Government of Canada navigation bar

Primary site navigation bar

Breadcrumb

Universal Transit Passes in Canada

University of Victoria campus (courtesy University of Victoria)

Halifax, N.S. / London, Ont. / Victoria, B.C.

Summary

Organization

University of Victoria (in association with BC Transit).

University of Western Ontario (in association with London Transit Commission).

Saint Mary's University (in association with Metro Transit).

Status

Ongoing, started in 1998 (University of Western Ontario), 1999 (University of Victoria), 2003 (Saint Mary's University).

Overview

University of Victoria - The U-Pass was approved by student referendum and launched in 1999, and subsequently renewed in 2001. It gives unlimited access to all BC Transit services in the Victoria area to all undergraduate and graduate students taking at least one course, at a cost of $56 for a four-month pass in 2004 2005. The fee is supplemented by a subsidy from the university of $4 per student per semester, taken from parking revenues.

Program participants are identified by a magnetically encoded strip on their student photo identification cards. The program is mandatory, with very limited exceptions. It is administered by the University's Students' Society.

Results have included a drastic increase in campus transit ridership, with 51% of students taking the bus to school in 2003.

University of Western Ontario - The Bus Pass was approved by student referendum and launched in 1998, and subsequently re-approved in 2000. It gives unlimited access to all London Transit services to all full-time undergraduate students, at a cost of $103.75 for the eight month academic year in 2003-2004.

Program participants are identified by a Bus Pass card printed with their student number that they must show with their student photo identification card. The program is mandatory, with very limited exceptions. It is administered by the University Students' Council.

Results have included a 50% increase in campus transit ridership over the first year of the program. A similar program is also offered to graduate students.

Saint Mary's University - The U-Pass was approved by student referendum and launched in 2003. It gives unlimited access to all Metro Transit services in the Halifax area to all full-time undergraduate students, at a cost of $110 for the eight-month academic year in 2003-2004.

Program participants are identified by a sticker on their student photo identification card, although a separate U-Pass photo card will be issued in 2004-2005. The program is mandatory with very limited exceptions. It is administered by the Saint Mary's University Student Association.

Results have included an approximate doubling of campus transit ridership.

Contacts

Sarah Webb
Interim Sustainability Coordinator, University of Victoria
Telephone: (250) 472-5011
Email: sarahwebb@fmgt.uvic.ca

Chris Foord
Marketing and Communications Manager, BC Transit
Telephone: (290) 995-5612
Email: chris_foord@bctransit.com

Steve Allen
Student Services Manager, University Students' Council
University of Western Ontario
Telephone: (519) 661-2111 ext. 82600
Email: sallen2@uwo.ca

John Ford
Director of Transportation & Planning
London Transit Commission
Telephone: (519) 451-1340 ext.317
Email: jford@londontransit.ca

Halifax, N.S.
Vice-President, Internal Affairs
Saint Mary's University Students' Association
Telephone: (902) 496-8709
Email: vpinternal.smusa@smu.ca

Kenny Silver
Manager, Planning and Development
Metro Transit
Telephone: (902) 490-6689
Email: silverk@region.halifax.ns.ca

Resources

Information on other U-Pass programs:

Introduction

The challenges of campus transportation

At a time of increasing financial pressures and heightened competition among institutions, many Canadian universities and colleges are also tackling a new and difficult question: How to make campuses, and campus life, more sustainable? Canada's cities and the nation as a whole face a similar challenge. And at all levels-from campus to country-our travel choices will play a key role in determining how sustainable our future will be.

Indeed, campus transportation is an emerging issue throughout North America. Although the nature of campuses varies widely-from old to new, from downtown to the suburbs, from compact to low density-the challenges are remarkably similar:

Expanding enrolments stress the capacity of older buildings, and add new passengers and vehicles to roads and intersections, parking lots and transit services on and around campus.
The drive to erect new, state-of-the-art facilities is causing administrations to examine how their lands are used, and in many instances to replace parking lots-space for cars-with buildings for teaching and research-space for people.
A growing level of auto ownership in society and among youth gives many students the choice of driving to school, an option that simply didn't exist for many students when their campuses were originally planned and built.

In short, the pressure to deliver quality education with finite resources is competing with the pressure to house more people, more of whom would like to bring their cars with them. The solution that appears obvious to some people-building more parking lots-is frequently impossible due to lack of space and/or lack of funds. Parking lots take a lot of room, are deceptively expensive to build, and the revenues they generate rarely make up for their initial cost. The solution that many campuses are turning to-and the one that best supports the goal of financial, social and environmental sustainability-is public transit.

Canadian campuses are inevitably major hubs for public transit demands and services within their communities. Universities and colleges house thousands of people with active lives and irregular schedules, and whose financial priorities place tuition, books, rent and food ahead of getting around. Canadian transit systems have responded to this reality by supporting the travel needs of university students. Particularly in smaller cities, students are a major transit market.

But, as with virtually all transit markets, the cost of serving students exceeds the revenues they bring. Improving transit service for students, while a desirable goal, is often beyond the means of transit systems and the communities that run them. Over the last two decades, huge decreases in provincial and federal transit funding have been accompanied by growing budget pressures on local governments. Service cuts and fare increases are now the unfortunate rule, rather than the exception. Canada's public transit systems, like its universities and colleges, are under great strain.

The U-Pass response

In response to these challenges, the transit industry is looking for new ways of doing business. And low-cost strategies that attract new riders, without abandoning traditional markets, are the goal. One hot area of innovation is pricing-varying fares according to the needs and characteristics of different markets. To some extent, fare innovations have been helped by new technologies. Magnetically encoded cards and electronic “smart cards” make it viable to offer a wide range of customized fares without making life impossible for bus drivers who would otherwise have to monitor an impossible variety of tickets, tokens and cash payments.

Not surprisingly, Canada's post-secondary students-who have a great stake in the simultaneous challenges to both education and public transit-have shown creativity and initiative in coming up with a solution. More and more, they are proposing, negotiating and implementing a program known as the universal transit pass-or to some, the U-Pass. General awareness of U-Pass programs has been spreading for several years, helped along by the Internet and better communication among student councils and other campus groups.

In general, U-Passes are mandatory social programs similar to public health or pension plans-all students pay a fee that enables them to take transit at no added cost throughout the school year. U-Passes work only because they require all members of a student population to participate-hence the term “universal”. By redistributing the costs of providing campus transit services from a smaller group to a larger one, per-capita costs decline. While transit users stand to benefit the most, because their travel costs decline without requiring them to do anything differently, many other groups also benefit.

Dozens of North American colleges and universities (more than 60, by one count) have universal transit pass programs. In Canada, post-secondary institutions in 12 communities have them, including:

Calgary, Alta. - University of Calgary, Southern Alberta Institute of Technology, Bow Valley College, Nazarene University, Alberta College of Art and Design
Guelph, Ont. - University of Guelph
Halifax, N.S. - Saint Mary's University
Hamilton, Ont. - McMaster University
Kamloops, B.C. - University College of the Cariboo
Kingston, Ont. - Queen's University, St. Lawrence College
London, Ont. - University of Western Ontario, Fanshawe College
North Bay, Ont. - Nipissing University, Canadore College
Peterborough, Ont. - Trent University
St. Catharines, Ont. - Brock University
Vancouver, B.C. - University of British Columbia, Simon Fraser University
Victoria, B.C. - University of Victoria, Camosun College

While some of these programs have been in place for several decades, in most instances they are recent responses to current challenges. This case study takes a closer look at three representative examples-the University of Victoria, the University of Western Ontario, and Saint Mary's University-to see how they work, how they got up and running, what challenges were overcome, and what other campuses can learn from the experience.

Summary of Key Findings

U-Pass benefits

U-Pass programs at the three institutions examined in this case study have proven to be win-win-win-win programs. That is, they have had positive impacts on four key groups-students, the university community, the transit system, and the community at large. Many of the major anticipated or observed benefits are shared among different institutions, as summarized in the following points (note that V = Victoria, L = London, H = Halifax).

Student benefits

Creation of a low-cost student transportation option-between $13 and $14 a month compared to regular transit passes at $51 to $64 a month [V, L, H]
New transit revenues can fund improved services meeting the specific needs of post-secondary students [V, L, H]
Improved student mobility, indicated by the growth in campus ridership after U-Pass implementation:
An increase from 31% to 51% in the proportion of students taking transit [V]
A first-year boost in campus ridership of about 50%, and a three-year increase in city-wide transit use of 20% [L]
An increase in average student transit use from 7 to 14 trips a month [H]
A simple and convenient way for occasional transit users, such as students in residence, to run errands or explore the city they live in [V, H]
Offers a safe and reliable travel choice for those who consume alcohol [V, H]
Improves low-cost housing options by making it easier to live further from campus [L, H]

University community benefits

Support for overall campus objectives to reduce auto travel and air pollution [V, L]
Fewer parking permits sold, or a shorter waiting list to buy a permit [V, L, H]
Campus lands can be used for new buildings or greenspace instead of parking [V]

Transit system benefits

Utilization of mid-day and evening routes increases [V]
Transit unions pleased by the need for new drivers to improve service [V]
Ridership increase provided inertia to upgrade the bus fleet [L]
Fewer complaints about empty buses in operation [L]
Improved transit system profile among the public and area politicians [L]
More students may continue to use transit after graduation [L]
Wider community benefits
Lower traffic volumes and air emissions [V, L, H]
Improved transit services offer better mobility for non-students [V, L]
Less illegal parking in residential areas around campus [V]

U-Pass challenges

The three examples presented in this case study show that U-Pass implementation is not easy. When compared to the benefits of U-Pass programs, the challenges are more variable and harder to foresee.

The main implementation challenges documented in this case study lie in several areas: contract negotiations, program management, getting students on board, getting the university administration on board, getting the transit system on board, winning a referendum, and developing new transit services to meet growing demands. Challenges observed at the three studied institutions are summarized in the following points (note that V = Victoria, L = London, H = Halifax).

Negotiating a contract

Developing the details of a three-way financial partnership, when the students and transit system are joined by the administration at the negotiating table [V]
Developing a clear and mutual understanding of the term “revenue neutral” as a basis for negotiating U-Pass fees and new transit services to be funded [H]

Managing the program

Working out the details-who does what to keep the program running, what the pass looks like, how to distribute it [V, L]
Deciding on a fair and consistent basis who to exempt from the U-Pass program, on a voluntary basis [V, H]
Managing the substantial time commitment from the student association in the first year [H]

Getting students on board

Building support among students who are not regular transit users [V]
Building support for a new program that increases student fees [V]
Assuring students that the U-Pass fee is fair to them, and is not simply a “cash grab” by the transit operators [L]
Maintaining support within the student government when elected officials change every year [H]

Getting the administration on board

Assuring the university administration that current and potential students will not be discouraged by the increase in fees [L]

Getting the transit system on board

Overcoming initial reluctance of the transit system to introduce a new fare program [L]
Addressing transit system concerns about recovering sufficient revenue to pay for required new services [L]

Holding a referendum

While conducting the referendum at the same time as student elections is needed to maximize turnout, the opportunity comes only once a year and timing is not flexible [V]
The need to follow a successful referendum with administrative approval reduced the effective amount of time available to resolve program details before September [L]

Transit operations

Transit system's ability (in terms of available staff and fleet) to carry unexpectedly high volumes during midday periods and evenings as well as rush hours [V, L, H]
A decline in service levels after initial implementation, due to cuts in government funding for transit, created resentment among students [V]
Difficult for students to stay on top of transit service and ridership changes, thus remaining comfortable with value received for U-Pass fee [H]

Lessons Learned

This section summarizes some of the valuable wisdom offered by U-Pass program participants, representing both student and transit perspectives (note that V = Victoria, L = London, H = Halifax).

Overall

The U-Pass works for students because it's affordable, simple, convenient, environmentally sound and sustainable. [V]
The U-Pass is a win-win situation that benefits both students and the transit system. [L]
The U-Pass requires a leap of faith and it can be hard to get the program started-but once it's running, everyone sees the benefits. [L]
While some students will always resist higher fees, most will quickly adapt and recognize its excellent value. [L]
The program is more successful than expected, and collaboration has been the key. [L]
The U-Pass positively reinforces transit's role in the community. [L]
An increase in campus ridership of up to 50% or more is likely. [V, L, H]
The process of putting the U-Pass in place can improve relations between the student council and the transit system. [L]
It is important to have a good steering committee guiding the U-Pass implementation. [V]
Launching the U-Pass concurrently at more than one school could make program development efforts more efficient on a per-student basis. [H]
Putting the U-Pass in place will take no less than one year but probably about two years. [H]

Building support

Be prepared for opposition. [V]
It is important to have a team of committed and well-informed students to help build support among other students. [V]
The program must market itself to non-transit users, so that car drivers feel they benefit too. [V]
Getting support from both the student society and the university administration is critical. [V]
While the university administration was worried about increasing student fees, solid statistical research complemented the positive referendum results in helping to demonstrate high levels of student support. [L]
Campus and community media were crucial to building support during the referendum campaign, and students made natural and effective media spokespeople. Don't underestimate the benefits of using local media to spread your message. [V]
The referendum campaign should promote the “big picture” and various benefits of the U-Pass, rather than just debating the issue of some students not directly benefiting from the pass. Point out the many other programs that have mandatory fees even though not everyone benefits directly. [L]Referendum
Time the referendum to happen at the same time as student elections-it guarantees that candidates will stake a position, the issue will be debated, and voter turnout will be reasonable. [V]
Having the student council be non-committal, or at least fund “Yes” and “No” campaigns equally, can help to provide some neutrality. [L]
The referendum question phrasing is critical to make the U-Pass program efficient. The question should avoid specifying a precise cost and requiring a new referendum for each annual fee increase. It's a better idea to index the U-Pass fee to inflation or some local indicator like the price of a regular adult monthly transit pass. [V]

Contract

It is never too early to start discussing the terms of the U-Pass contract. Ideally, key issues should be worked out before the referendum. Allow time to research other existing U-Pass agreements. [H]
Having good negotiators on all sides, as well as the assistance of a neutral facilitator, can make the process more efficient and the final contract more transparent. [H]
Where the U-Pass fee is directly linked to ridership, revenues and costs for campus transit services, the contract should define those figures and identify how they are to be assessed in future. However, this can be quite a challenge and some other mechanism for setting the U-Pass fee should be considered. [H]
Establish a clear mutual understanding that the U-Pass fee is not negotiable once it has been set. [H]
Take care to estimate future enrollment accurately, to ensure adequate transit service. [H]
Even if the university administration is not directly involved in funding the program, involving them in the negotiations will make it easier to initiate future discussions about a possible U-Pass subsidy. [H]Program design and management
It's important to examine technical details, such as whether technologies that can be used with the existing student card will work with the farebox system. [V]
A unique U-Pass card showing the user's student number can be used for access to other student programs, but all programs using the card must have the same eligible target audience. [L]
It is easier to make the rules for U-Pass exemptions the same as for other student fees, as much as possible. [V]
The inability of students to opt out of the U-Pass program must be made very clear, particularly to students who live out of the transit service area. [H]
The student association and transit system need to create an ongoing forum for discussion of transit service issues. [V]
Understanding how transit systems are funded can help students to avoid worrying that transit is “making a profit”, and to appreciate that future transit service levels cannot be guaranteed. Students can help by working with their transit operator to lobby for better government funding. [V]
While changeover within any student group is inevitable, student councils should strive for some kind of continuity to avoid each new executive wanting to re-examine issues that have already been settled. [H]

Example: University of Victoria

Community and institutional context

BC Transit double-decker bus (courtesy BC Transit)
BC Transit double-decker bus
(courtesy BC Transit)

Victoria. With a metropolitan area population of 300,000, Victoria is the capital of British Columbia. The community lies at the southern tip of Vancouver Island, and enjoys one of Canada's mildest climates. The economy of the Victoria area is supported by strong tourism, public administration, defense and retail sectors, and has a growing advanced-technology sector.

Victoria residents are strong users of sustainable transportation modes. They boast a rate of car commuting that is among the lowest in Canada, with 10% of commuters taking transit to work, 10% walking and 5% cycling.

The Victoria Regional Transit System is operated by BC Transit, a provincial agency. In 2002 it carried about 22 million passengers with a fleet of almost 180 buses, including the first low-floor double-decker buses in regular service in North America. The adult transit fare is $2.00 cash, a $1.75 ticket, or a $60 monthly pass.

University of Victoria. The self-contained campus of the University of Victoria (UVic) is located centrally, but several kilometres outside the downtown core. The institution's 2003-2004 enrolment included 16,000 undergraduate and 2,400 graduate students, 33% of whom attend part-time, and 72% of whom come from outside the Victoria area. The number of full-time equivalent students is about 13,500, and the number of employees is 4,300. In September 2004 there will be almost 2,200 student residence spaces, plus 180 family housing units.

University of Victoria campus (courtesy University of Victoria)
University of Victoria
campus (courtesy
University of Victoria)

Over the last 10 years, the University's enrolment has grown an average of 2% per year. With this growth has come increased pressure on internal and surrounding road networks, and on campus parking facilities. The current parking supply of about 4,500 spaces is adequate, but will drop by 33 spaces in 2004-05 as a new building is erected on a former surface lot. The university recognizes that negative transportation impacts on the campus and the surrounding community can only be avoided through transportation demand management strategies that foster the use of public transit, cycling and walking. Accordingly, parking costs rose by 90% over the period from 1993 to 2002. A parking permit now costs about $155 yearly, $90 per semester, $30 monthly or $5 daily, and will cost 15% more in 2004-2005.

Transit service to the campus includes four all-day transit routes and four routes that run during weekday peak periods. About 16 buses arrive during the morning rush hour, and about 12 buses depart during the afternoon rush hour.

Rationale and objectives

The development of a universal transit pass program for UVic students represented a win-win-win scenario for the main involved parties.

On campus, the university administration appreciated the benefits of such a measure from a growth management perspective (as discussed in the previous section). The student association and many student groups sought to create an affordable, flexible transportation option for all students, but also cited the benefits of reduced traffic-less pollution, safer streets, reduced drinking and driving. The protection of greenspace by avoiding the need to build new parking lots was also a significant issue.

BC Transit supported efforts to increase transit use by students in order to increase ridership in a cost-effective manner. Improving service to attract new riders is a relatively expensive strategy, compared to a revenue-neutral measure that simply makes transit more affordable to all students. While the initiative would improve the utilization of existing services at little extra cost (particularly in mid-day, evening and weekend periods), some new services could be added that would benefit the entire community. Based on experience elsewhere, BC Transit planners forecast that the U-Pass would increase student transit ridership by 15% to 50%.

Actions: Planning

There were four main stages in the development of the U-Pass program that preceded its implementation.

Survey. In the fall of 1998, a survey was conducted of students enrolled at UVic and Camosun College (Victoria's community college, with one campus not far from the university and another in a western suburb). The survey was not preceded by extensive promotion, and sought to establish a baseline of student travel choices and attitudes. It asked 600 UVic undergrads, 125 UVic graduate students and 250 Camosun College students about their primary and secondary commuting modes and distance travelled, their attitude toward a universal bus pass, the price (if any) they were willing to pay for it, and whether they would use it if introduced. Key results included:

Among undergraduates-54% for the idea, 41% against it
Among graduate students-70% for the idea, 25% against it
Among undergraduates who usually drove to campus-36% for the idea, 50% against it
Support was greatest among transit users, and declined among cyclists, pedestrians and car drivers

Negotiation. Following the survey, negotiations among student groups, the university administration and BC Transit established the key terms of a proposed U-Pass agreement. The key principles of mandatory participation (with some exceptions) and transit revenue neutrality were quickly agreed upon. The determination of a fair pricing scheme (initially estimated to be around $43) was based on the following considerations:

The estimated annual transit revenue from Victoria-area post-secondary students was $2.4 million, with $1.5 million from monthly transit pass sales and $0.9 million from ticket and cash fares
The total number of post-secondary students served by transit was 24,400
U-Pass revenue had to total close to the $2.4 million figure, with the expectation that some added revenue would arise from students who occasionally forget their pass or who are among the few to be exempted from the program.
UVic administration would contribute about $170,000 annually ($4 per semester per student) and Camosun College would contribute $60K, both from campus parking revenues

To better illustrate the benefits of a U-Pass to students, BC Transit identified the several service improvements it was willing to make. These included more buses on campus routes, extension of service heading downtown after midnight, new weekend services to the BC Ferry terminal and a new cross-town route linking two Camosun College campuses.

Awareness building. Leading toward an eventual student referendum on the issue, U-Pass supporters generated significant attention and support from both campus and community newspapers, and local television stations. Local mayors, Councils, provincial MLAs and local community associations all endorsed the idea, citing reduced emissions, improved road safety, and lighter on-street parking demands. The “Yes” side campaigned with a long list of U-Pass benefits including those discussed under Rationale and Objectives (above). Other positive points included:

The prospect of easier and less costly campus parking for those who continue to drive
The convenience to occasional transit users who make trips to downtown on weekends
The ease of using a student pass for occasional trips rather than cash or tickets
The ability of cyclists to take transit in bad weather, at no cash cost
The ability of students enjoying themselves at pubs to get home by transit rather than driving

Regular transit users (about 25% of the student population), and other students who thought they might become regular transit users, were key supporters of the proposal. Those resisting the U-Pass proposal included:

Students who would continue to drive and thus felt they would receive little benefit
Pedestrians who felt they would not get good value for their money
Students in residence who saw limited utility in having a transit pass
Cyclists who felt transit, while less polluting than car travel, still polluted and should not be promoted ahead of walking and cycling
Individuals who felt, in principle, that the program should not be mandatory

Referendum. A referendum of members was required to enable the undergraduate and graduate student associations to enter a contract with BC Transit. The vote was scheduled to coincide with the student elections, to maximize both discussion by candidates and turnout by voters. The results of the referendum included 68% support among UVic undergraduates, 69% support among UVic graduate students, and 59% support among Camosun College students.

Actions: Implementation

This section describes key aspects of the UVic U-Pass.

Eligibility. The U-Pass is valid for unlimited access to BC Transit services in greater Victoria during a given semester (September 1 through December 31, January 1 through April 30, May 1 through August 31). It is mandatory for all students registered in at least one credit course, meaning all full-time and part-time undergraduate and graduate students. Students not required to pay the U-Pass fee include those registered only in distance education programs, those who receive transit passes from a social service program for low-income persons, those whose mobility disabilities prevent them from using BC Transit or handyDART paratransit services, and others in exceptional circumstances as approved by a U-Pass Appeals Committee. Co-op students on a work term in the Victoria area may voluntarily join the program.

Card. The U-Pass program uses the UVic student photo identification card that students already use to access campus libraries and recreational facilities. Initially, the U-Pass was validated using a foil decal on front that changed color each term. In 2002, BC Transit changed its fare collection system and monthly pass users started to swipe their pass cards as they entered buses (a beep indicates to the driver that each pass is valid). This change in technology enabled the U-Pass program to make use of the magnetic strip on the reverse of the student card, which minimized the chance of fraudulent use and eliminated the need for bus drivers to check each passenger's picture and card expiry date.

Registration. Returning UVic students have the magnetic strip on their student identification cards encoded at the campus Photo ID center. New students automatically receive an activated card. The electronic nature of the on board fare collection simplifies pass management- lost cards are automatically cancelled, and students withdrawing from all courses are reported to BC Transit and their card becomes invalid.

Fees. Upon its initiation in 1999, the U-Pass reduced the monthly cost of transit pass for UVic students from $36 to $11 dollars (i.e. a $44 fee spread over four months). In 2004-2005, UVic students will pay a U-Pass fee of $56 a semester. The fee is set at the beginning of each academic year, and is now indexed to be $4 below the cost of a BC Transit adult monthly pass as of the previous 1 July. This provision was included in the 2001 U-Pass renewal referendum to minimize the need for another referendum every time the fee changed. The University collects U-Pass fees from students when they register for classes at the start of each semester.

Remittances. UVic remits U-Pass fees paid by undergraduate and graduate students to the UVic Students' Society, accompanied by its own contribution of $4 per student per semester, in six yearly installments. The student society, in turn, remits U-Pass fees and the university's subsidy to BC Transit in eight yearly installments, accompanied by a reconciliation statement that identifies the number of students registered and exempted and the associated fees collected. The society retains 1% of U-Pass fees as a commission to cover the costs of program administration.

Service improvements. BC Transit has made several service improvements enabled through U-Pass fees:

The addition of buses to campus routes in morning and afternoon peak hours
A 45-minute service extension (to 12:30 a.m.) of evening routes leaving UVic for downtown
The addition of afternoon and evening service on Fridays and Sundays between the campus and the BC Ferry terminal, used by students heading to the British Columbia mainland for the weekend
A new cross-town route connecting the two Camosun College campuses

By 2003, the number of buses serving the UVic campus on three key routes had increased by about 15% over pre U-Pass levels. The actual passenger capacity on these routes increased even more, due to the high proportion of double-decker buses put into service on these routes starting in 1999.

Promotion. The UVic Students' Society is largely responsible for promoting the U-Pass program on campus. Early in the year, particularly during the university's Welcome Week, a blitz is held (using an information booth, inclusion in orientation guides, and so on) to clarify U-Pass benefits and requirements. The U-Pass is also touted as an advantage of attending UVic when undergraduate representatives make presentations to potential students at local high schools.

Ongoing planning. Representatives of U-Pass partners (BC Transit, UVic, the UVic Students' Society and the Graduate Students' Society) meet at least once yearly to review transit service issues and the program's status with regard to financial and administrative matters. Meetings with BC Transit route planners are held several times each year to fine-tune service schedules with course dates and the timing of holidays and exam periods. BC Transit drivers and operations staff also regularly report on street level service issues that may require adjustments.

Monitoring. BC Transit continuously collects passenger count data as part of regular operations. As part of its ongoing campus growth management, the University conducts comprehensive traffic counts every four years that enable it to quantify overall use of walking, cycling, transit and car travel by students and staff.

Renewal. The U-Pass program's initial two-year implementation period ended in 2001. A referendum in March of that year asked students whether they were in favour of maintaining the program and indexing the semester-based U-Pass fee to $4 below the cost of a regular adult monthly pass. The referendum questions received support from 83% of student voters, an increase over the roughly 70% who voted for the U-Pass in 1999. The renewed U-Pass contract, signed by BC Transit, UVic Students Society, UVic Graduate Students' Society, and UVic administration, will remain in force continuously until one of the parties decides to withdraw (requiring eight months' notice).

Results

The introduction of the U-Pass for post-secondary students in the Victoria area led to a drastic increase in student transit ridership. In 1997-1998, before the U-Pass, post-secondary students represented 13% of Victoria transit ridership, but by 1999-2000 that number had increased to 24%.

At UVic, the proportion of students holding transit passes increased overnight from 17% to virtually 100%. As a result, the 31% of students who took transit to and from the campus in 1998 increased to 44% in 2000, 47% in 2001 and 51% in 2003. At the same time, the rate of car drivers dropped from 20% to 19%, car passengers dropped from 22% to 13%, and pedestrians dropped from 20% to 13%.

The following chart shows that the U-Pass also had a significant impact on overall campus travel patterns.

Travel mode of staff and students	Share of travel to/from campus in peak hours
Travel mode of staff and students	1996 (before U-Pass)	2000 (after U-Pass)
Car driver	57.6%	54.4%
Car passenger	15.7%	11.0%
Transit	11.1%	17.8%
Cycling	6.9%	5.5%
Walking	8.7%	11.3%

Other notable results of U-Pass introduction include:

Student ridership on three key BC Transit routes serving the UVic campus increased by 28% to 48% from pre U-Pass levels to 2003.
The number of parking permits sold by the university in the fall of 2000 dropped by 12% from the previous year.
Local parking enforcement officers reported a significant reduction in illegal parking in the residential areas around campus.
Student groups noted that the U-Pass helped to combat drinking and driving, reduced traffic and parking demands, made parking easier for those who continued to drive, protected campus greenspace from replacement by parking lots, and added convenience for occasional transit users such as students in residence who traveled downtown on weekends.
Local politicians were happy to have a transit success story.
Transit unions were pleased by the increase in drivers needed to improve service.

Participants

Student groups. The responsibilities of the UVic Students' Society (which also acts as an agent for the Graduate Students' Society) have included:

Initial work on research, student surveys and negotiations that led to a firm U-Pass proposal
Awareness and coalition building that led to a successful referendum
Ongoing administration of eligibility (protocol and appeals for opting in or out of the program) and remittances
Ongoing promotion through posters, pamphlets, booths and open forums to build and maintain student awareness

Other campus groups (notably those involved with sustainability and environmental issues) played an important role in the two successful U-Pass referenda.

University administration. Key roles of the administration (notably the office of the Vice-President of Finance and Operations) have included collecting and remitting student fees, contributing its own subsidy from parking revenues, and encoding student cards for use on-board buses.

BC Transit. Several departments were involved (e.g. planning, operations, finance) in negotiating the U-Pass terms and conditions, and in committing to and delivering the service improvements needed to meet growing demands.

Media. BC Transit and student representatives both emphasize that positive media coverage served as inexpensive marketing, and was essential to the success of the initial U-Pass referendum. Editorial press in local papers built community exposure and reached the parents of students.