit of Mobility low-floor transit bus. The bus is leased to Hammond for the

duration of the operating contract, and all maintenance is performed by Hammond as part of the maintenance

agreement. While the vehicle itself has experienced reliability issues, the arrangement has worked well for both the

Town and the current contractor. The operating and maintenance expertise at Hammond allowed the Town to focus on

purchasing a vehicle that would support their service and customers most effectively. By leveraging the ARBOC

product, which is built on a standard General Motors chassis and drive train, the Town avoided depending on more

exotic suppliers for parts and maintenance.

Issues related to the regeneration process of the Diesel Particulate Filter (DPF) created operational troubles that were

mitigated through changing maintenance and upkeep processes. The DPF goes through a regeneration, or regen,

process to clear itself out. This occurs automatically when the engine reaches a certain temperature. Since transit

vehicles make frequent stops, the engine rarely gets hot enough for long enough to complete a full regen process. If the

DPF is not cleared regularly, the vehicle will shut down and be disabled until a manual regeneration can take place. The

Town and the contractor have elected to run the vehicle for an extended period outside of service hours to complete

the regeneration process. This has resulted in an increase in service hours and fuel payments to facilitate this exercise.

The Town currently operates the Bracebridge Mobility service as a turnkey solution with Hammond providing the

required vehicles. Hammond has outfitted one Dodge Promaster to provide the Bracebridge Mobility service. The


40

vehicle is an industry-standard design capable of supporting up to ten seated passengers, or six passengers and one

mobility device, depending on the configuration. The vehicle is equipped with a rear-loading lift to support customers

using mobility devices, but variations include manual ramps and lifts that deploy from either rear or the passenger side.

Going forward with the execution of the Five-Year Business Plan will eventually require the Town to expand the fleet of

vehicles in operation. At a minimum, the two-route network will require a second conventional transit vehicle. It is

advisable that the Town secures an option for a second Promaster or similar accessible vehicle to support growth in the

Bracebridge Mobility and On-Demand services. All new and existing vehicles will need to be equipped with fare

collection equipment and supporting technologies to facilitate operations as noted. Additionally, considerations need to

be made to ensure that appropriate replacement vehicles are available should one of the buses or vans be out of service

for maintenance.

While cost efficiency is a primary driver in identifying ownership models for transit assets, Figure 41 assesses the

potential impact on the identified evaluation criteria. Based on this evaluation, maintaining ownership of vehicle assets

within the Town is slightly preferable for achieving the business goals and objectives of this plan.

Name and

description of

initiative

A:Transit

Productivity

B: Access to Transit

Service for the

Broader

Community

C: Responding to

Demand

D: Access to Transit

Services for Priority

Resident

Communities

E: Improving

Operational

Understanding

Town Owned:

Transit Bus

Ownership

structure does not

have a meaningful

impact on this

i tem

3 Allows for

specifying bus

detai ls to meet

community needs

1 Limited capacity

to respond rapidly

to demands

should a new

vehicle or new

technology be

warranted

3 Allows for

specifying bus

detai ls to meet

community needs

3 Can define and

instal l on board

technology to

support data

col lection

Contractor-

Provided:

Transit Bus

2 Less f lexibi l i ty in

specifying bus

detai ls to meet

community needs

due to contract

l imitations

3 Greater

economies of

scale to leverage

when to respond

to demands.

L imitations to

contract terms

may restr ict or

changes or make

them cost-

prohibit ive


specifying bus

detai ls to meet

community needs

due to contract

l imitations.

1 Any on board

technology not

included in

contract terms

l ikely inaccessible

for reporting. New

technologies must

be approved/

selected by the

contractor

Town Owned:

Bracebridge

Mobility Van

3 Allows for

specifying bus

detai ls to meet

community needs

1 Limited capacity

to respond rapidly

to demands

should a new

vehicle or new

technology be

warranted

3 Allows for

specifying bus

detai ls to meet

community needs

3 Can define and

instal l on board

technology to

support data

col lection


41

Name and

description of

initiative

A:Transit

Productivity


Service for the

Broader

Community

C: Responding to

Demand


Services for Priority

Resident

Communities

E: Improving

Operational

Understanding

Contractor

Provided:

Bracebridge

Mobility Van


specifying bus

detai ls to meet

community needs

due to contract

l imitations

3 Greater

economies of

scale to leverage

when to respond

to demands.

L imitations to

contract terms

may restr ict or

changes or make

them cost-

prohibit ive


specifying bus

detai ls to meet

community needs

due to contract

l imitations

1 Any on board

technology not

included in

contract terms

l ikely inaccessible

for reporting. New

technologies must

be approved/

selected by the

contractor

0 No Meaningful


Impact 3 3 – Strong

Impact 4 4 – Exceptional Impact

FIGURE 41: Summary of evaluation criteria for the provision of Transit and Bracebridge Mobility/On-Demand vehicles in future service contracts.

As Bracebridge Mobility transitions to providing a combined On-Demand service for both paratransit and conventional

customers, the aspect of ownership and its influence on improving the experience for various customers and community

groups becomes more apparent. By combining conventional, On-Demand trips with booked, paratransit trips, there will

be greater scrutiny on the customer experience by both rider groups. As such, it is preferable that the Town transition

to ownership of Bracebridge Mobility vans to more closely tailor the on-vehicle experience to meet the needs of their

customers.

Generally, it is recommended that in future contract procurements for service, the Town solicit pricing for contractor-

provided vehicles as well as operating vehicles supplied by the Town, and an option to exercise either. Operators who

would prefer to use their own vehicles may show competitive pricing when accounting for the lifecycle costs of the

vehicle under Town ownership. It is important for the bid to remain competitive, however, by allowing proponents to

submit a proposal for either option, or both combined. The potential capital cost impacts for vehicle purchase,

maintenance and required on-board equipment in each instance are outlined in Figure 42.

Purchase Price Funding /

Financing Maintenance

Technology

Installation

Total Capital

Costs

Bracebridge Transit Bus

Capital Cost $150,000 - $200,000 $100,000 –

$150,000 (7-year)

Up to $30,000

Costs vary

depending on

technology

installation. Fare

collection system

and ASA are

required at a min.

$250,000 -

$380,000 (7-years)

Annualized Cost

$35,800 – $55,000 Considerations

for Town

Ownership

More preferential

pricing possible

through Joint

Procurement Initiatives

from Province/

Metrolinx

Grants for capital

purchases through

Provincial and

Federal funding

Town may choose to

rebuild vehicle

+ $150,000 (12-year

life extension

rebuild)

Town may choose to

sell vehicle


42

Purchase Price Funding /

Financing Maintenance

Technology

Installation

Total Capital

Costs

Considerations

for Contractor

Provided

Purchase price will be

capitalized in contract.

May have economies of

scale if vehicle is

standard model already

in use

Capital funding

grants may not be

available to assist

Actual contractor

costs are unknown

Maintenance costs

will be capitalized in

the contract

Actual contractor

costs are unknown

Bracebridge Mobility Van

Capital Cost $80,000 – $150,000 $60,000 – $90,000

(6-years)

Up to $30,000

Costs vary

depending on

technology

installation. Fare

collection system

and ASA are

required at a min

$150,000 –

$270,000 (6-years)

Annualized Cost

$25,000 – $45,000 Considerations

for Town

Ownership

More preferential

pricing possible

through Joint

Procurement Initiatives

from Province/

Metrolinx

Grants for capital

purchases through

Provincial and

Federal funding

Town may choose to

sell vehicle

Considerations

for Contractor

Provided

Purchase price will be

capitalized in contract.

May have economies of

scale if vehicle is

standard model already

in use

Capital funding

grants may not be

available to assist

Actual contractor

costs are unknown

Maintenance costs

will be capitalized in

the contract

Actual contractor

costs are unknown

FIGURE 42: Summary of potential lifecycle capital cost considerations for the provision of Transit and Bracebridge Mobility/On-Demand vehicles in

future service contracts.

Operating contracts should be aligned with expected vehicle lifespans as much as possible to take advantage of

competitive pricing under either ownership arrangement. While it may be slightly preferable (from an operational and

service-related perspective) if the Town retains ownership of the vehicles for Bracebridge Transit and Bracebridge

Mobility services, the final pricing available in the contracts may persuade decision makers to prefer the trade-off to

other aspects of ownership over the total cost of ownership. The Town is advised to include a maintenance agreement

as part of the transit services contract, or as part of a broader maintenance agreement for other Town vehicle assets.

Project 4: Bracebridge Transit vehicle procurement and Project 5: Bracebridge Mobility vehicle procurement

Recommendation: If costs remain equal, then it is preferable for the Town to own the vehicles for both Bracebridge

Transit and Bracebridge Mobility. Cost variances can be compared based on quoted pricing in bids for service contracts

and factored into ownership decisions when contracts are negotiated. A detailed breakdown of the expected features

and functionality for each vehicle is presented in the attached cutsheet in Appendix C.

5.3 IMPROVED OPERATIONAL TECHNOLOGIES

Transit technologies come in a variety of forms and levels of complexity. This section discusses three key operational

transit technologies that can be readily adapted to the scale of Bracebridge Transit and Bracebridge Mobility while

enabling transformative growth over the next five years.


43

Several of these technologies would benefit from partnerships with other regional players such as Metrolinx, the District

Municipality of Muskoka, the County of Simcoe, and/or the Town of Huntsville for example to benefit from economies of

scale and to support integration of service, fares and seamless transit travel throughout the region.

Recommendation: Engage with external parties such as Metrolinx, the District Municipality of Muskoka and the Town

of Huntsville to develop a working group in support of integrated unified procurement of larger transit technologies. This

will enable access to a wider market, economies of scale and future integration of service, scheduling and fares.

Demand Response Booking and Dispatch Software

Implementing a comprehensive booking and scheduling system for Bracebridge Mobility service will open considerable

opportunities for service efficiency and service expansion. The technology will enable vast improvements in efficiencies

for existing Bracebridge Mobility services by providing greater automation in management of trip bookings, scheduling

and providing operators with improved information on their “manifests” (trip schedules). Additionally, most vendors of

demand responsive booking and dispatch software have developed innovative solutions to combine traditional

paratransit bookings with On-Demand transit akin to Transportation Network Providers (TNPs) like Uber and Lyft.

This integration of paratransit and On-Demand transit is known as co-mingling and has the potential to vastly improve

overall service efficiency of paratransit services while providing improved service coverage in lower demand areas. This

is particularly relevant to the Town, which struggles with a complicated, disconnected road grid and a large service area

of relatively low demand. By investing in a fully-featured, demand responsive booking and dispatch solution with On-

Demand capabilities, the Town can experiment with innovative service delivery models that can more appropriately

meet the demands of customers in lower demand areas and has the potential to grow to new services areas in the

future.

Figure 43 provides a summary of several vendors of traditional and new-age solutions for consideration, as well as an

assessment of the technology’s appropriateness for the Town based on the previously identified evaluation criteria:

Criteria Score Description

A: Transit Productivity

4 The technology will enable vast improvement in efficiencies for existing Bracebridge

Mobility services while also providing the capacity to introduce new On-Demand

service in new parts of town.


Service for the Broader

Community 4

The solution will enable increased service area and coverage to most of the urban

area, including areas currently beyond a comfortable (400 metre) walk from transit

service today.

C: Responding to

Demand

4

The technology will enable vast improvement in efficiencies for existing Bracebridge

Mobility services while also providing the capacity to introduce new On-Demand

service in new parts of town. On-Demand service will enable flexible changes to

service delivery as demand grows or changes within Bracebridge, so long as it is

supported by a flexible service delivery contract from the transit operator.


Service for Priority

Resident Communities 4

The technology will enable vast improvement in efficiencies for existing Bracebridge

Mobility services reducing the volume of trip denials in peak periods. Additionally, the

On-Demand service will provide existing Bracebridge Mobility users with a new,

equally accessible service to improve spontaneity and independence.


44


E: Improving

Operational

Understanding 4

By monitoring trip bookings, the Town gains valuable insight into potential new

demands for route adjustments, particularly as On-Demand bookings increase.

Additionally, the technology doubles as an account management system for

Bracebridge Mobility customers, allowing the Town to better support their queries

and challenges.

0 No Meaningful



Impact

Vendors Implementation Cost Ongoing Maintenance Annualized Lifecycle Cost

TransLoc

SpareLabs Spare Driver

UbiTransport 2TOD

Passio

TripSpark NOVUS

Up to $60,000

Software-as-a-Service

vendors often include

implementation within

annual license costs

$5,000 – $25,000 / year depending on

solution licensing model

$13,000 - $25,000 per year over 5 years

Considers a 2-vehicle implementation for

a combined Bracebridge Mobility/On-

Demand service.

FIGURE 43: Summary of the evaluation of implementing a new Demand Response Scheduling and Dispatch System.

Project 6: Demand Response Dispatch and Scheduling Technology

Recommendation: Implement a Demand Response Scheduling and Dispatch System that has the native capacity to

introduce On-Demand booking. Several vendors have the capacity to deliver other products such as CAD/AVL solutions

and Fare Collection Systems. However, it is recommended that the Town considers an open design that allows for

integration with other third-party systems, such as the existing TransitFare solution.

Modern Fare Collection System

The Town leverages the TransitFare platform for fare collection and revenue reconciliation on board Bracebridge Transit

and Bracebridge Mobility vehicles. The system has a relatively modern cloud-based back end system that depends on

proprietary hardware installed on board the vehicle. The system can support several forms of fare media including

electronic near-field communication (NFC) cards and barcode tickets. The Town presently accepts cash fares as well

as stored value and monthly period passes available on the easyPASS and waveCARD fare cards, respectively.

New fare collection systems offer similar diverse fare media functionality with the added benefit of mobile payment

through smartphone technology. Some of these systems enable passengers to purchase fare media directly on their

phone using a mobile application, which then displays a unique barcode or QR-code valid for the rider when activated.

The code is validated by an on-board validator. Variants include a dynamic “flash pass” that is displayed for visual

inspection by the driver. In all cases, vendors are committed to continuing to offer non-technical alternatives for users

and those who rely on cash fare.

Introducing a new fare collection system has the capacity to better cater to customer’s changing expectations while

providing the Town with improved understanding of who their customers are and what their travel patterns are like.

However, the existing TransitFare system is a capable solution that generally meets many of the current needs of the

Town. Figure 44 compares some of the potential options for upgrading or replacing the existing fare collection system

and provides a summary of the performance of this technology relative to the evaluation criteria previously identified.


45



2

Modern fare collection systems are frequently implemented to reduce the cost of

fare collection by minimizing cash utilization on board and reducing fraud. This may

help to minimize the total cost of service delivery in Bracebridge by encouraging

greater utilization of electronic fare media.



Community 4

The solution can greatly improve access to fare media for residents who might

otherwise not know where to purchase an easyPASS or waveCARD, especially if

options are provided online and through mobile applications.

C: Responding to

Demand 3 The solution has the potential to meet the demands of a more discerning community

that is used to advanced methods of payment using mobile devices and smart

phone applications.




The solution enables alternative fare media and can improve access to fare media

for residents in certain communities. Care must be taken to ensure that cash is

maintained, or reasonable alternatives are provided.

E: Improving

Operational

Understanding 4

The solution can provide a wealth of data on customers and their travel habits. Most

solutions include robust reporting tools to support analysis

0 No Meaningful





TransitFare

Massabi Justride

UbiTransport 2Place

TripSpark EZFare

Up to $200,000





$15,000 – $25,000 / year depending on

solution licensing model

SaaS vendors often charge as a

percentage of total fares paid

$15,000 - $63,000 per year over 5

years

Note that costs for some SaaS vendors

will change based on ridership

FIGURE 44: Summary of the evaluation of implementing a new Fare Collection System.

Project 7: Enhanced Fare Collection using TransitFare

Recommendation: Review options for enhancing TransitFare to include new fare products such as mobile payment

and support online account and card management for purchasing fare products outside of business hours or when

access to retail channels is not possible. In the long-term, consider replacing the TransitFare system with a new Fare

Collection System that is integrated with other transit technologies such as a CAD/AVL solution or an On-Demand

transit booking application.

Fixed-Route Computer-Aided Dispatch/Automatic Vehicle Location System

A Computer-Aided Dispatch/Automatic Vehicle Location System is often a central component for transit technology

systems. CAD/AVL systems enable accurate, real-time monitoring of operations, live two-way text-based

communication between operators and dispatch, and integration of on-board systems including fare collection,

Automatic Stop Annunciation (ASA), and vehicle monitoring systems. The systems enable a robust collection of data

and support real-time next bus predictions for customers.

The existing TransitFare system has a built in Automatic Vehicle Location system that relies on onboard GPS and an

uploaded schedule to monitor schedule adherence. However, there are concerns with respect to the accuracy of the

information. Through investigations of historical on-time accuracy of the TransitFare system, vehicles were observed in

approximate adherence to the posted schedule but reported as upwards of 10-20 min late at times during the route.

This could be attributed to technical issues within the system or errors in usage of on-board systems by operators.


46

There is no capacity within the TransitFare system at present to communicate with drivers in real-time. The current

contractor communicates with operators by mobile radio that they provide, but Town staff do not have direct

communication channels with operators.

Traditionally, CAD/AVL systems are costly and complicated technology systems that depend on proprietary

technologies from very specialized vendors. Recently, however, there are several newer entries into the market that

have developed solutions that are less hardware intensive with several operating as Software-as-a-Service models with

annual costs and non-proprietary hardware such as browser-based backend systems and Android or iOS compatible

mobile solutions. Figure 45 provides a summary of several vendors of traditional and new-age solutions for

consideration, as well as an assessment of the technology’s appropriateness for the Town based on the previously

identified evaluation criteria.



3

This technology is designed to improve operational performance monitoring, allowing

for on-the-fly response to real-world conditions, minimizing delays and improving

service productivity. The solution provides live feedback to operators to ensure that

they are operating as close to schedule as possible.



Community 2

The solution enables improved real-time information through integration with third-

party applications such as Google Transit. This may improve the residents’

understanding of transit services in Bracebridge.

C: Responding to

Demand 3

The technology is designed to allow for on-the-fly response to real-world conditions

such as service delays and breakdowns. Solutions can provide this information down

stream to inform potential riders of the impacts of delays, allowing customers to

adapt.




The solution enables improved real-time information through integration with third-

party applications such as Google Transit. This may improve the residents’

understanding of transit services in Bracebridge.

E: Improving

Operational

Understanding 4

The solution is designed to improve operational performance monitoring and can

provide a wealth of data on schedule performance, and other information such as

actual ridership, vehicle maintenance metrics, and others depending on the level of

integration. Most solutions include robust reporting tools to support analysis

0 No Meaningful



Impact


TransLoc

Passio

UbiTransport

TripSpark

Consat

Up to $200,000





$3,000 – $15,000 / year

depending on solution licensing

model

$34,000 - $63,000 per year over 5 years

Considers a 4-vehicle implementation

(2 Bracebridge Transit & 2 Bracebridge

Mobility/On-Demand Vehicles)

FIGURE 45: Summary of the evaluation of implementing a new CAD/AVL system.

In 2016 Metrolinx procured a CAD/AVL System from Consat on behalf of eleven transit agencies in Ontario under one

of several Transit Procurement Initiatives. The current contract with Consat expires in 2021 and may be renewed or

replaced with a new vendor. This technology is currently in use at the City of Temiskaming Shores, City of Kawartha

Lakes, City of Orillia, County of Simcoe, Town of Milton, City of Sarnia, City of Kingston and others. If the Town elects

to proceed with a CAD/AVL technology that is more traditional in nature, this may be an appropriate method of

procurement. Cost was approximately $ 6,200/vehicle in a bulk procurement, for a total of $4.5 million for 11 transit

agencies in upfront costs. Alternatively, the Town could consider a similar partnership with the District Municipality of


47

Muskoka and the Towns of Gravenhurst and Huntsville. An integrated system could include a broader range of vendors

that traditionally target larger procurements.

Project 7: Enhanced Fare Collection using TransitFare

Recommendation: Review options for correcting and enhancing performance reporting from the TransitFare solution.

If it is determined to be a viable and cost-effective approach, it will allow the Town to maximize the utility of the existing

TransitFare technology. Otherwise, it may be worthwhile to explore alternatives that utilize CAD/AVL solutions.

Project 13: Computer-Aided Dispatch and Automatic Vehicle Location System

Recommendation: Long-term operations management and reporting needs may require implementing a CAD/AVL

solution. Such a solution may become necessary shortly after the conclusion of this five-year plan. It is recommended

that the Town closely consider this technology in the near future, with plans to implement the technology within the next

five-to-ten years.


48

6 CUSTOMER EXPERIENCE

The following recommendations include incentives to promote transit use in Bracebridge and to improve the overall

customer experience. Details are provided for the various actions to ensure that the proposed changes to conventional

and specialized transit services are effectively communicated to existing and future riders.

6.1 TRANSIT EVENT PARTNERSHIPS

The Town should consider offering free transit to all riders on selective special events as a way of promoting transit use

in Bracebridge, providing safe and dependable ways of getting around, and fostering goodwill between Bracebridge

Transit and riders. The events that warrant free transit mostly appeal to youths and young families and are taking place

in transit-accessible areas, these include Fire & Ice Festival, Canada Day celebrations, Midnight Madness, the

Bracebridge Fall Fair and Horse Show, and Remembrance Day.

Familiarizing the younger population with transit is a proven method of ensuring ridership growth in the future. Consider

introducing special service for New Year’s Eve, where regular service would extend to 1:00 am and service between

9:00 pm and 1:00 am would be free. For Canada Day, regular service would run from 11:00 am to 9:00 pm, and for

Remembrance Day, free service would run during regular hours. This applies to both conventional and specialized

transit. For ticketed events, the rider would show the driver their ticket to the event on the day of and board the bus for

free. The Town should be in communication with event organizers so that they can plan accordingly and advertise the

availability of free transit as part of their event promotion process.

Conventional buses will not deviate from their routes on the day of the events for the sake of simplicity in service planning

and minimizing additional costs of operation. Free transit for the aforementioned events can be introduced on a trial

basis and continued if proven to be successful in drawing ridership. Note that the location of some of these events

require a relatively significant walk from the nearest bus stop. Figure 46 below lists some of the popular annual events

that take place in Bracebridge, the ones that may warrant complimentary transit are bolded.

Name of event When Where

New Year’s Eve service extension to 1AM Jan Downtown Bracebridge

Fire & Ice Festival Jan Downtown Bracebridge

Venture Fest June 1964 Muskoka Beach Road Bracebridge

Canada Day service during celebrations (11am to 9pm in 2019) July Downtown Bracebridge

Muskoka Arts & Crafts Show July Annie Williams Memorial Park, Bracebridge

Muskoka Pride Parade July Memorial park, Bracebridge

Midnight Madness August Memorial Park, Bracebridge

What’s Cooking Bracebridge Sept Miscellaneous locations

Remembrance Day Nov Memorial Park, Bracebridge

FIGURE 46: Sample of events, with recommended partnerships to consider providing complimentary transit service highlighted in bold.


49

Project 8: Transit event partnerships for complimentary transit service

Recommendation: Work with event hosts and the Town to offer free transit access using event tickets, wristbands,

event maps, etc. as proof of participation. Consider offering regular transit service on Canada Day and Remembrance

Day for free for all residents. Conventional buses will not deviate from the regular routes and free transit can be

introduced on a trial basis. The following table illustrates the impact of this on the evaluation criteria previously identified.



3

Providing complimentary transit access to family events will reach a customer

demographic (young families) that is presently underrepresented on the transit

system. Engaging new demographics will help to familiarize residents with transit

services and drive new, sustained ridership in the long-term.



Community 2

Complimentary transit service will foster community goodwill and emphasize

Bracebridge Transit as a community partner. Impact on transit access is low but will

help to familiarize residents with the service.

C: Responding to

Demand 2 While service on these events will likely be opportunities to capitalize on high transit

demand at those times, they do not represent any change in the ability to respond

to demand on a day-to-day basis




While the service is available to all residents, it does not explicitly benefit individuals

from priority resident community groups any more than residents in the broader

community.

E: Improving

Operational

Understanding 0

The solution may not improve operational understanding without direct integration

with the fare collection system, or operating policies to track ridership.

0 No Meaningful




Implementation Cost Ongoing Expense Revenue Potential

Low to no cost to implement No significant operating expenses for service

during regular hours.

Service for Canada Day and New Year’s Eve

may have an operating cost premium of 15-

25% above hourly costs

No direct revenue potential unless fare

revenues are offset through agreements with

event holders.

Long-term revenue growth through increased

ridership

FIGURE 47: Summary of the evaluation of providing free fares to and from select events in Bracebridge.

6.2 COMMUNICATING AND MARKETING SERVICE CHANGES TO THE PUBLIC

The successful implementation of routing changes and introduction of the On-Demand service will heavily depend upon

informing and educating the public about these changes. Updates will need to be made to the Bracebridge Transit

webpage to include information such as service hours, updated service schedule and route maps, the trip-booking, fare

payment and cancellation process for the On-Demand service, and a map with the locations of all the virtual On-Demand

stops.

In promoting the service to riders with limited access to and/or understanding of the Bracebridge website, paper

pamphlets containing all the information available on the Bracebridge website should be placed at stops with high

ridership (e.g., Walmart, Food Basics, Independent Grocer). An operator training session should be held to ensure that

transit operators are well informed of service changes and are able to answer questions from transit riders. Additionally,

Town staff can visit places such as the Castle Peak Retirement Residence, and stops with high ridership (e.g., Walmart,


50

Bracebridge Sportsplex, Food Basics, Downtown core) to give short presentations introducing service changes and

answer questions from the public.

As part of a comprehensive marketing campaign, the Town could partner with local high schools and task interested

students with designing promotional signage as well as creating and/or editing a short video outlining changes to the

existing fixed-route and Bracebridge Mobility services, the process for using the new On-Demand service, and

measures taken by Bracebridge Transit to ensure the safety of riders during and after the COVID-19 pandemic. The

video can be played on Bracebridge Transit’s webpage and can be shown during presentations.

Project 9: Communication and marketing campaign to encourage community to return to and try transit

Recommendation: Prepare a long-term marketing strategy that helps to educate residents about the existing service,

and the work being done over the course of the five years to improve transit in Bracebridge. Details of this

recommendation are provided in Figure 48.


A: Transit Productivity 4

A carefully prepared marketing strategy will help to educate the public on transit

services, promote new changes, and encourage individuals to take transit.



Community 1

The marketing campaign is a limited first step in improving resident’s understanding

and awareness of transit services but does not directly improve access to the service.

C: Responding to

Demand 0 This activity does not significantly impact this criterion.





and awareness of transit services but does not directly improve access to the service.

E: Improving

Operational

Understanding 0

This activity does not significantly impact this criterion.

0 No Meaningful



Impact


No significant implementation cost unless

specific advertisements are commissioned

from external sources.

Less than $10,000 over five years to

implement a basic marketing campaign.

Could be funded from existing operating

budget

No direct revenue potential.

Long-term revenue growth through increased

ridership

FIGURE 48: Summary of the evaluation of implementing consistent and targeted marketing campaign for transit services in Bracebridge.

6.3 NEW FARE PROGRAMS AND INCENTIVES

Employer bulk fare incentive

Partnering with local businesses is a great way to encourage transit use and guarantee a source of ridership. Partnership

can be introduced with selective local businesses (e.g., Walmart and Food Basics) on a pilot basis and would include

providing employees of these businesses a discounted monthly pass. Employees who earn minimum wage are often

dependent on transit and would benefit from having a discounted fare. Other transit agencies that have partnered with

local businesses typically offer employees a 10-15% discount to a monthly pass, provided that a minimum of 10


51

employees sign up for the program. The purchasing of the monthly passes is either done through a payroll deduction

(e.g., typically an adult month pass is $50, after a 15% discount, $42.50 is deducted each month from employee’s

payroll) or through a discounted bulk purchase made by the employer who then distributes them to their employees

(the employee would buy the monthly pass from the employer for a discounted price). Typically, the partnerships last

for a minimum of 1 year. However, for the purposes of the pilot project in Bracebridge, the partnership program can be

on trial for 4 months and be continued if proven successful.

Project 10.1: Employer bulk fare incentive for monthly passes

Recommendation: Introduce a trial project granting bulk discounted waveCARDs to large employers in town who

purchase 10 or more monthly passes on behalf of their employees per month for a minimum of 4 months. This will

require an education campaign and pitch to local employers and their staff that may be best tied to service improvements

discussed in Section 4. Details of this recommendation are provided in Figure 49.



4

Engaging with a demographic of regular workers in Bracebridge will significantly

increase regular ridership demand, improving overall productivity. Securing a

consistent source of revenue will help to support service growth required to meet the

demand.



Community 3

Educating employers and their staff on how transit can be used to support them

getting to and from work, and providing them with a discounted transit pass, will

significantly help to lower barriers to accessing the service for staff.

C: Responding to

Demand 2

Securing a consistent source of revenue in advance might help the Town respond to

anticipated demands or changes. It will provide an avenue of communication with

large employers and their staff to collect feedback on service to respond more

quickly to concerns.




Lowering the cost of a transit pass for employees of large companies in Bracebridge

only supports priority resident communities if they are employed by these parties.

Consider approaching large companies that employ minimum-wage staff

E: Improving

Operational

Understanding 1

A dedicated fare class will help to understand how this specific demographic is using

the service, but does not impact insights into the service in general

0 No Meaningful


Impact 3 3 – Strong Impact 4 4 – Exceptional Impact


Low cost to implement new fare product.

May have to purchase additional

waveCARDs for distribution to employers.

No significant ongoing operating expenses Consistent and reliable source of revenue from

employers will help to fund service and

encourage increased ridership.

FIGURE 49: Summary of the evaluation of providing large employers with bulk fare discounts.

College Student Discount

Currently, Bracebridge Transit offers a similar fare structure to that of its peers in Ontario, with discounted fares for

seniors at the age of 65 and up and students from age 6 to 18. Town staff should consider offering discounted regular

fares and/or monthly passes to the students at Georgian College - Muskoka Campus as an incentive to promote

ridership among college students. A staff report released in 2017 suggested a partnership with Georgian College to

determine the potential of developing a Student Transit Card. However, this endeavor was not further explored. Town

staff should continue the conversation with Georgian College and explore the feasibility of introducing student discounts.


52

Discounts can be granted to college students (e.g., $2 as opposed to $2.50) upon boarding with the display of a student

card. Similarly, students can receive a discount when purchasing and reloading their easyPASS once they have shown

their student card. The introduction of discounts can be done on a trial basis and continued if proven to increase

ridership and/or have received positive feedback from college students.

Project 10.2: Georgian College student fare discount

Recommendation: Work with administrative staff at Georgian College to introduce a pilot project granting a discounted

easyPASS or waveCARD to all students at Georgian College Muskoka Campus. Enable a new fare classification for

“college students” in TransitFare to support performance monitoring and adjust the program as data and feedback is

collected. Details of this recommendation are provided in Figure 50.



A carefully prepared marketing strategy will help to educate the public on transit

services, promote new changes, and encourage individuals to take transit.



Community 1


and awareness of transit services but does not directly improve access to the

service.

C: Responding to






and awareness of transit services but does not directly improve access to the

service.

E: Improving

Operational

Understanding 1

A dedicated fare class will help to understand how this specific demographic is

using the service, but does not impact insights into the service in general

0 No Meaningful





Low cost to implement new fare product. May

have to purchase additional easyPASSes or

waveCARDs for distribution to students at

Georgian College.

No significant ongoing expenses Current ridership at Georgian College is

relatively low. This initiative is more likely to

increase ridership and total revenues, then

decrease revenues collected from existing

riders.

FIGURE 50: Summary of the evaluation of introducing a College Student fare discount on a dedicated easyPASS or waveCARD.

6.4 BRACEBRIDGE MOBILITY RIDER HANDBOOK UPDATE

Establishing clear and comprehensive rules regarding the usage of the Bracebridge Mobility service will give customers

a better understanding of what they can expect from Bracebridge Mobility as well as what is expected of them as a

rider, consequently leading to more willingness to try the service. Having clearly defined rules in the handbook coupled

with education campaigns targeting demographic groups that are likely to benefit from Bracebridge Mobility service will

help to promote the service overall and encourage correct service usage. Education campaigns for Bracebridge Mobility

can be incorporated as part of the larger long-term communication and marketing strategy and can include activities

such as doing presentations explaining the rules and usage of the service at retirement homes, mailing an updated rider

handbook to registered users, and keeping rider handbooks available on mobility vehicles.


53

Another benefit of having well-defined rules is that it will help the Town avoid certain liabilities in cases of accidents or

complaints. One key area that currently leaves ambiguity for readers is the differences between what services are

required for drivers to provide and what services can be accommodated upon request. This ambiguity is especially

apparent when it comes to assisting passengers with their baggage/parcels. Currently, the handbook listed that drivers

are not required to help with parcels but in practice, the drivers do help carry parcels for the elderly and those who are

unable to use their mobility device and carry parcels at the same time. Therefore, helping or not helping passengers

with parcels is completely up to the drivers’ discretion. The handbook should include language around the discretion

allocated to drivers when it comes to aiding passengers with their parcels (e.g., drivers are not required to help

passengers with parcels but can help those who are unable to carry parcels on their own upon drivers’ discretion).

Additionally, there should be guidelines as to where drivers are expected to drop off the parcels (e.g., drivers are not

permitted to enter a client’s place of residence any further than the entrance way).

Another area that can afford some specification is in assisting passengers with boarding and exiting the vehicles.

Currently, the handbook states that drivers will escort passengers to and from the vehicle by taking them to the closest

accessible door. Language should be crafted to say that for safety reasons, drivers will not lift or carry passengers or

mobility devices. Lastly, the handbook should include language which specifies that drivers will not make unscheduled

stops and that all Bracebridge Mobility trips will only go to the destinations that passengers have identified when they

were initially booking the trip.

Project 11: Bracebridge Mobility Rider Handbook Update

Recommendation: Update the rider handbook for Bracebridge Mobility to improve clarity of various policies. Consider

introducing this update in lockstep with new booking systems (Section 5.3) or an online booking website (Section 6.5)

to help promote the changes to existing and potential customers. Additionally, consider a user education campaign to

help introduce current and new users to the changes. Figure 51 provides details of this recommendation.



Improvements to the Bracebridge Mobility Handbook will help customers feel more

comfortable using the service, increasing ridership and productivity of the service.



Community 0


C: Responding to





Improving the Bracebridge Mobility Handbook has the potential to significantly

reduce confusion on operating policies and provide users in certain priority

communities with greater understanding and comfort using the system.

E: Improving

Operational

Understanding 0


0 No Meaningful





54


Low cost to implement the new handbook. If

an education campaign is combined with the

program, resources (less than $3,000) may

be required to support the program.

No significant ongoing expenses No direct revenue potential. Ridership growth

may improve overall productivity of the

Bracebridge Mobility service and generate

additional revenue indirectly.

FIGURE 51: Summary of the evaluation of updating the Bracebridge Mobility Rider Handbook and introducing an education campaign.

6.5 IMPROVE CUSTOMER TOUCHPOINTS THROUGH TECHNOLOGY

Several technological changes can be made to improve customer convenience. The first being the introduction of a

web portal for booking Bracebridge Mobility trips online. This function will allow Bracebridge Mobility users more flexibility

in trip planning while improving operational efficiency. Second being the creation of a Where’s the Bus mobile trip-

planning app, where users could see where fixed-route buses are in real time, book their On-Demand trips, and pay the

fare with their phone once they have boarded the bus. The integration of the fare payment feature on the mobile app

can be introduced later. By being able to pay for their trips via the mobile app, riders would no longer need to carry cash

or purchase an easyPASS or waveCARD to pay for their trip, increasing the incentive to use transit.

Recommendation: There are 4 distinct technological changes to gradually introduce. First being the implementation

of a booking website/portal for Bracebridge Mobility. Second being the creation of an On-Demand trip booking mobile

application. Third being the integration of a mobile fare payment component to the application. The last being the

introduction of a fully-integrated transit travel app, where both Bracebridge Mobility and On-Demand trips can be

requested, trips on conventional services can be planned, and fare products are purchased and stored.

Project 12.1: Bracebridge Mobility Booking Website

By implementing a booking website, Bracebridge Mobility customers and their caregivers can manage accounts, make

trip booking requests, and modify upcoming trips without operator intervention. This additional level of freedom and

awareness will complement a reduced strain on the booking agents or call-takers. Integration with a demand-response

scheduling system will help to automate the scheduling process. Figure 52 outlines the evaluation of this technology.



Seeing that the website is only for booking Bracebridge Mobility trips, it will not

drastically increase transit productivity.



Community 1

Will not significantly improve access to transit for the broader community because

this only applies to Bracebridge Mobility users.

C: Responding to

Demand 3 Scheduling staff revealed that they are overwhelmed with booking Bracebridge

Mobility trips, the booking website will significantly reduce the burden on staff.




The booking website will make trip booking much easier to access for users of

Bracebridge Mobility, which are usually persons with disabilities.

E: Improving

Operational

Understanding 3

A booking website along with a streamlined booking process will make more data

available for staff, leading to greater operational understanding

0 No Meaningful





55


$5k – 10K to implement. No significant ongoing expenses beyond

ongoing support costs for Scheduling

Software (Section 5.3).

Will likely lead to an increase in the number of

Bracebridge Mobility users, leading to an

increase in revenue

FIGURE 52: Summary of the evaluation of improving customer touchpoints using a Bracebridge Mobility Booking Website.

Project 12.2: On-Demand Request Mobile Application

Implementing an On-Demand request mobile application is integral to the overall success of Bracebridge On-Demand

services. This application, coupled with a booking website and live call-takers, will provide customers with transit access

in parts of the community with low demand for transit or limited access by fixed-route conventional services. Figure 53

outlines the evaluation for this technology.



The convenience of being able to quickly book a trip on a mobile will attract many

riders, especially in the younger demographics.



Community 4

The app will allow anyone with a smartphone within the service area to book an On-

Demand trip, which greatly enhances the access of On-Demand service.

C: Responding to

Demand 4 The app will reduce the burden of trip-booking on staff and ensure that the

maximum number of trips are accommodated.




The app will be available for all those with a smartphone, making On-Demand

service more accessible in-real-time.

E: Improving

Operational

Understanding 4

The app will support enhanced data collation during booking that will inform

operational understanding. Request locations will inform decisions about future

operating changes, such as new fixed-routes and service enhancements.

0 No Meaningful





$5k – 15k to implement

May come bundled with Demand Response

Scheduling Software (Section 5.3)5.1

Likely minimal ongoing expenses. < 2k/year

Some system providers charge based on

number of trips booked through the solution.

Will drive significant increase in the number of

transit users, leading to an increase in

revenue through new ridership

FIGURE 53: Summary of the evaluation of improving customer touchpoints using an On-Demand Request Mobile Application.

Project 12.2: Mobile Fare Payment Application

Providing customers with another way to pay their transit fare adds to the convenience of taking transit, particularly for

those in the community who are well connected by technology. Mobile fare payment applications can be integrated with

On-Demand request apps and trip planning apps to further expand functionality. Customers would be able to purchase

and reload their waveCARD or easyPASS accounts and use their mobile device to validate their fares in place of the

physical card. This application is dependent on Project 7. Figure 54 outlines the evaluation for this technology.



3 The convenience of being able to pay with a smartphone will be an appealing

alternative for those that often do not carry cash or want to invest in an easyPASS

or waveCARD, leading to an increase in willingness to use transit.



Community 3

Not relying on cash or a physical bus pass will improve the transit access for those

that do not often carry cash.


56


C: Responding to

Demand 3 The app will meet the need of younger riders that are accustomed to paying digitally




The app will make a new fare payment option available for those in priority

communities.

E: Improving

Operational

Understanding 4

The app will capture data regarding payment type (e.g., student, senior, etc.) and

inform operational understanding

0 No Meaningful





$5k – 15k to implement

Likely minimal ongoing expenses. < 2k/year

Some system providers charge based on

number fares paid through the solution.



revenue

FIGURE 54: Summary of the evaluation of improving customer touchpoints using Mobile Fare Payment Application.

Project 14: Integrated Traveler Application

Integrating mobility booking, On-Demand requests, fare payment and travel planning into a single hub for customers is

a trend that helps to build toward Mobility-as-a-Service, particularly if it is integrated with other active transportation

modes. This application builds on the previous projects discussed in this section, and is closely dependent on Project

13, discussed in Section 5.3. Figure 55 outlines the evaluation for this technology.



4 The convenience provided by the functions of the integrated application (trip

booking, real-time bus tracking, fare payment) will be a great incentive for riders to

use transit.



Community 4

The application provides all the information they need regarding transit service and

payment, improving access and understanding.

C: Responding to

Demand 4 The app will allow Bracebridge to communicate with many users through a single

channel. Updates can be made easily, incorporating new features in future releases.




The app will be available for all those with a smartphone, making trip-booking more

accessible in-real-time and fare payment more flexible.

E: Improving

Operational

Understanding 4

The application will support enhanced data collation during booking and fare

payment that will inform operational understanding. Request locations will inform

decisions about future operating changes, such as new fixed-routes and service

enhancements. Trip plan data will identify desirable destinations for conventional

service

0 No Meaningful





Up to $20k to implement. Cost may be

reduced if same vendor used for other

applications.

No significant ongoing expenses beyond

ongoing support costs for Scheduling

Software (Section 5.3).



revenue

FIGURE 55: Summary of the evaluation of improving customer touchpoints using an Integrated Transit Traveller Application.


57

6.6 BUS SHELTER ADVERTISEMENTS

An additional source of revenue that the Town could explore is the incorporation of advertisement at bus shelters.

Typically, a municipality would be working with an advertising agency, whereby businesses interested in advertising at

a bus shelter would directly contact the agency and pay the agency a certain fee for designing and installing their posters

at shelters. The revenue from advertisement would be split between the agency and the municipality. In Ontario, some

of the major outdoor advertisement agencies include Pattinson (partnered with the TTC), Sambrook (partnered with

Brampton Transit), and Outfront (partnered with MiWay). The average cost for a business to set up an advertisement

panel at a bus shelter is around $500 for a 4-week period. However, with many advertisement agencies, the monthly

price could be lower if the business chooses to advertise for a longer period. In most cases, the $500 includes the

printing, installation, and management of the panel and an additional fee applies if the business needs the agency to

design the panel. Without a partnered agency, the installation and management of the panel will have to be done by the

town, in which case the administrative costs may negate some of the revenue potential.

Alternatively, if generating revenue is not the Town’s primary objective, bus shelters can also be used by the Town to

advertise community initiatives or in partnership with local organizations to promote various events in Town.

Project 15: Bus Shelter Advertising

Recommendation: Revenue generation opportunities for bus shelter advertising are likely limited and may not cover

the otherwise modest maintenance cost for providing the service. However, there may be a benefit to install bus shelter

advertising as a Town initiative to support local businesses and encourage community engagement. Details of this

recommendation are provided in Figure 56.



This activity could slightly contribute to improving transit productivity if

advertisement is used by Bracebridge Transit itself to promote its service.



Community 0 This activity does not significantly impact this criterion.

C: Responding to




Resident Communities 0 This activity does not significantly impact this criterion.

E: Improving

Operational

Understanding 0 This activity does not significantly impact this criterion.

0 No Meaningful





$2k – $8k to implement signage at existing

shelters.

Ongoing maintenance costs to handle

advertisement replacement, vandalism, etc.

$1k - $5k per shelter advertisement annually.

Revenue dependent on interest in advertising

with contracts ranging for $100 – $500 per

month.

FIGURE 56: Summary of the evaluation of installing bus shelter advertisement.


58

7 IMPLEMENTATION PLAN

This section presents a summary of the recommendations as clearly defined projects that can be implemented over the

course of the next five years. A quarterly roadmap for project implementation is also presented in this section.

7.1 PROJECT SUMMARY

Figure 58 summarizes the recommendations discussed from the prior sections, presenting a high-level view of

evaluation for each of these initiatives as well as their estimated capital cost impact. For reference, the evaluation criteria

are listed below.

Criteria Description

A: Transit Productivity Ability to contribute to growth in total ridership or riders per service-hour,

and improvements to transit mode-split

B: Access to Transit Service for the Broader Community Improving total service coverage, reducing average walking distance to

a stop and/or average waiting times

C: Responding to Demand Improving access to transit services that meets the needs of customers,

either through On-Demand access or improved service coverage

D: Access to Transit Service for Priority Resident

Communities

Improving available service in areas with a large proportion of priority

residents, or for specific types of service that support specific

communities of need.

E: Improving Operational Understanding Improves access to reliable reporting including real-time operational

metrics to better understand service and performance

0 No Meaningful



Impact

FIGURE 57: Summary of the evaluation criteria identified and prioritized in collaboration with Town staff as well as the evaluation scale and legend.

Project Evaluation Criteria Lifecycle Capital Cost Impact

A B C D E

1 Introduce the New Bracebridge Transit

Network See following evaluation for individual

components of this project

Costs include for stop installation and

improvements

1.1 Introduce On-Demand Transit 3 4 4 4 4

$10k – $15k for stop installation and

improvements

1.2 New Route Introduction and

Realignment 4 4 3 3 4 $45k – $60k for stop installation and

improvements

1.3 Salmon Avenue Route Realignment

4 4 3 3 4 $18k – $20k for stop installation,

excluding concrete pours (should be

included in road extension project)

1.4 Bracebridge Mobility Expansion 2 4 4 4 2

No significant capital cost impact

1.5 Evening Service Expansion 2 4 4 3 2


1.6 Sunday Service Introduction 2 4 3 3 2


2 Prepare new contracts for Bracebridge

Transit and Bracebridge Mobility

services

Necessary to support Project 1

No significant capital cost impact.

Necessary to support several other

enhancements


59

Project Evaluation Criteria Lifecycle Capital Cost Impact

A B C D E

3 Document service standards for

Bracebridge Transit and Bracebridge

Mobility

Necessary to support Projects 1, 2 and others No significant capital cost impact.

Necessary to support several other

enhancements

4 Bracebridge Transit vehicle

procurement Necessary to support Project 1

Only applicable if Town-owned

$300k – $400k (purchase)

$200k – $300k (maintenance)

5 Bracebridge Mobility vehicle

procurement Necessary to support Project 1 Only applicable if Town-owned

$160k – $300k (purchase)

$120k – 180k (maintenance)

6 Demand-Response dispatch and

scheduling technology 4 4 4 4 4 < $60k for implementation

$65k – $125k total lifecycle (5-year) cost

including implementation and support

7 Enhanced Fare Collection using

TransitFare 2 4 3 3 4

< $20k for enhanced fare media

development

Note that using TransitFare limits

reporting capabilities

8 Transit event partnerships for

complimentary transit service 3 2 2 1 0* Low to no cost to implement.

Operating costs may be recoverable

through partners

9 Communication and marketing

campaign to encourage community to

return to and try transit 4 1 0* 1 0*

< $10k to run a basic marketing campaign

over five years.

10 New Fare Programs and Incentives See following evaluation for individual


10.1 Employer bulk fare incentive for

monthly passes 4 3 2 2 1

$3k – $10k to implement new fare

products and administration system.

Moderate revenue impact if insufficient

uptake of new riders

10.2 Georgian College student fare

discount 2 1 0* 1 1 < $2k to implement. Likely little to no

revenue impact since ridership at the

College is presently low

11 Bracebridge Mobility Rider Handbook

Update 1 0* 0* 3 0* < $3k cost to implement

12 Improve Customer Touchpoints See following evaluation for individual


12.1 Bracebridge Mobility Booking Website 1 1 3 3 3

$5k – $10k to implement. Should be

folded into costs for Project 6

12.2 On-Demand Request App 3 4 4 4 4

$5k – $15k to implement. Backend

software part of Project 6

12.3 Mobile Fare Payment App 3 3 3 2 4

$5k – $15k to implement. Backend

software part of Project 8

13 Computer-Aided Dispatch and

Automatic Vehicle Location system 3 2 3 2 4 < $200k for implementation

$170k – $315k total lifecycle (5-year) cost

including implementation and support

14 Integrated Traveller App 4 4 4 3 4

Up to $20k to implement

Depends on CAD/AVL solution

15 Bus Shelter Advertising

1 0* 0* 0* 0*

$2k – $8k to implement signage at

existing shelters. Ongoing maintenance

costs to handle advertisement

replacement, vandalism, etc.

16 Improve Regional Connections

1 2 2 1 0* $10k – $15k to implement enhancements

at Ecclestone and Wellington stop for

regional connectivity

0 No Meaningful




FIGURE 58: Summary of proposed projects for inclusion in the Five-year Plan.

*Project does not have a meaningful impact on the evaluation criteria specified.


60

7.2 PROJECT STAGING AND IMPLEMENTATION HIGHLIGHTS

To successfully deliver all of the elements of this strategy, the implementation requirements for each project were

assessed so that they could be staged appropriately and ensure that resources are balanced. The following table

summarizes the individual projects, their timeline for implementation, and the proposed project phases.

Project

Implementation Steps and

Considerations Timeline

Upfront Capital

Costs

1 Introduce the New

Bracebridge Transit

Network

1.1 Introduce On-Demand Transit

1.2 New Route Introduction & Realignment

1.3 Salmon Avenue Route Realignment

1.4 Bracebridge Mobility Expansion

1.5 Evening Service Expansion

1.6 Sunday Service Expansion

Launch in Q3 2023

Launch via Ball’s Drive in Q3 2024

Realign after completion of Salmon

Avenue (anticipated in 2023

Progressive rollout starting in Q3 2025

Launch with On-Demand in Q3 2023

Launch with On-Demand in Q3 2023

$ 10,000 – $ 15,000

$ 45,000 – $ 60,000

$ 18,000 – $ 20,000

-

-

-

2 Prepare new

contracts for

Bracebridge Transit

and Bracebridge

Mobility services

Ensure Project 3 – Documentation of

Service Standards is complete prior to

developing draft contract requirements

and going to tender

Consider leveraging Performance Based

Incentivization to support continuous

improvement of services

Extension of Bracebridge Transit

contract to August 2023

Prepare new procurement for service to

launch in Q3 2023, along side On-

Demand transit launch

Negligible

3 Document service

standards for

Bracebridge Transit

and Bracebridge

Mobility

Formalize current operating practices and

service design standards in formal policy

within the Town

Consider necessary reporting and

monitoring technologies, such as Projects

7 and 8.

Complete by Q3 2021 Negligible

4 Bracebridge Transit

vehicle procurement

Solicit quotes from vendors prior to Project

2 to support decision-making on vehicle

procurement

Consider future renditions of the Metrolinx

Transit Procurement Initiative to support

vehicle procurement

If cost of procurement is favourable,

plan to receive new vehicles by Q2

2024 in advance of new route network

$ 300,000 –

$ 400,000

5 Bracebridge Mobility

vehicle procurement

Solicit quotes from vendors prior to Project

2 to support decision-making on vehicle

procurement

Consider future renditions of the Metrolinx

Transit Procurement Initiative to support

vehicle procurement

If cost of procurement is favourable,

plan to receive new vehicles by Q2

2023 in advance of On-Demand service

launch

$ 160,000 –

$ 300,000

6 Demand-Response

dispatch and

scheduling

technology

Define detailed requirements for the

functionality that allow for future automated

Demand-Response booking application

and automated scheduling

Procure dispatch and scheduling

technology for launch ion Q3 2022

Integrate with projects 12.1 and 12.2

$ 12,000 – $ 65,000

7 Enhanced Fare

Collection using

TransitFare system

Work with TransitFare to introduce

incremental improvements to address

transit performance reporting issues,

introduce online account management

systems to card holders.

Consider support for project 12.3 in the

future

Enhancements ready for Q4 2021 Up to $ 20,000


61

Project

Implementation Steps and

Considerations Timeline

Upfront Capital

Costs

8 Transit event

partnerships for

complimentary

transit service for

participants

Begin with pilot program in Q3 2021

(Remembrance Day) to test

communication strategies and ridership

impact. Progressively grow partnerships

through 2022

Remembrance Day Pilot in Q3 2021

Additional event partnerships in 2022

Negligible

9 Communication and

marketing campaign

to encourage return

to transit

Update the Bracebridge Transit & Mobility

web pages

Work with local schools to produce

marketing materials inspiring transit usage

and highlighting COVID-19 pandemic

precautions

COVID-19 pandemic recovery

marketing in 2021

Update website by Q3 2021

Up to $ 10,000

10 New fare programs

and incentives

Introduce in parallel with the two-route

transit network

10.1 Employer bulk fare incentive for

monthly passes

10.2 Georgian College student fare

discount

Introduce in Q3 2024

Introduce in Q3 2024

$ 3,000 – $ 10,000

Up to $ 2,000

11 Bracebridge Mobility

rider handbook

update

Update alongside Project 12.1

Consider preparing content prior to start of

On-Demand service (Projects 1.1 and

12.2)

Update released in Q3 2022 Up to $ 3,000

12 Improve Customer

Touchpoints

12.1 Demand-Response booking website

12.2 On-Demand Request App

12.3 Mobile Fare Payment App

Launch in Q3 2022

Launch in Q3 2023

Launch in Q3 2024

$ 5,000 – $ 10,000

$ 5,000 – $ 10,000

$ 5,000 – $ 15,000

FIGURE 59: Summary table of proposed projects with key implementation notes and timelines.

The following table presents several projects that are not included in this five-year plan and includes the justification for

their exclusion at this time.

Project Rationale and Future Considerations

13 Computer-Aided

Dispatch and

Automatic Vehicle

Location system

Cost-prohibitive at this stage and likely oversized for the needs of the Town. Reconsider in late 2025

Identify opportunities to partner with neighbours such as District Municipality of Muskoka, Simcoe County, the

Town of Gravenhurst and the Town of Huntsville

14 Integrated Traveller

Application

Requires a robust Computer-Aided Dispatch and Automatic Vehicle Location system to support the necessary

trip planning and alert functionality, which is not being recommended at this stage. Reconsider in late 2025.

15 Bus shelter advertising Not recommended for launch as a revenue generator, since it is unclear whether there would be significant

enough interest to cover the costs of installing and maintaining ad space

Reconsider if program is geared toward local economic development and Town marketing activities

FIGURE 60: Summary table of projects that are not recommended for implementation at this time.

While these projects are not recommended at this time due to procurement challenges, costs or limited positive impact,

it is advisable to reconsider these projects at later stages of this five-year plan.

7.3 IMPLEMENTATION ROADMAP

The chart presented on the following page (Figure 61) includes the recommended projects as described in this report,

staging them over the next five years. This roadmap considers resource constraints and appropriate alignment of

activities to maximize efficiencies of procurement, development and service growth.


62

FIGURE 61: Five-year project roadmap for enhancing Bracebridge Transit and Bracebridge Mobility services.


63

8 FINANCIAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT

This section presents an outline of capital and operating budget impacts of the overall program on an annualized basis,

as well as commentary on potential funding opportunities and subsidy requirements.

8.1 CAPITAL BUDGET ASSESSMENT

The total capital budget requirement over the next five years is estimated at between $564,000 and $940,000 in order

to deliver this five-year plan, with a significant investment in new vehicles to support service levels. This capital budget

forecast assumes Town ownership of vehicles (see Section 5.2). The following table in Figure 61 breaks down the capital

budget requirements by year, with a summary of the projects and activities requiring the funds.

Year Capital Requirement Notes

2021 $ 1,000 - $ 37,000

Enhance TransitFare to improve performance reporting, introduce online smart card

reload, and other enhancements. Cost dependent on degree of custom development or

new modules required for the TransitFare solution

2022 $ 18,000 - $ 73,000

Purchase Demand-Response software for Bracebridge Mobility and future On-Demand

service. Launch of online booking portal for Bracebridge Mobility. Variance in capital cost

driven by vendor and service delivery selection for the Demand-Response software.

2023 $ 179,000 - $ 339,000

Capital cost considers Town procurement of dedicated Bracebridge Mobility/On-Demand

vehicles (2) required for service. Includes introduction of On-Demand enhancements to

the Demand-Response software, a mobile application for booking, and stop installations

to support On-Demand service

2024 $ 348,000 - $ 472,000

Capital cost considers Town procurement of two new Bracebridge Transit vehicles to

replace the existing vehicle. Existing vehicle will be retained as a spare so long as it

remains in serviceable condition. Includes introduction of mobile payment application and

stop installations to support the new two-route service

2025 $ 18,000 - $ 20,000 Limited capital cost expenditures anticipated for expansion. Includes stop relocation for

the Salmon Avenue extension and new community centre.

FIGURE 62: Capital budget requirements for years 2021 through 2025. Values indicated are approximate in 2020 dollars and are exclusive of inflation.

The Federal and Provincial Governments have announced several funding opportunities that may support the capital

improvements as part of this five-year plan. They include:

$5.9 billion in 2021 earmarked from the Federal Government for public transit in support of the COVID-19

pandemic recovery;

Ongoing funding from the $33 billion Investing in Canada Infrastructure Program; and

Approximately $375 million in annual funding from the Provincial Gas Tax program, of which the Town has been

allocated approximately $155,000 in 2021.

As the COVID-19 pandemic transitions through vaccination and into recovery additional funding opportunities may arise

to support economic growth and municipal infrastructure improvements.


64

8.2 OPERATING BUDGET ASSESSMENT

The operating budget for Bracebridge Transit and Bracebridge Mobility will expand in lock-step with the introduction of

new services in the Town. The expansion of service is closely tied to several capital projects described previously and

aims to support a return to steady ridership growth after the conclusion of pandemic-related emergency restrictions.

The following table presents key operational components impacting the operating budget for the following five years,

considering the service levels stipulated in Section 4.5, Proposed Annual Network and Service Changes. Note that

these calculations consider the range of ridership estimates presented in previous sections, and their associated impact

on revenue. In all cases, we anticipate that net cost per rider will remain within reasonable variance of the 2019 actual

cost ($10.68 per trip) and that the Revenue/Cost ratio will be approximately the same in 2025 (12.6-14.6%) as it was

in 2019 (13.1%). By 2026, it is anticipated that the net cost per rider and overall Revenue/Cost ratio will improve beyond

2019 levels.

Costs 2019 (Actual) 2021* 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026

(Representative)

Transit Service - $195,000 $195,000 $195,000 $292,500 $390,000 $390,000

Bracebridge

Mobility

Service

- $162,500 $162,500 $235,500 $308,750 $308,750 $308,750

Vehicle

Maintenance - $25,000 $25,000 $35,000 $50,000 $50,000 $50,000

Technology

Licensing - $10,000 $20,000 $22,000 $24,000 $24,000 $24,000

Operating Cost $334,000 $392,500 $402,500 $487,500 $675,250 $772,750 $772,750

Revenue

Total Ridership 27,193 ~ 19,500 36,300 – 37,500 51,800 – 57,500 58,600 – 67,100 62,200 – 72,000 63,700 – 74,000

Average Fare

per Trip $1.60 $1.60 $1.60 $1.60 $1.60 $1.60 $1.60

Estimated

Revenue $43,610 ~ $31,000 $58 – 59,000 $82 – 91,000 $93 – 107,000 $99 – 115,000 $101 – 118,000

Net Cost Indicators

Net Operating

Cost $290,390 ~$356,460 $342 – 344,000 $430 – 439,000 $560 – 574,000 $678 – 694,000 $654 – 671,000

Net Cost per

Rider $10.68 $16.81 $9.13 - $9.15 $7.48 - $8.48 $8.35 – $9.79 $9.41 – $11.15 $8.84 - $10.52

Revenue/Cost

Ratio 13.1% 9.2% 14.4 - 14.9% 15.9 – 17.7% 14.1 – 16.2% 12.6 – 14.6% 13.2 – 15.4%

FIGURE 63: Summary of operating budget impacts as well as cost indicators for tracking performance over time. Note that 2019 actuals are presented

as representative of targets, while 2026 is presented to indicate anticipated ridership gains from proposed service improvements. Values indicated

are approximate in 2020 dollars and are exclusive of inflation.

* 2021 assumes a return to pre-pandemic economic activities by Q3. Ridership and revenue estimates are estimated on that basis.


65

Gas tax allocations from the Province have historically been used for offsetting operating costs but may also be used to

offset capital improvements. Gas tax is allocated proportionally based on transit ridership across the Province from a

fund of roughly $375 million annually. In 2021, the Town was allocated $155,000 from the Provincial Gas Tax fund.

8.2.1 REVENUE CONSIDERATIONS FOR THE FUTURE

One consideration that is not factored in this report is a change in fare strategy. While the diversity of fare products is

generally good, of particular note is the relatively low average fare collected per trip. It may be worthwhile evaluating

discounted fare products, such as the easyPASS. Most agencies price monthly passes based on an estimated number

of trips per month in the range of 35-45 trips, relative to a cash fare. The easyPASS is presently heavily discounted at a

relative price of 20 trips per month.

While uptake on the easyPASS is presently quite low (3-4% per of total trips in 2019), this is likely to change as new

fare media (such as mobile payment) is introduced and ridership grows over the next five years. The implication is that

interest in monthly passes at the presently discounted rate will drastically reduce the average fare per trip. It is important

to closely monitor interest in all fare products as demand changes and ridership grows in order to maintain the average

fare paid trip at $1.60 (2020 dollars) adjusted to inflation.

bracebridge transit & mobility 5-year business plan

Documents