Chapter 3: Recommendations and Barriers
Kitchener Transit would
receive $35.00 from each student. Therefore, Kitchener Transit must be
accountable for the revenue it assumes by proving that it is benefiting
students. Services must also be satisfactory given the changes in
ridership that would arise from Universal Transit. Any alterations or
improvements made within the Transit system must be well defined before
the referendum so students know what they're voting for.
3.2 Referendum Time Line
As a result of present
financial constraints, the CTC deems that the earliest possible date for
a referendum would be in the spring of 1997 during student elections.
When held in conjunction with an election, costs are estimated at $2,000;
whereas if held otherwise, costs incurred would be $10,000.
Given the results of the
survey the CTC conducted, some predictions can be made as to the opinions
and feelings of the student body. Nonetheless, the sample size was only
of 269 people, possibly inaccurately representing the overall opinions of
the entire U.W. student populous. Thus, a survey with a much larger
sample size would help increase the validity of gathered data.
3.3 Cooperation and Communication.
Increased scheduled meeting
times are necessary to discuss the opinions of the actors involved. This
specifics of the proposal can be worked out as desired by the Federation
of Students. Some examples of details needing further attention are: the
fee the FEDS will receive for administering the program, finalizing the
exclusion lists, and other details such as WATCARD use.
3.4 Other Recommendations
Less confusing scheduling,
more availability of schedule pamphlets etc. for student use and
accessibility as well as more frequent buses to and from the university
(the main response in the comments section of the survey).
In Colorado, USA, bike racks
are installed on the sides of buses so people who have to travel far can
make use of both bikes and transit. This would be ideal in a large urban
system such as Kitchener - Waterloo.
Cooperation with downtown
private establishments to make a coupon book for business. This would
encourage increased ridership and draw people to the downtown, benefiting
students while aiding local business.
Since the area code N2L
possesses the highest concentration of students, the CTC suggests that
this area be surveyed annually to provide a comparative basis to see
which streets persistently house the most students. If Universal Transit
came through, this will allow Kitchener Transit to re-orient its services
to access the areas of highest demand. Further a study of Sir Wilfrid
Laurier University's student population density by postal code region
would assist in determining the key areas where all university students live.
Service to more remote
areas. There are some students who live outside of Kitchener-Waterloo or
whose homes are simply beyond the boundaries of Kitchener Transit's
service. It may be recommended that these areas be given special
attention. Perhaps Kitchener Transit has deemed service in these areas
uneconomical or simply beyond its means, but smaller buses or shuttle
vans could be operated provided Kitchener Transit had a reliable customer
outlet in these areas and even better if these customers were university
3.5 Barriers for the Universal Bus Pass
Students have already felt
the consequences of severe funding cuts by the provincial and federal
governments. Any additional increases in basic student fees will surely
create controversy and debate.
An extreme lack of
communication exists between many of the actors involved within this
issue. This will inevitably hinder the progress towards the
implementation of the proposal.
The City of Waterloo is
investigating the possibility of contracting out the responsibilities of
transit service to other, more economically feasible tenders.
Already existing biases
towards the convenience of the current bus system may hinder Kitchener
Transit's attempts at increasing revenues, and further, implementing the
universal pass system.
Last Modified: 12-04-96