Transportation

Desired Future

Rossland’s transportation system offers affordable, reliable, safe, accessible, frequent, green, and efficient means of moving within Rossland and to and from Rossland. The community’s livability is enhanced by an extensive local and regional trail network that supports non-motorized vehicles. Land use planning connects housing with services through trails and transit, thereby reducing automobile dependency. Rossland’s downtown core is accessible, pedestrian-friendly and linked to the resorts by a high quality public, equitably funded transit connection. The community encourages and supports low-impact environmentally-friendly transportation choices, thereby conserving the natural environment and increasing Rossland’s tourism appeal.

End-State Goals

End-state Goal 1: A networked system of trails for walking, hiking, biking and skiing connects Rossland and serves to decrease traffic and congestion, and to improve year-round tourism appeal.

End-state Goal 2: The historic downtown is accessible and pedestrian friendly.

End-state Goal 3: There is a ‘sense of arrival’ at key entrances / gateways to Rossland and the downtown core.

End-state Goal 4: Public transit within and around Rossland is affordable, accessible, reliable, frequent, safe, comfortable and ‘green’. A high-quality connection links downtown with the resorts. Private vehicle dependence is minimized.

End-state Goal 5: Transportation systems utilize renewable energy sources and have minimal impact on air quality.    

End-state Goal 6: Traffic patterns that are the least hazardous to pedestrians and others are established and enforced

 

Journey-To-Work Mode (T-1)

Journey-to-work mode represented as proportions of the
employed labour force in Rossland according to 2006 Census

What are we measuring?

Proportion of residents who commute to work by car, bike, bus, on foot, etc.

Why are we measuring it?

This indicator reflects Rossland residents’ preferred transportation modes and provides insight into the level of dependency on privately owned vehicles. This indicator partially reflects movement towards End-state Goal #4, which sets a goal of minimizing dependence on private vehicles.

How are we doing?

At present, Rossland has only baseline data for this indicator. In future iterations of this report, we will be able to report trends in this indicator as a baseline has been established. In 2006, over 83% of Rossland residents drove a motor vehicle to work. This is well above the provincial average of 72% and is probably because only a small number of Rossland commuters (1%) use public transit. In contrast, 10% of Provincial commuters use public transit.  Rossland’s limited number of public transit users is likely strongly influenced by the limited public transit services available in Rossland, despite the efforts of City Council to work with BC Transit to improve Rossland’s transportation options.

Without the necessary data to report trends, it is not possible to say if Rossland is moving toward its Vision for 2030. However, based on the relatively low numbers of people commuting via means other than the single occupancy vehicle, it appears that Rossland is a long way from achieving its goal of minimizing impacts on air quality and having a functional transit system that meets residents’ needs.

Journey-to-work mode in 2006 represented as proportions of the employed labour force in Rossland and BC

Mode of Transportation

Rossland

BC

Car, truck, van, as driver

83%

72%

Car, truck, van, as passenger

5%

8%

Public transit

1%

10%

Walked or bicycled

10%

9%

All other modes

<1%

1%

Data Sources  

Statistics Canada
 

Transit Ridership (T-2)

What are we measuring?

Total and per capita annual ridership

Why are we measuring it?

Improving transit service with the intention of reducing single occupancy vehicles is consistent with End-state Goal #4 which states that: “Public transit within and around Rossland is affordable, accessible, reliable, frequent, safe, comfortable and ‘green.’  A high-quality connection links downtown with the resorts.  Private vehicle dependence is minimized.”  Transit ridership provides a behavior-based indicator of Rossland’s transit use.  While it does not indicate the achievement of End-state Goal #4 directly, in the sense that it does not provide data on the quality of public transit in Rossland, it does provide some indication of how well subscribed current transit services are.

How are we doing?

Although BC Transit does monitor ridership, at the time of this report, they were unable to provide data.  In future iterations, we aim to incorporate this indicator. However, it is worth noting that according to the 2006 Census, only 1% of Rossland residents commuted to work by bus. Provincially, 10% of residents commute to work by bus (see figures in Journey-to-Work Mode T-1).  

Data Sources

BC Transit

This indicator will be reported on as soon as information comes available from BC Transit.
 

Length and Location of Trails (T-3) (Repeat of RL-1)

Inventory of maintained trails by
surface type and activity

Why are we measuring it?

Rossland’s trail network has been identified as playing an integral role in Rossland residents’ quality of life and local economic development. End-state Goal #1 states that:  “A networked system of trails for walking, hiking, biking and skiing connects Rossland and serves to decrease traffic and congestion, and to improve year-round tourism appeal.”  This indicator measures Rossland’s progress toward End-state Goal #1. This indicator is a repeat of an indicator in Recreation and Leisure (RL-1) as it also relates directly to the End-state Goals for that Focus Area.

How are we doing?

Rossland currently has only baseline data for this indicator. In future iterations of this report, we will be able to report trends in this indicator as a baseline has been established. There are a total of 33.88 km of trails within the City limits. These trails are maintained by both the City of Rossland and the Kootenay Columbia Trails Society (KCTS). The majority of these trails are KCTS trails.  However in 2009 and 2010 the City constructed three new trails - Centre Star Gulch, Little Nugget (also known as Museum Trail) and Louie Joe (also known as Trail Creek Trail) bringing the total of City owned trails to 2.1 km. All of these trails are designated for multi-purpose, non motorized use and are unpaved.  The total length of KCTS trails outside the City boundary is 74.59 km.  Thus the total length of trails in the Rossland area (KCTS and City owned) is 108.47 km.

Without the necessary data to report trends, it is not possible to say if Rossland is moving toward its Vision for 2030. However the City has recently completed an Active Transport Plan that identifies opportunities to improve Rossland’s active transport infrastructure including paths and trails. The plan lists 45 trails within the city limits that could be developed.  This indicator will help to track the implementation of this plan. The City has also been working with KCTS to inventory local trails.

 

Length of trails in and around Rossland

Type of Trail

Length

KCTS trails completely within City bound    ary

13.55 km

Portions of KCTS trails within City boundary        

18.23 km

City owned trails within the City boundary

2.1 km

Total trails within City boundary

33.88 km    

KCTS trails in Rossland area outside City boundary

74.59 km

Total KCTS trails in Rossland area (inside and outside of City boundary)

106.37 km

TOTAL trails in Rossland area (inside and outside City boundary)

108.47 km

download map PDF

Data Sources  

The City of Rossland
 

Satisfaction with Downtown Pedestrian and Transit Accessibility by Season and Age Group (T-4)

 Satisfaction with downtown pedestrian accessibility by age group in winter 2011

 

What are we measuring?

Community members’ level of satisfaction with the accessibility of the downtown core

Why are we measuring it?

This indicator reflects in part the achievement of End-state Goal #6, which sets the goal of establishing and enforcing traffic patterns that are the least hazardous to pedestrians and others and End-state Goal #4 which focuses on ensuring public transit is affordable, accessible, reliable, frequent, comfortable and green and private vehicle dependence is minimized.

How are we doing?

Satisfaction with downtown pedestrian accessibility is fairly high, ranging from 65% of respondents indicating that they are very satisfied or somewhat satisfied with pedestrian accessibility in the winter to 78% of respondents indicating that they are very satisfied or somewhat satisfied with pedestrian accessibility in the summer.  Respondents indicating that they are very satisfied with pedestrian accessibility ranged from 35% in the winter to 50% in the summer, suggesting that improvements can be made to pedestrian accessibility.

Common themes in the comments suggest that satisfaction in the winter drops slightly due to snow and ice concerns and in the spring due to inaccessibility of trails and the amount of dog excrement on streets.  Dissatisfaction with pedestrian accessibility in the summer and fall seems largely related to the lack of sidewalks on main streets such as St. Paul Street and Le Roi Avenue.

Satisfaction with pedestrian accessibility was fairly stable across age groups but was lowest for those 65 and up and those 35 to 44 in all four seasons, dropping to 61% and 60% in these two age groups in the winter.

Satisfaction with downtown transit accessibility was fairly moderate with most respondents indicating that they are neither satisfied nor dissatisfied in all seasons –  ranging from 38% of respondents in winter to 43% in the summer.  Less than 50% of respondents expressed satisfaction with downtown transit accessibility in any season.  A common theme among respondents was that they do not use transit. 

Overall satisfaction with downtown transit accessibility in all seasons was highest for those age 65 and up and lowest for those aged 35 to 44, ranging from 51% for those 65 and up to 28% for those 35 to 44 in the winter.  However, those 65 and up were more likely to report that they were somewhat satisfied with the downtown transit accessibility rather than very satisfied.

This is baseline data.  In future iterations of the State of Rossland report in which a survey is undertaken we should be able to report on trends for this indicator.

Data Sources  

State of Rossland Survey