2024 Transit Accessibility Engagement

A decorative image showing a diverse group of people including some with disabilities waiting to board a Kingston Transit Bus.

Each year Kingston Transit engages with residents and customers to improve the the accessibility of its services. This information is used to plan and deploy improvements. Our goal is to build a conventional transit service that is accessible to our customers. We acknowledge that barriers exist in accessing our service and this process helps us to prioritize barriers that need to be redressed.

A decorative image showing a diverse group of people including some with disabilities waiting to board a Kingston Transit Bus.

Each year Kingston Transit engages with residents and customers to improve the the accessibility of its services. This information is used to plan and deploy improvements. Our goal is to build a conventional transit service that is accessible to our customers. We acknowledge that barriers exist in accessing our service and this process helps us to prioritize barriers that need to be redressed.

  • What we heard

    Why we engaged

    Kingston Transit is committed to continuously improving its service including accessibility for people with disabilities. Under the Accessibility for Ontarians with Disabilities Act (AODA), transit systems in Ontario are required to consult about accessibility. Kingston Transit uses the feedback from this annual consultation to inform on developments and future planning for the transit system.

    How we engaged

    An online survey was made available on the City’s Get Involved platform and Kingston Transit staff were available during two open houses in December 2024 to answer questions and hear feedback.

    Who we heard from

    • 102 engaged participants completed the survey
    • 819 aware participants visited the project page to learn more about the Transit Accessibility Engagement
    • 25 participants engaged with the City for the first time via Get Involved Kingston

    What we heard

    Feedback received across all sources indicated that while Kingston Transit is generally accessible to people with disabilities and has made improvements over the years, more work could be done in some key areas. Generally, areas for improvement include:

    • A focus on improving the accuracy of online tools like apps and trip planners;
    • Renewed focus on customer service and driver training related to accessibility;
    • Addressing limited space for mobility devices;
    • Improvements with route and system information sharing;
    • Improvements at transit stops;
    • Better maintenance; and
    • More affordable pass options and more payment options.


    A detailed breakdown of survey results is below.

    Question 1: Which trip planning tools do you use? Select all that apply.

    A graphic that shows that the largest share of responses reported using Google Maps (37%), followed closely by Transit App users (30%), then Kingston Transit’s website (22%). Only 9% reported using printed maps and schedules and 2% indicated they used other tools, (two response indicated they used none of the above and two indicated they used transsee.ca).

    Question 2: How would you rate the accessibility of the Kingston Transit Website? Select one.

    Nearly half the responses (49) indicated Kingston Transit’s website was accessible, while 24 rated its accessibility negatively and 29 responses were neutral, either with no opinion or because they do not use it.

    Question 3: What methods do you use to connect with Kingston Transit Customer Service? Select all that apply.

    The majority of responses (61) indicated that they are able to connect with Kingston Transit through email. 29 said they use the phone. 20 people stated that they use the My Kingston website, while 17 indicated going in-person.

    Question 4: Is there anything you would like to add about accessibility of trip planning tools or customer service?

    Comments related to trip planning focused on the accuracy of bus arrival time, transit app issues, printed route information and route integration with other digital tools:

    • Accuracy of Bus Arrival Times (25%): Some users expressed frustration due to bus arrival times and GPS location updates being inaccurate
    • Transit App issues (20%): Technical issues with the Transit app were identified including inconsistent functionality, lack of real-time updates and general confusion. Some users weren’t aware of the Transit App, suggesting a need for better promotion.
    • Printed Route Information (15%): A significant number of comments requested the return of printed maps and schedules at bus shelters. Users found the recent changes to routes confusing and expressed a need for clear, accessible printed materials to help navigate the system.
    • Integration with other tools (5%): There were mixed reviews about the integration with Google Maps. While some users appreciated it, others found discrepancies between the app and the actual bus schedules, leading to longer wait times.


    Comments specific to service mentioned training, snow maintenance, payment options and the frequency of buses.

    • Customer service and driver training (15%): Some respondents noted issues with the attitude of some transit operators towards passengers with mobility issues, suggesting a need for better training for drivers to handle accessibility services.
    • Snow clearing and accessibility (10%) See summary below (question 14).
    • Payment and ticketing options (5%): See summary below (question 6).
    • Service hours and frequency (5%): A few comments mentioned the need for extended service hours (particularly late at night and on Sunday mornings) and more frequent buses during peak hours.

    Question 5: How would you rate the accessibility of the fare system?

    More than half the responses rated the accessibility of the fare system as positively, either good (47) or excellent (9). While nearly a quarter rated it negatively, either very poor (6) or poor (14). Approximately a quarter of responses with neutral with no opinion (25).

    Question 6: Is there anything you would like to add about accessibility of the fare system?

    Payment options

    • Contactless payment options (30%): Many respondents expressed a desire for contactless payment options (i.e. debit, credit and integration with digital wallets) to make it easier for occasional riders and those without cash.
    • Online and app-based payment (15%): Respondents appreciated the ability to refill passes online but suggested further improvements, such as an app (or integration with existing app) to manage transit cards and payments.
    • Cash and coin payments (10%): Some comments emphasized the importance of continuing to accept cash fare, particularly for riders who may not have access to digital payment methods.
    • Accessibility for Visually Impaired (5%): Some visually impaired respondents mentioned difficulties with the new fare boxes, such as locating where to tap their bus pass and seeing how many trips they have left. They appreciated drivers' assistance but suggested improvements to the system.

    Question 7: Are you typically able to find space available in the priority seating (mobility device) area of the bus?

    The largest share of responses (44) indicated that priority seating was not applicable to them. Of the remaining responses the majority indicated Yes they typically can find priority seating (24) with another 23 responses indicating they can sometimes find priority seating, while 11 responses indicated that they typically cannot find priority seating.

    Question 8: Do you think there is enough communication on the buses about who can use priority seating areas?

    The majority of responses (43) said the was enough communication about who can use the priority seating areas while 31 responses indicated there was not enough. 27 responses were unsure or had no opinion.

    Question 9: Thinking about the electronic displays inside the bus that provide audio and visual notice of different stops, which improvements would you like to see? Select all that apply.

    Additional information and more locations were the most popular options with 49 responses wanting more information to be shared on displays and 46 wanting displays in more locations. 30 responses indicated that turning up the volume on announcements would be helpful while 20 responses wanted brighter displays.

    “Other, please specify,” received 13 responses. The write in responses have been themed and summarized in the chart below:

    Theme

    Responses

    Fine as is

    2

    No opinion

    2

    Larger displays or better fonts

    3

    Better text to speech pronunciation

    2

    Consistent audio announcements for next stops

    2

    Audio announcement volume is too loud

    1

    Better announcements when a bus changes to a new route e.g. 502 to 4 downtown

    1


    Question 10: Thinking about the information that is shared on the exterior digital signs on the bus, called destination signs, which of these options would improve your experience? Select all that apply.
    The largest share of responses (44) wanted to see more information shared on exterior signs while less than half that amount (19) would prefer less information on the signs. The second largest share of responses (28) wanted to see the signs use a more accessible font and 22 responses wanted the sign to change less.

    Question 11: Is there anything else you would like to tell us about accessibility of the vehicles?

    Comments are categorized as follows: Driver/Passenger Behaviour, Physical Features and Other.

    Driver/Passenger Behaviour

    • Priority seating (25%): Many respondents mentioned issues with priority seating, noting that able-bodied passengers often occupy these seats, making it difficult for those with disabilities to find a place to sit. There were calls for drivers to enforce priority seating rules more strictly.
    • Driver behaviour and training (20%): Several comments highlighted concerns about driver behaviour (including not lowering the bus for those who need it and driving aggressively), suggesting better training to improve the overall accessibility and safety of the service.
    • Overcrowding and space for mobility devices (15%): Overcrowding on buses, especially during rush hours, was a common concern. This issue is exacerbated for passengers using wheelchairs or strollers, who sometimes have to wait for the next bus due to a lack of space.

    Physical Features

    • Physical accessibility features (15%): Respondents pointed out the need for more physical accessibility features, such as additional grab bars and straps for stability, and ensuring that the bus is lowered for those who need it. Some also mentioned the difficulty of standing on accessible vehicles due to a lack of stability aids.
    • Signage and information (10%): A portion of the comments focused on the need for better signage on buses. Suggestions included larger exterior signs, clearer audio announcements and displaying route numbers and destinations on all sides of the bus.
    • Printed route information (5%): A few comments emphasized the importance of having physical copies of routes and schedules available at transfer points and bus shelters (particularly important for those who do not have access to smartphones).

    Other

    • General satisfaction and comparisons (10%) Some respondents compared Kingston Transit favorably to transit systems in other cities, praising its overall performance. Areas for improvement noted were the need for more accessible buses and better enforcement of priority seating.

    Question 12: How do you get to your bus stop? Select all that apply.

    The vast majority of responses (99) indicated they either walk or use a mobility device to get to bus stop, and additional 7 responses indicated they use active travel like cycling. Vehicle uses included 10 responses who indicated they use a private vehicle and another 2 that take taxis or rideshares. One response in the other category said they used the help of a support person.

    Question 13: Please prioritize the following transit stop amenities from 1 to 9 with 1 being the most is most important for you and 9 being the least.

    Overall the average value for all responses showed they were all clustered between 3 and 6 suggesting in general all options would be valued. The average ranking break down is below

    Amenities

    Average value

    Shelter

    3.29

    Stop sign with route number and destination

    3.47

    Seating

    4.39

    Lighting

    4.47

    Real time route information

    4.8

    Concrete pad

    5.15

    General roue schedules

    5.71

    System maps

    5.97

    Services alert

    6.06


    Question 14: Is there anything else you would like to tell us about accessibility of transit stops and terminals?

    Comments about transit stops and terminals focused on maintenance, bus stop features and the number of stops/routes.

    Maintenance

    • Snow and ice removal (20%): Accessibility during winter was a concern, with respondents pointing out that inadequate snow clearing at transit stops made it difficult for riders (especially those with mobility issues) to access the bus safely.
    • General maintenance (5%): A few comments mentioned the importance of general maintenance at stops, such as providing garbage cans to reduce litter. They also mentioned that having clean, well-maintained stops adds dignity to using public transit.

    Stop Features

    • Shelters and seating (25%): Many respondents emphasized the need for shelters and seating at all bus stops to protect passengers from the weather and provide comfort while waiting.
    • Lighting and safety (15%): Several respondents mentioned the need for better lighting at bus stops to improve safety, especially during winter months
    • Accessibility features (15%): Comments pointed out the importance of having accessible features at bus stops, such as concrete pads, ramps and clear paths to the stops. Some stops were noted to be difficult to access due to uneven terrain or lack of proper sidewalks.
    • Signage and information (10%): Respondents expressed a need for better signage and information at bus stops, including route numbers, schedules and real-time updates.

    Stop/Route Frequency

    • Additional stops and routes (10%): Some comments suggested that adding more bus stops and extending routes to serve different areas of the city would make transit more accessible to a wider range of passengers.


    Next steps

    The feedback will be used to inform future improvements at Kingston Transit and the evaluation of Kingston Transit’s accessibility plan.

Page last updated: 12 May 2025, 12:01 PM