On Monday I went to my Ward meeting specifically to hear more information about the cancellation of the express and milk-run buses serving Beaverbrook. While there are still busses going through the main artery of the neighbourhood, most of the Beaverbrook is no longer going to have bus service.
The demise of the milk run bus was inevitable. Even when it was reasonably frequent ten years ago, it rarely carried more than a few people. My shock lies mostly with the cancelation of the express bus. I have used it a lot this summer and it was the perfect bus. I was always able to get a seat though by the time it hit the highway there were many people standing. It went every twenty minutes and it took me just as long to get home as it would if I was carpooling. The alternative to taking the 65 was 60. 60 was always overpacked and, though I am by no means unaccustomed to crowded buses, I was close to tears in discomfort every time I took it. I would much rather drive by myself and pay $25 per day to park at Carleton than take the 60.
Anyhow, the city is cutting transportation costs and getting rid of 65 saves them $450,000 per year. According to the city, the ridership of 65 (7 buses in the morning and 7 in the afternoon) is 200 people. To compensate the removal of this line, the city will increase the capacity and frequency of the 60 and add a 90 level bus (“main line” busses in Ottawa) between Morgan’s Grant (fast growing neighbourhood north of Beaverbrook) and Bayshore (major shopping centre two highway exits towards downtown) that will go through Beaverbrook. I am sceptical about the 60 and cautiously hopeful about the new 93.
Now here is the beef. Despite the changes like this one happening all over the city, they do not expect the level of ridership to drop. My city councillor claims that the parking downtown combined with the gas prices and wear and tear on the cars will cause people in Beaverbrook to use the 60 in lieu of 65. I truly don’t buy it. I am sure that some of the 200 people will walk extra 10 or 20 minutes each way, squeeze themselves onto the 60 and stand for half an hour while the bus is rushing at highway speeds and making sharp turns. Will all 200 people do this? I would not.
I think it is commendable of the city to cut costs and focus on bringing the service to areas of the city and suburbs where people are most likely to not be able to afford to drive to work. It is also commendable that they are not raising taxes or bus fees more than absolutely necessary. However, I am uncomfortable with the position that the bus is the last resort for people who cannot afford to pay for car, gas or parking. I am unhappy with city doing absolutely nothing (worse than nothing really) to get the people who have a choice between driving and taking a bus off the roads during rush hour, if not during other times.
Because I grew up in the city and was a heavy, and generally happy, user of public transit for most of my life, my expectations of what the transit service should be are perhaps too unreasonable for a suburb. However, I would like to see the data. Is the ridiculous amount of money spent over last ten years on roads and highways in Kanata (every mayor artery has been built, rebuilt or expanded since I moved here) justifiable where as a bus that is always comfortably filled is luxury? If anyone has some urban planning data or a link to an intelligent paper about this, please let me know.
Silly city public transit is for kids!
