Ride the bus for free

Posted by Laura

Guelph Transit will offer free service on June 4 between the hours of 5:30 a.m. and 9:15 p.m. to mark Clean Air Day.

The initiative encourages people to leave their cars at home and take public transit. According to a city report, transit ridership on Clean Air Day increases on average from 15,000 rides to 22,000.

Comments

[David Graham]

15,000 to 22,000 with the temporary elimination of bus fares ... imagine what the permanent elimination of bus fares could do.

Wouldn't funding free bus fares ultimately be cheaper than building massive new parking lots?

[D1&OnlyMichaelStevenWizardWisniewskiD1st]

I'm no expert on the matter, but based on what I've been reading, I have to say I'm definitely leaning towards the pro-transit/anti-parking lot side of the debate. It sounds like it makes good economic and environmental sense!

[Karen]

Well, I guess the above posters take transit when they grocery shop, or make large scale item purchases. Why can't the shops downtown afford the same consideration as grocery stores and malls. I shop downtown more then anywhere else in town and sometimes I walk and other times I take my car as I know I will be purchasing heavy items that I need to transport via my car. Perhaps after patronizing a restaurant downtown, I plan to drive to visit a friend. People need to park downtown. Just like they need to park when shopping, dining, etc. elsewhere away from the downtown.

[David Graham]

Karen,

Grocery stores and malls build and pay for their own parking lots and pay property tax on the parking spaces. Why should the taxpayer -- including those businesses -- pay $30,000 per parking space to make downtown businesses more competitive?

As I wrote at some length over the weekend at http://cdlu.net/entries/20080412.shtml , we have alternatives that we could do to make inexpensive on-street parking all over downtown, and the money we're paying for parking garages could instead be invested in free bus fares -- something that has been shown to raise ridership by 50%, almost certainly at the expense of cars on the road -- on the one day per year we do it, according to this very post.

[Edgar Floyd]

I heard the suggestion of two hour transfers for downtown buses come up during the parking debate. This is a good idea that should not be lost. If I could come downtown by bus, stay two hours, shop, eat, etc. - and then ride home on the same ticket, it would be worth my while.

[Karen]

David, the retailers within the store did not pay for the parking. Mall management did. Obviously Mall mgt recoups those fees over the long-term through lease fees from the individual retailers.

Downtown Retailers also pay property taxes. They pay directly if they own the property and indirectly if they lease the property. Downtown retailers also fund downtown parking via staff monthly passes as well as through their customers that patronize their stores.

$30k is extremely expensive cost. I will not argue that. However, many of these parking spots will also be used by office staff/city staff that work downtown. Should they take the bus? Perhaps. However I work in Cambrige so I have no choice but to take my car. I am sure that is the case for many who work downtown. I believe the Mercuy ran a story about the number of City Hall staff that live out of town. I don't remember the number but it was not insignificant. Don't forget about the parking spaces used by Cooperators, the new businesses that will lease the space left vacant by City Hall staff, the spaces requested by the developers of the Gummer building.

[David Graham]

Karen,

Indeed. The $30,000 per parking spot is not only expensive, it is completely unconscionable. That amount of money per commuter could easily provide the much-needed city bus link between Guelph and Cambridge, or Guelph and Kitchener.

$30,000 each for 1,000 parking spaces, minus the couple of hundred spots that will be displaced to make those parking spaces, is a completely backward approach to solving the real issue. The real issue is that our transit system is sorely lacking, and it doesn't need to be.

The parking passes are a bit of a fiscal red herring. At $50 per month per parking stall, assuming 100% occupancy 100% of the time, it will still take 600 months - 50 years - to ammortise each parking space. Even at $100 per month, it would still take 25 years, and that's just for the cost of building it. What about maintenance and other related post-construction expenses?

My point here is that if this cost is worth it to downtown's economy, downtown is free to pay it. But if it's tax-dollars that are paying it, then we should get the best bang for our buck. The cost of those two parking garages could buy us 30 additional buses and operate them all for 5 years, without a dime of fare revenue or additional subsidy. Surely that would be enough to connect Guelph to its neighbours?

It is true that retailers inside the mall do not directly pay for the parking -- they do so indirectly through fees to the mall, which in turn has to both provide parking and pay taxes on it. Downtown businesses pay taxes and are provided parking for their tax money, so the point is it isn't a fair comparison - on the surface, it's downtown, not the mall, that has the advantage on the parking score.

[Harry]

Mr. Graham:
You are right on. The Downtown, spearheaded by the Board and the bottom sucking DBA are sucking the blood out of this City. There was a day when the Downtown carried its weight in terms of taxes raised versus cost of service.
But now it is a different story. All the freebies - including free parking, a new this, and that and the other thing, mean that millions are and have been wasted away on the downtown with no return on investment.
Start counting the misspent taxpayer dollars.
Over $25 million dollars on an Arena that was not going to cost the taxpayers a cent.
Over $50 million on the renovated Memorial Gardens. (Didn't the original architect say it could be built for about $18 miilions? What a joke.
$% millions to save the Memorial gardens wall. Wasn't the original guestimate just over $1 millon?
Leasehold improvements on the Court at old Quebec St of at least $3 millions which will be walked away from when more money is spent on the renovations at the old City hall - at least another #10 millions?
$12 plus millions on the Loretta Convent with accessibity concerns and limited parking.
A "triple P" deal on Baker Street for a new Library/parking Lot/Residential/Commercial?Whatever fiasc. (Please refer to the Nustadia deal on GSEC which was not to cost the City a cent). They were right on that it did not cost the City a cent It cost the city (you and me) $25 Miillions.
And TWO new Garqges at over $30 Millions - don't ask how the second one materialized overnight, it just did -- but with this comatose Council, what else did you expect?
And there are the small change items - free parking. Extra Policing, Daily cleanup both winter and summer all of which add another $ million or so per annum to the tax bill.
So how much has the feeding frenzy cost so far? $100 millions, 200 Millions #00 million? Think about it. It is your money being wasted by Kween Karen and the Klowns!

And in the meantime the Ward 6 Residents are still waiting for the Community Recreation Centre promised in 2001, the Local Fire station and a number of other improvements that we so richly deserve.

Harry

[Edgar F]

It's not the fault of the downtown retailers that downtown streets were built before cars were king. Malls were built for cars. The Mall does not pay taxes on its parking lot - only on the sq footage of the building.

I'm not sure how Harry does his math, but compared to other retail formats (malls, strip plazas, and big box) downtown still generates more tax revenue per hectare than the others. Granted, it does cost more to service too, but that's why it's so important to get more people living and shopping downtown. No matter how you slice it, downtown still costs less to service per hectare (including police and clean up)than sprawling single family residential subdivisions.

Since when was the south end promised a recreation centre in 2001??? It was never that early - it's been 2015 ever since the beginning. And the fire hall and police station are being built this year. And you have a nice grocery store down there too now. Too bad I can't get a walkable grocery store here in the north end....

EF

[Edgar F]

It's too bad this forum spends so much time bickering about downtown vs. south end vs. north end vs. east end. It seems to me we've got a great city, and equitable distribution of ammenities is actually pretty good. Not every neighbourhood has the same thing, but it would not be practical or economical to put one of everything in each ward. Here in Ward 2 we've got the Evergreen and Riverside Park. Down south they've got the Y and Hanlon Creek Conservation area. In the east they've got Victor Davis and Eastview (which will be beautiful someday). The West End has the Rec Centre and the biggest grocery store. Downtown has the Sleeman Centre and River Run. Everybody has something. Nobody has everything. And it still takes less than 15 minutes to get from one end to the other....

[Harry]

Edgar F:

What is your proof that the Downtown "pays its way"? It has not for at least three decades, but if you can show that the taxes paid outweigh the benefits received, then do it, because I have been unable to do so. But then maybe your math is superior to mine!! Somehow I doubt it, but please show me. I am prepared to listen to fact, not emotion.
And then in rolling out the benefits to the City you refer to the Y west of the Hanlon. Not a City initiative.
And the Evergreen was an initiative of a bunch of senior Citizens who raised a lot of money to make it happen - again not a City lead initiative.

And, if I read you right, Ward six should just shut up and go away!! First you make the error of assuming that west of the Hanlon is in the Southend. And you can get around this City in 15 minutes - not so unless you break a few speed limits or have one of those things the Emergency response teams have to change the traffic lights.
As for the promises to Ward six, property was aquired in 2001 or thereabouts for an integrated development with BM high school. In addition a firestation was also to be developed.
You are smug up there in Ward 2 with your fire station, your Evergreen Centre and your Riverside Park, and other than a branch Library, What has ward 6 got? NOTHING!
If you don't believe me then phone both ward 6 Councillors and get the facts about what was committed to in 2001. We pay a lot of taxes, much more than the average resident and we deserve the same facilities as the rest of the City. Forget about piddling away more money and subsidies on the downtown. Stop the free lunch. There are probably only about a dozen buildings there worth the title Heritage.
I stand by my comments - over the past forty years we have wasted hundreds of millions of dollars on the downtown - to what benefit?
It is time to focus on the rest of the City.

Harry