Transitway stations get makeover in the form of "station domination"

If you travelled through Hurdman or Lincoln Fields Stations in November, you may have noticed the large Rogers Communications ads covering Transitway shelters and stairs. Pattison Outdoor Advertising, the agency in charge of managing ads on OC Transpo property, says the "station domination" ad campaign will end this week on December 3rd. (There's a photo of Hurdman Station blanketed in Rogers advertisements in the link.) Station domination gives a company exclusive advertising rights to a particular station for a limited time.

A passenger tweeted a photo of a set of stairs that shows the Rogers promotions at Lincoln Fields Station:

Lots of new Rogers ads at Lincoln Fields station today. Looks like a big boys fight. pic.twitter.com/2FgxOXJhiZ
— M. A. (@asselsm) November 5, 2013

Last year, large lobsters were placed on top of bus stop shelters to promote P.E.I tourism. The conventional ads are the posters placed inside and outside buses, and on bus stop shelters. A single ad can wrap the entire exterior of buses. We are used to this on our transit system and wouldn't think twice. Now for the very first time in Ottawa, transit station shelters, walls, and floors can be covered in ads promoting the same message. Station domination is a common advertisement practice in subway and LRT stations across this country, but is generally met with public disapproval.

Some passengers may be annoyed with them, especially the telecom ones, while others may not noticed or simply don't care. When ads start to creep into areas that have remained ad-free, they usually don't go away. Station domination could appear in future Confederation Line stations, which will be far more spacious than the current Transitway stations and consequently, provide more opportunities to advertisers.

However, advertising on transit property is not a significant source of revenue for OC Transpo. Advertising on transit shelters and vehicles generates approximately $3.3 million per year, a relatively small amount compared to the $218.6 million revenue that the the transit agency estimates it will generate in 2014. It's roughly 1.5%. As for revenue from station domination, in 2011, the City projected it would bring $50,000 in revenue during the first year (2011) of implementation. It's nowhere near enough to stop annual fare hikes unfortunately.

Whether you like it or not, station domination is probably here to stay. There is concern about multiple ads of similarity interfering with wayfinding signage and confusing the casual user or tourist. And of course, station domination can turn a beautiful rail station into a marketing jungle. The first set of ads haven't created a public outcry, but it doesn't mean they are accepted either. Like the bus wraps, station domination should be applied sparingly.

Many transit initiatives planned to be implemented by 2031

On Wednesday morning, Mayor Watson announced the City of Ottawa’s proposed transit network plan which includes the eastern extension of the Confederation Line to Place D’Orleans, western extension to Bayshore, southern extension of the O-Train line to Bowesville, all at a cost of $2.5 billion and to be completed by 2023. 

Although there doesn't seem to be any timeline attached to each project, the costs of the proposed light-rail projects were revealed in the updated TMP draft (page 38 on document, 42 on Adobe Reader):

• O-Train southern extension from Greenboro Station to Bowesville with new stations at Gladstone, Walkley, South Keys, Leitrim, and Bowesville: $99 million. No station or connection is planned at the Airport.
• Western LRT extension of the Confederation Line from Tunney’s Pasture to Baseline Road along existing Transitway corridor: $980 million. This proposed project was already being discussed at city hall well before the updated TMP.
• Western LRT extension from Lincoln Fields to Bayshore in a tunnel underneath Connaught Avenue: $396 million.
• Eastern LRT extension of the Confederation Line from Blair Station to Place D’Orleans: $500 million.

These figures are in 2013 dollars. So, in a few years, the prices of these projects will probably increase with inflation.

Buried in the draft of the Transportation Master Plan are some non-LRT transit initiatives. Here are the "affordable" BRT ones that can be implemented by 2031: 

• Western Transitway extension from Bayshore to west of Moodie Drive will run along Highway 417 with one station near Moodie Drive. This busway, from the original TMP of 2008, is priced at $79 million.
• Bus-rapid transit (BRT) along Baseline Road from Heron to Baseline Stations. This is a new BRT line to be constructed on the existing road with at-grade intersections and is priced at $131 million.
• A Kanata North at-grade BRT Transitway will follow March Road, connecting Highway 417 to Carling Avenue. Kanata’s first busway will cost $110 million. This western busway was also in the 2008 TMP.

According to the next page, the number of Airport Parkway lanes will double from two to four from Hunt Club to the MacDonald-Cartier International Airport. The new lanes will become HOV lanes, but buses can only use the lanes during peak periods. The expansion is scheduled for construction between 2026 and 2031, as per the appendix.

Further down the same page, the draft of the TMP also lists some roads that can potentially feature new bus lanes:

• Carling Avenue from the Carling O-Train Station to Lincoln Fields Station. It’s currently being served by routes 6, 16, 85, 101, 102.
• Hemlock Road & Codd’s Road from St. Laurent Boulevard to Montreal Road. There is currently no service on these sections of roads.
• Hunt Club Road from Albion Road to Uplands Drive. It’s currently being served by routes 1, 87, 98, 114, 116, 143, 146, 147, 189, 199.
• Montreal Road from St Laurent to Blair Road.  It’s currently being served by route 12. The hours of the existing priority lanes form Cummings Bridge to St Laurent Blvd are to be extended.
• Blackburn Bypass peak period lanes.

 

Here are some streets that are supposed to have both queue jump lanes and transit signal priority at selected intersections in the future:

• Baseline Road from Baseline Station to Bayshore Station, currently served by (The plan says “Bayshore” and there’s no existing bus route that connects Baseline Station to Bayshore.) It’s currently being served by route 118.
• Carling Avenue from Bronson Avenue to Carling O-Train Station. It’s currently being served by routes 6, 85, 101, 102.
• Chapman Mills / Strandherd / Earl Armstrong from Barrhaven Centre to proposed Bowesville O-Train Station. Chapman Mills and Strandherd are supposed to be served by routes 94, 95 once the Strandherd-Armstrong bridge is completed.
• Eagleson Road from Hazeldean Road to Highway 417. It’s currently being served by routes 96, 61, 62, 164, 168.
• Hazeldean Road from Stittsville Main Street to Eagleson Road. It’s currently being served by routes 96, 118.
• Innes Road and Blair Road from Millennium Station to Blair Station. It’s currently being served by routes 94, 121. 126, 128, 131.
• Jeanne D’Arc Boulevard from Innes Road to Jeanne D’Arc Station. It’s currently being served by routes 30/130, 31/131, 132.
• March Road from Carling Avenue to Maxwell Bridge Road. It’s currently being served by route 60.
• Merivale Road from Baseline Road to Carling Avenue. It’s currently being served by routes 14, 151, 176.
• Orleans Boulevard from Jeanne D’Arc Boulevard South to proposed Orleans Blvd LRT Station. It’s currently being served by routes 34/134, 132.
• Richmond Road / Wellington Street West / Somerset Street from Woodroffe Avenue to Bank Street. It’s currently being served by route 2.
• Robertson Road and Richmond Road from Eagleson Road to Baseline Road. It’s currently being served by routes 118, 97.
• St Laurent Boulevard from Innes Road to Montreal Road. It’s currently being served by routes 114, 5, 7, 14.
• Tenth Line Road from Charlemagne Boulevard to Regional Road 174. It’s currently being served by route 136.

To be clear, these transit initiatives are considered to be "affordable" and can be implemented by 2031. BRT projects are supposed to cost $317 million, while the transit priority projects (bus lanes, transit signal priority, etc) are estimated at $200 million, bringing the total cost to just under $3 billion.

Proposed transportation plan features light rail extensions to be completed by 2023

Mayor Jim Watson announced the City of Ottawa's proposed Transportation Master Plan this morning, and the ambitious plan includes light-rail extensions to Baseline, Bayshore, and Place D'Orleans, plus conversion of the O-Train to light-rail before adding in new stations on the current line and then extending the whole thing to Bowesville -- all happening concurrently, all finished before 2023, at a price tag of about $2.5B.

Here are the details of the mayor's speech from various city hall reporters and the mayor himself:

"We did not change the balance of investments towards transit and away from roads." That's maintained in the new TMP.
— David Reevely live (@ReevelyLive) October 9, 2013

Plan is to connect La Cite to the rail network. NOT waiting for provincial or federal contributions.
— David Reevely live (@ReevelyLive) October 9, 2013

Not sure what that entails. It could mean better bus service connecting to the Confederation Line, since the college is not considered within walking distance from either Cyrville or Blair Station.

New Transitway from Bayshore to Moodie and from March to Terry Fox. New bus measures in the east along Blair as well. #ottcity
— Jim Watson (@JimWatsonOttawa) October 9, 2013

The new busways in the west are nothing new. Kanata North will likely see more reliable and less travel times for route 93 once the busway opens.

These "new bus measures in the east along Blair" are probably for route 94. Innes was mentioned as one of the "transit priority" roads in the city's media release. The others are Montreal Road, Hunt Club Road, Carling Avenue, and Bank Street. Transit priority usually means an adjustment of the traffic lights to minimize delays to transit vehicles.

Q about the Airport Parkway. I think JW said it’ll be twinned, but new lanes for HOV and cabs.
— David Reevely (@davidreevely) October 9, 2013

The Airport Parkway will be expanded to four lanes total. The HOV lane will certainly improve service on the 97 route. Creating dedicated lanes act as an alternative to extending the O-Train to the airport. (As you'll see later, the O-Train line extends south of the airport, but doesn't connect to it.)

For pedestrians, there'll be funding for pedestrian bridges, including the Somerset-Donald bridge.
— David Reevely live (@ReevelyLive) October 9, 2013

This benefits transit users in that area too because they'll now have access to either routes 16 or 18.

So the western extension from Tunneys to Baseline, we've heard lots about. NCC still not completely on board, last I heard.
— Joanne Chianello (@jchianello) October 9, 2013

Plenty of discussion about the Richmond Underground already.


One of the proposed light-rail extensions is from Lincoln Fields to Bayshore Shopping Centre and here's how it's supposed to look:

Plan is to skip the Transitway planned there. Go straight to rail on the planned route, including in the little tunnel.
— David Reevely live (@ReevelyLive) October 9, 2013

Line runs north along the Queensway past Leon's, etc. New ped overpass to Ikea (and, er, the Citizen).
— David Reevely live (@ReevelyLive) October 9, 2013

So, it appears the Pinecrest-Bayshore busway, where routes 93 and 96 travel, will be converted into light-rail.


The O-Train south extension:

LRT South: Further enhancements to O-Train: New stations at Gladstone, Walkley and South Keys, extend line to Leitrim and Bowsville #cbcott
— Alistair Steele (@alistairsteele) October 9, 2013

Interesting how there's an LRT extension to a rural area, but not to the airport. The additional ridership from the added stations and line extension can't be supported from the existing single track sections of the line. It would have to be expanded entirely to double-tracking eventually.

The new stations in the south will take some pressure off buses on the south-east Transitway, which is likely the goal here. To the north, the Gladstone O-Train station is a welcome addition.


Orleans LRT extension:

And now to the east: new LRT stations at St-Joseph, Jeanne d'Arc, Orleans Drive, Place d'Orleans along the 174.
— David Reevely live (@ReevelyLive) October 9, 2013

Most of the 95 bus line will be replaced in the east end and Orleans Boulevard Station will be a new station since there isn't an existing BRT one at the moment. One thing to note is the rail line will extend through the Greenbelt on NCC land, which is not something the crown corporation will easily give up.


This is supposed to be one large project, both physically and financially:

Mayor says will expand rail to east, west and south "together."
— Joanne Chianello (@jchianello) October 9, 2013

All this can be done for less than $2.5B, JW says. Rattles off numbers quickly. $500M to get to Orleans, for one thing. $100M for O-Train.
— David Reevely live (@ReevelyLive) October 9, 2013

$2.5B in rail extensions east, west and south can be done by 2023 if feds, province provide money, Mayor Watson says. #OTTPoli
— Jon Willing (@JonathanWilling) October 9, 2013

Hard to imagine all rail extensions would be constructed simultaneously within ten years, given that both federal and provincial governments are experiencing enormous budget deficits.


The new bold LRT plan is called "Stage 2":

Stage 2: 35 kilometres of new rail and 19 new stations. Not multiple phases. One project. East, west, south. Together pic.twitter.com/KnFNOdBLTa
— Jim Watson (@JimWatsonOttawa) October 9, 2013

The draft outline of the Transportation Master Plan can be seen on the city's website and further details are to be released later this afternoon by the city. The plan will be debated at a Transit Commission meeting next week, and at a Transportation Commission and City Council meetings in November.

OC Transpo to undo some optimization route cuts

OC Transpo's massive route optimization project is set to be scaled back a little bit, as was announced today. Given an extra $5.5M in the 2012 City of Ottawa budget to address specific service concerns resultant from the optimization process--specifically: overcrowding on buses and lacking service to certain areas--OC Transpo announced upgrades to take effect by early in the new year.

According to reports from the CBC and the Ottawa Citizen, service changes will entail:

• an increase the number of buses serving routes 2, 4, 5, 16, 30, 87, 93, 94, 95, 96, 97, 106, 111, 118, 120, 143, 148, 169, 261, 263, and 691;
• larger buses serving routes 4, 38, 60, 62, 87, 93, and 114 at peak times in the day; and
• route adjustments on route 5, 16, 93, 106, 121, 144, 169, and 198.

The goal of route optimization when the process began was to trim the fat, so to speak, on OC Transpo service by reducing route overlaps, "milk runs," and inefficient routes and trips. The eventual savings target was about $20M per year; with the $5.5M injection from this year's city budget, those savings are now down to an estimated $14.5M per year.

That $14.5M represents trimming a little more than four per cent off OC Transpo's total expenditures (from 2010, the most recent numbers available).

OC Transpo fares to increase 2.5 per cent in 2012

According to Ottawa Metro, the City of Ottawa's 2012 budget includes extra funding for OC Transpo (fuelled by a property tax increase of 2.39 per cent), which will be directed towards increasing service on major routes such as the 87, 94, 95, and 96.

More to the point for most transit riders, the budget also calls for a 2.5-per cent increase in OC Transpo fares.

The fare increase falls in line with recent estimates, but is much lower than the 7.5-per cent increase in March of 2010. Still, after a massive optimization project intended to make service more efficient, one wonders where those savings have gone.

NDP offers transit funding for freezing fares

According to a report on 580 CFRA, Ontario NDP leader Andrea Horwath promised her party would put pick up half of OC Transpo's operating costs if the transit utility would promise to freeze fares. From the story:

Speaking at the monthly Mayor's Breakfast, Horwath criticized the Liberals for not doing enough to help cities make transit affordable and championed her party's promise to take on 50 per cent of operating costs, in exchange for a fare freeze.

"It would begin to put cities like Ottawa on even footing with other cities around the world," Horwath told the crowd. "Other cities where national and regional governments step up to the plate and take on a fair share of transit funding."

The promise was also covered by the Ottawa Citizen.

Although I'm unable to price out this promise, if it were feasible, it would be a huge boon to OC Transpo; right now, they're re-couping fifty per cent of operating costs by fares, so if they freeze them (rather than lowering them), they'd actually be sitting on a pretty hefty budget surplus after the year.

Realistically, if the Provincial Governments (whether it's NDP or aything else) were to absorb half of OC Transpo's operating costs, we could see one of two things happening to offset that budget surplus:

1. A pretty hefty fare decrease, because less of the operating costs need to be recovered at the fare box; or
2. A lesser subsidy from the municipal government.

The second option seems significantly more likely, as unfortunate as that would be for transit users (although property tax payers in Ottawa would be happy with it).

What could Ottawa do with that money? A lot of things. Transit-wise, it could be put towards adding a few bells and whistles to the upcoming LRT project, or expediting the expansion of it further east, west, or south. (We could also see lower property taxes, but that seems pretty unlikely, too.)

The NDP is a way down in the polls leading up to the provincial election, but once again they're offering some of the most significant transit promises. We'll see what happens out of it.

Transit issues on Talk Ottawa

On Thursday evening's Talk Ottawa program, public transit dominated much of a program that was about municipal issues in general. Along with myself (Peter Raaymakers), the panel included Peggy DuCharme, executive director of the Downtown Rideau Business Improvement Agency, and David Reevely, News Editor and blogger for the Ottawa Citizen talked about a variety of issues in our city today.

The roundtable kicked things off with a discussion of several issues facing the city's current light-rail transit plan, and especially the downtown tunnel. As is usually the case, cost came up, and the possibility (or probability) of cost increases as we move forward with the plan. The general consensus of the panel was that costs will likely go up, at the very least due to inflation, but that's a fairly normal occurence when projects of this magnitude are undertaken. Reevely suggested that there are options available if cost estimates rise significantly, including shortening the tunnel or finding savings in platform designs, but it would take a drastic increase in cost (a jump to, say, $3.5B or more) for the city to entertain the possibility of scrapping the project entirely. A fair degree of political humiliation would result from a cancellation, Reevely said, and DuCharme pointed out that a second major transit project cancellation in just ten years would seriously tarnish the city's reputation.

Sticking with the LRT project, we also discussed the impacts that will be felt leading up to and during the construction of the tunnel downtown. There was agreement that the impacts would not be insignificant--there will definitely be major disruptions to bus routes for at least a couple years during construction, and likely some street closures during the tunneling process--but, as Reevely and DuCharme both said, the hope is that the long-term benefits will outweigh the short-term inconveniences.

In the more immediate term, we also looked at potential service changes to the O-Train. Given the success of the pilot project-cum-transit spine, the city is seriously looking at increasing the capacity of the O-Train, which was generally regarded as a good idea. As was the possibility of extending the train along mostly-existing train tracks into the growing development of Riverside South, for which the Transit Commission approved a feasibility study.

That latter option, if pursued, would eventually lead to a revamped O-Train meeting the city's major east-west light-rail system at Bayview Station, which would transform that station into one of the city's biggest transfer points for riders. Bayview also happens to be a prime location for transit-oriented development, so the discussion moved on to the possibility of retail, residential, commercial, and other development (including a sports stadium) in or around the station. Members of the panel were fairly excited about the possibility, but all seemed to realize it would still have a long road to travel before coming to fruition.

On the topic of sports stadiums, the city's recent decision to study a potential Coventry Road footbridge across the Queensway connecting the Transitway with Ottawa Baseball Stadium and the developments surrounding it also came up. It's a $1M study into a $9M bridge which spans an area of the highway that will soon be expanded, and the panel seemed to think the City was well on its way to going forward with the bridge--Reevely pointed out that in a city that routinely builds road bridges for tens of millions of dollars, $9M for a pedestrian footbridge isn't an outrageous expense. To the criticism that there's no long-term certainty of the baseball stadium, panellists pointed out that there isn't only a baseball stadium there: There are also many houses, businesses, and the Hampton Inn and convention centre that would benefit from a more direct connection to the city's major transit spine, plus the fact that if the city decides to tear down the stadium, something else will certainly be built in its place. Plus, given that transportation was likely a major factor in the Lynx' struggles at attracting spectators, improving the accessibility of the stadium by putting it along the Transitway and opening it up to more people could go a long way in making it a more viable home stadium for a professional baseball team.

Also discussed were the outdoor water ban in the south end and street name changes, but those didn't have too much to do with transit so I won't go in to too much detail.

The economic cost of inefficient public transit

For some time now, people dissatisfied with public transit service have made suggestions that maybe our politicians and city managers should have to take transit to really get a hands-on feel for the issues everyday riders face, and an honest understanding of the service they're responsible for. It's a good idea, in theory, and something most people would love to see done. David Reevely, however, poured some cold water onto the idea a little while back, stating--correctly--that we're paying these people handsomely, and while they're "on the clock", it makes sense for them to get around the city as quickly as possible; rarely is OC Transpo the quickest option.

Practically, also, our senior transit officials and their political bosses don't ordinarily have enough hours in the day to do the business we want them to do. These people have a lot more places to be in a day than the average white-collar worker. The more time they spend in transit, so to speak, the less time they're actually working.

This all speaks to a larger problem, though: The fact that having slow, inefficient public transit is costing our people, our cities, and our national economy greatly. While I have no way of measuring it, I can hardly imagine the economic cost of lost productivity as a result of ever-lengthening commutes in cities.

The real solution to this problem is a pretty obvious one: Have people work closer to where they live, or live closer to where they work. But this isn't always an option. When it isn't, finding innovative ways to get commuters from point A to point B as quickly as possible, but also as cheaply as possible, if the best we can hope for.

Adding more roads is the typical solution, but more roads rarely (if ever) provide a long-term solution to traffic congestion in Canada's big cities. Investing in public transit can improve the capacity and service level (including time, comfort, and environmental cost), but it's always a challenge for cities due to the unpredictable nature of transit funding from federal and provincial partners, and the fact that municipalities simply can't foot the bill on their own.

In a recent article in the Globe and Mail, the fact that Canada doesn't have and hasn't ever had a national transit stategy to fund municipal projects was lamented, and many explained the need to make it an election issue this year.

“We would certainly hope that one of the key issues that this election is fought on is around a national transit strategy,” said Board of Trade president and CEO Carol Wilding. “There has to be a vision brought to it across all levels of government.” Unlike other countries, Canada has never had a national transit strategy. Although Ottawa has grown increasingly involved in transit over the past 10 years, averaging investments of about $600-million a year, the funding remains ad hoc, with no predictability. In the lead-up to this week’s federal budget, the mayors of some of Canada’s largest cities appealed to Finance Minister Jim Flaherty to address transit and the $123-billion urban infrastructure deficit.

Both the NDP and Liberal parties have recently outlined plans for a national transit funding strategy for Canada. The Conservative Party, while in government, has been willing to fund transit projects--including $600M for Ottawa's current project, among others--but neither they nor the Green Party have committed to putting one in place.

For cities to adequately plan and fund transit projects, consistent and predictable funding is of utmost importance. Through a national transit strategy, whoever ends up running this country acter May 2 could guarantee their cities exactly that.

Three bus operators on Ottawa's "Sunshine List" by earning over $100k

The Ottawa Sun published the city's annual Sunshine List on Thursday, revealing the city's employees who earned over $100,000 in 2010. Three OC Transpo bus operators made the list:

• Balwant Narula, $100,492.08 plus $1,311.43 in taxable benefits
• Francois Danis, $103,008.21 plus $1,324.44 in taxable benefits
• Abdirizak Mohamed $104,827.53 plus $1,289.82 in taxable benefits

As far as I can tell, no bus operators pulled down six digits in 2009 (I'd guess the bus strike might have something to do with that), while one did in 2008. It will surely draw some ire from people, but I'm inclined to congratulate the operators above; I can hardly imagine how much overtime they must have worked in the year to earn that much.

UPDATE: A bunch more OC Transpo-related sunshine listers, these ones all managers and supervisors:

• Alain Mercier (General Manager, Transit Services), $186,116.70 plus $7,511.55 in taxable benefits
• William Atkinson (Chief, Transit Maintenance), $145,239.01 plus $12,224.13 in taxable benefits
• Laurie Blackstone (Manager, Transit Operations), $122,574.84 plus $380.45 in taxable benefits
• Stephane Carbonneau (Manager, Transit Capital Project & Facilities Maintenance), $113,190.13 plus $360.86 in taxable benefits
• Lynne Huneault (Strategic Advisor, Transit Management-Union Relations), $111,860.23 plus $353.69 in taxable benefits
• Robert Denault (Transit Supervisor), $110,813.34 plus $335.64 in taxable benefits
• Pat Scrimgeour (Manager, Transit Service Design), $109,598.21 plus $359.58 in taxable benefits
• Randy Guthro (Transit Supervisor), $102,994.56 plus $451.13 in taxable benefits
• Wallace Devries (Transit Supervisor), $101,571.50 plus $335.64 in taxable benefits

There are also four "licensed mechanics" on the list, but I'm not sure if they work for OC Transpo or some other arm of the City of Ottawa.

OC Transpo runs $4.6M deficit in 2010

Buried in an article on 580 CFRA about the city running a $16M surplus last year was the revelation that OC Transpo had to pull from its capital reserves to make up for a $4.6M budget deficit in 2010.

I'm sure we'll hear more about it in the coming days, notably explanations for the shortfall. In August, the utility predicted a $4.7M revenue shortfall, so I guess that's a plus.

Selling public transit as a real alternative

The Globe and Mail has been running a great series on traffic and transit in Canadian cities over the last few days, and it's offered some pretty good content to look at for folks interested. On Monday, there was a very cool slideshow-type feature that discussed the "psychological gridlock" that seems to be preventing so many Canadians from really buying in to public and alternative transit as realistic ways to get themselves around the city.

The slideshow dealt with some of the 'best practices' that transit systems in Canada would be well-served to duplicate:

• Bringing in a no-nonsense, no-apologies transit guru like New York City's Janette Sadik-Khan; she's not without controversy, but Sadik-Khan gets things done.
• A transit 'smart card' that goes above and beyond, like Hong Kong's 'Octopus Card', which not only simplifies paying for public transit, but simplifies paying for a huge number of city services.
• Get subways in place, like Madrid, Spain has done; a good choice for funding, when done right, are public-private partnerships, which were how much of the Madrid system was built.
• Congestion pricing on highways, but carefully: If you're going to force people into public transit, make sure you improve public transit capacity to ensure you can handle the surge in ridership. That's what Stockholm, Sweden did--to great results--in 2006.
• Spreading demand for transit to times outside peak periods, to increase your capacity without needing to increase the actual fleet size.

Ottawa could use a lot of this. The so-called "O-Card" smart card is in progress-and has been for more than a decade, but remains far off. The subway Ottawa's getting is a start, but is still a long way off, and is a pretty small first step. Congestion pricing on Ottawa highways might cause a massive riot among suburban commuters, but since OC Transpo wouldn't be able to accommodate the increase, it's hard to blame them. And OC Transpo actually used to have 'peak fares' and other fares, but changed that arrangement, likely because it was too complicated (with a smart card, it would be much simpler to have in place).

The story ended with an interesting point:

When Canadians are travelling, their openness to alternative modes of transportation seems to blossom, while back home many cities remain psychologically gridlocked when it comes to how to improve our daily commute. Change also requires the kind of permanent funding that big-city mayors and others believe should be part of a federal urban strategy – and on the table for discussion in the national election campaign.

Why OC Transpo optimization isn't just good--it's overdue

I'm sure just about everyone has heard, but this past week OC Transpo released a list of 100 bus routes which are going to be changed in some way under the "optimization project" they've undertaken to make service more efficient. If you haven't heard yet, check the OC Transpo website to see if your route is affected or to get a look at what the changes are going to look like.

The changes are sweeping and fairly expansive. Although OC Transpo says 90 per cent of riders won't be affected by the changes, that ten per cent could be affected fairly significantly, from longer walks to bus stops, limited hours of service, or more frequent transfers. It's not going to be a painless exercise, and I do think we will see at least some changes to the plans. But in theory, optimizing the service might end up being the best thing OC Transpo has done in years.

Frequent riders of OC Transpo know that there are problems with the system right now. Once in a while, the route you're waiting for is ridiculously late; sometimes it just doesn't show up. OC Transpo always seems to be hiring, and despite that, costs associated with overtime are ridiculous--and at their highest this year. Every year, fare increases far outpace the inflation rate, and despite those increases, revenue shortfalls at OC Transpo still force the city to pay more than budgeted (last year, it was a $4.7M revenue shortfall). In my view, the signs all point to one thing: OC Transpo is operating beyond its means. The service is trying to do too much, and hasn't critically examined the system map and made the necessary changes to clean up the spaghetti-like map of routes.

Take, for instance, a look at the image below, from a presentation by city staff via the Ottawa Citizen (click to enlarge):

The image at left is the current, pre-optimization structure of routes. It's a ridiculously complex map of meandering express routes (red) which, for the most part, follow streets that are already served by faster cross-town routes (black). The right image is the optimized map, with express routes bumped off community roads, and black routes moderately re-routed to find a best fit, cutting down on redundancies. This is a fairly small glimpse at a very large change, but serves as at least an example of what the city and OC Transpo are trying to do with the optimization project.

Are all the proposed route cuts appropriate? I doubt it. I do know that plenty of people are upset with routes they use frequently being changed, and I understand that. But I also understand that the system isn't working right now, and something does need to be done to fix it. This optimization project is a step in the right direction.

For those of you with input on the optimization, whether positive or negative, the city is holding a series of public consultations on the following dates at the following venues:

Tuesday, March 29th
5:30 p.m. - 7:30 p.m.
Presentation will begin at 6:30 p.m.
Ottawa City Hall, Jean Pigott Place, 110 Laurier Avenue West

Wednesday, March 30th
7 p.m. - 9 p.m.
Presentation will begin at 8 p.m.
Kanata Recreation Complex, Hall B, 100 Walter Baker Place

Thursday, March 31th
7 p.m. - 9 p.m.
Presentation will begin at 8 p.m.
Nepean Sportsplex, Halls C and D, 1701 Woodroffe Avenue

Monday, April 4th
7 p.m. - 9 p.m.
Presentation will begin at 8 p.m.
Jim Durrell Recreation Complex, Ellwood Hall, 1265 Walkey Road

Tuesday, April 5th
7 p.m. - 9 p.m.
Presentation will begin at 8 p.m.
Shenkman Arts Centre, Music Rehearsal Hall, 245 Centrum Blvd.

Why sell station names when you can sell the stations themselves?

Last week, the Ottawa Business Journal published a very interesting article on ways to increase revenue from transit stations in the city. On this site, we've talked about options like energy generation at transit stations or selling station-naming rights to generate revenue; OBJ takes it one step further and looks at the possibility of selling transit stations themselves to developers.

From the OBJ article:

“I’d sell the stations,” [Lawrence Solomon,] writer and founder of Energy Probe, an environmental agency, said in a recent interview.

“I’d put them up for auction and allow retailers to bid on them … Mall developers would be very interested (and) would figure out the best way to get people in and facilitate passenger (movement).”

[...]

Mr. Solomon suggests transit operators look to modern airports for inspiration, where shopping areas and concourses are oriented to be part of a passenger’s experience, and generate large amounts of revenue for terminal operators.

An interesting idea indeed.

Obviously, the functionality of the space needs to be retained; transit stations need to be first and foremost designed to allow people to easily transfer to and from buses so they can get where they're going. But if opening up transit stations to retail developers can improve the experience of the transit user, then I think it could be a win-win.

The article above mentioned Hurdman Station as a particularly drab place to transfer buses; it's also a station I go through most days, and one I considered when thinking about this idea. My imagination brought out a vision of a similarly wide-open ground floor, to offer some shelter and also allow people to move back and forth between platforms. But I'd picture a cafe or coffee house along with a slightly larger convenience store, and heck, maybe even a second story with a place to get some grub.

Maybe through it all, transit stations could be made destinations themselves, rather than simply transfer points.

Everyone's talking about another OC Transpo strike

It seems like everyone's pretty pessimistic about the possibility of avoiding a transit strike during this year's negotiations between OC Transpo and the City of Ottawa. Considering the virulent back-and-forth between both sides through the last one, people can probably be forgiven for their cynicism.

Although the possibility of a strike has been in everyone's mind for quite a few weeks, it really took off when former mayor Larry O'Brien penned a guest column for the Ottawa Citizen suggesting that we're headed down the same road as we were last time. David Reevely pointed out a few falsehoods in O'Brien's op/ed on the Greater Ottawa blog, but even if the factors O'Brien pointed to are flawed, the fact that some of the same issues which caused the last transit strike remain unsolved is undeniable.

On the plus side, no one wants a transit strike. Or at least both sides say they want to avoid one. From the city's perspective, a strike would be disastrous, and would likely be something saddled on mayor Jim Watson--whether it's fair or not--after he promised to work on repairing strained relations with OC Transpo. Unions never really want to go on strike, but it is one of few options available to them in negotiation; still, with the last strike so fresh in their minds, you've got to think the ATU 279 are especially dreading the possibility--their new president, Garry Queale, said in one of his first interviews that he's not in favour of a strike (although his predecessor, Mike Aldrich, said the same thing weeks before walking away from negotiations).

If you think Toronto's recent advances towards an essential service designation for the TTC might pave the way for a similar one in Ottawa, don't count on it. Neither the city nor the union are in favour of the designation, and also anything in Ottawa would have to go through the federal government (which in the past had no interest) rather than the provincial.

So the negotiators from the city and the union will have to figure it out themselves. Well, once they get back to negotiating...

What would an out-of-towner premium mean for OC Transpo?

Cumberland councillor Stephen Blais, a member of the City of Ottawa's Transit Commission, recently put forward an idea to have commuters from outside the City of Ottawa who use OC Transpo pay a premium for the service. The premium, according to CTV Ottawa, would help cover the true cost of the service, and at least partially recover what "out-of-towners" don't pay to the service in property taxes.

While the idea is still very much in its infancy, it's one that, at least on the surface, seems rational. Since only about half of OC Transpo's operating costs are funded by fares (the other half coming from the tax base), a rider from Kemptville is paying about half as much as one from inside the city line.

By that rationale, though, tourists are also paying far less than the 'true cost' of OC Transpo rides they might be taking, and we're not about to start asking them to top-up their fares. It's always going to be a tricky line to walk when certain people pay for (part of) a service aren't the only ones who might use it.

One possible benefit of the move, according to CTV, would be unclogging the Park'N'Ride lots through the city. Which might be true, but even if it does, that just means more cars driving into the city, and fewer people taking the bus; is that really a positive outcome, overall?

As said above, it's still all hypothetical, and in the investigative stage; it won't even be considered until next year's budget. Who knows, perhaps staff will come up with an arrangement that brings in some extra income to offset the discrepancy, but still doesn't overly inconvenience out-of-town riders; that would be the ideal situation, realistically. But it will be interesting to see if the idea gets much political traction.

Pros and cons of Ottawa's $82M double-decker bus purchase

The City of Ottawa's (interim) Transit Commission has recently approved a purchase of 75 double-decker buses for $81.8M to build up the OC Transpo fleet. Sounds like a lot of money, especially since it's been less than a year since the city spent $155M to get 226 new articulated buses. But, as is usually the case, there are pros and cons to the purchase.

This may not be an exhaustive list (I encourage people to add what I've overlooked in the comments), but here's a quick look at some of them:

PROS

• Higher seating capacity. Although the expected capacity for a double-decker is supposed to be around the same number as an articulated, there are more seats--which means more comfort for passengers.
• Lower road-space per person. Double-deckers are the same length as a 40-foot bus, but have the same capacity as an articulated. Anyone who's ridden through the Transitway at peak periods knows this more compactness can be valuable.
• Lower costs. The new buses will replace 158 older 40-foot buses in the fleet, meaning lower maintenance costs; net savings are estimated at $20.4M.
• Simpler identification. Typically, if you're waiting for an express bus, you can watch for a double-decker. If you're looking for a Transitway route, look for an articulated. Seems minor, but as dozens of buses are driving by you at Bank and Albert or something, it can be a serious relief.

CONS

• Less flexibility. The double-deckers are earmarked for express routes, but there are a certain few spots where they can't run. This reduces the flexibility of moving them around as needed, and will require more planning.
• No garage space. Although part of the $81.8M price tag is $24M for new washing facilities, the new $97M bus garage on Industrial Avenue is not designed with double-deckers in mind.
• Accessibility. There are some concerns about accessibility for riders in wheelchairs, as outlined by CBC. They will likely be addressed, but are initially an issue.
• Loading time. Because riders can't (or aren't supposed to) be standing in the stairs or on the upper deck while the bus is moving, loading and unloading time is a concern. (This is less of a concern on express routes, where stops are less frequent.)

While I'm not sure the fleet--already a very modern one--necessarily needed these upgrades just yet, the addition of double deckers could very well prove a positive move for OC Transpo.

Catch PTIO on Talk Ottawa tonight

If you're in the Ottawa area, you can catch me (Peter Raaymakers) on Rogers 22's Talk Ottawa program this evening at 7:00 p.m. No word yet on other guests, but we'll be talking about all the big issues of the day: Optimization, labour negotiations, budgets, and bus-tracking apps based on GPS data--among, more than likely, other things.

There will be plenty of opportunities to call in, so tune in and say your piece on public transit in Ottawa this evening.

OC Transpo "optimization": The process begins

With a fairly massive presentation at Wednesday's transit commission meeting, the groundwork was laid for the huge service optimization project at OC Transpo. The writing was on the wall for the process, as it's been said since the new council formed that service would be changed--and significantly. What was outlined on Wednesday wasn't a complete turn towards a true hub-and-spoke system, but it represents a much closer structure than the city's been running with for the last decade or so.

Basically, the idea will be to eliminate some routes, consolidate others, and streamline others still (read general descriptions and comments from commission members on CBC News and the Ottawa Citizen). Somehow, out of all those proposed changes, OC Transpo staff said that 90 per cent of trips will remain exactly as they are today; that probably shouldn't come as a surprise, considering Transitway routes of the 94, 95, 96, and 97 form a huge percentage of OC Transpo trips, and aren't going to be changed. For the full picture, check the actual business plan as outlined, or read my highlights from it below.

The bus fleet, in pure numbers, will actually fall for next year: 158 first-generation low-floor buses will be phased out and partially replaced with the purchase of approximately 75 double-decker buses. Those double-deckers would be assigned to long-distance express routes, while articulated buses will be used mostly for Transitway routes, and 40-foot buses would take over local routes. Basically, there will be predictability: If you're waiting for a 95, look for an "artic"; if you're waiting for an express, keep your eyes peeled for double-deckers. The idea is also to use buses for their (perceived) most effective and economical purposes.

And then the routes. The following bus routes will either be unchanged, or have enhanced service: 1, 2, 7, 8, 14, 15, 20, 21, 22, 24, 27, 33, 35, 38, 60, 61, 66, 67, 68, 69, 70, 71, 73, 76, 77, 86, 87, 94, 95, 96, 98, 99, 114, 118, 122, 123, 124, 126, 128, 135, 146, 148, 157, 164, 170, 172, 173, 176, 177, 183, 184, 186, 187, 189, 194, 199, 245, 261, 262, and 263. So if you take any of those, you're in luck.

One of the possible changes looked at to review is to cut down on route duplication: When two routes have a good number of overlap along them, staff might try to take a "route of best fit" between them to consolidate them into one. Potential candidates for consolidation include routes 3, 4, 5, 6, 16, 23, 32, 34, 39, 40, 43, 57, 62, 63, 64, 65, 85, 88, 101, 111, 112, 115, 116, 117, 125, 130, 131, 133, 141, 142, 143, 144, 150, 151, 154, 155, 156, 158, 160, 165, 166, 168, 182, 188, 190, 191, and 316.

[Addendum: I missed a few routes that might have a reduction of service during peak period service: the 103, 116, 127, 136, 137, 140, 143, 145, 147, 149, 152, 153, 161, 163, 165, 167, 171, 174, 175, 178, and 306, and certain sections of Routes 5, 6, 9, 12, 16, 18, 40, 82, 97, 105, 106, 115, 120, 121, 125, 129, 131, 151, 154, 156, 166, 169, 190, 191, 192, 197, and 232.]

Finally, there's a proposal to cut down on loops and crescents taken by 'milk runs', which shorten the walking distance to bus stops but also lengthen the route and, according to the report, are costly to maintain. Some routes that may be made more direct include 5, 18, 31, 37, 101, 102, 179, 221, 231, and 283.

Overall, the report states that tens of millions of dollars in long-term savings could be found if these suggestions are taken. Which might be little consolation to the people who'll have to walk farther to their bus stop, but I think most around the city would agree that the OC Transpo system isn't working right now: It's trying to do too much, and that's resulting in higher operating costs and worse service. Some changes do need to be made.

More double-deckers for OC Transpo

According to 580 CFRA, OC Transpo will be adding a few new double-decker buses to its fleet. There are three in service at the moment, and according to the report, OC Transpo general manager Alain Mercier has said the number they'll be adding will be in the double digits. From the story:

Part of the Transit Service's Plan to save millions of dollars in operating costs is to add more double-decker buses to the fleet.

I'm not really sure how the double-decker buses result in any significant cost-savings, but I find them to be a comfortable ride when I'm on them. They are limited, though; if I'm not mistaken, limited height clearance in some parts of the city restricts where they can go. And while common sense might lead you to believe twice the stories means twice the passengers, significant seating is eaten up by the staircase to the top deck, and no passengers are allowed to stand on the upper deck, either.

But when you're on the upper deck and lucky enough to sit in the front row, you can pretend you're driving. Which is pretty sweet.

Fare hikes proposed for OC Transpo

The city's transit commission has suggested a series of fare hikes for OC Transpo fares to get the city closer to the 50/50 funding split between revenue and property taxes. The hikes are typically around the 2.5-4 per cent range, which is much better than the 7.5 per cent range of the past couple of years and much closer to the inflation rate.

Metro Ottawa has the full breakdown of fare and pass hikes. The most significant is a four per cent hike to bus tickets, up from $1.25 per ticket to $1.30 each. Doesn't sound like much, but considering an adult regular fare return trip is four tickets, you're talking about a $0.40 hike.

Beyond just this hike to ticket prices, though, the history of ticket price increases has been massive in recent years. In June 2009, bus tickets were $1 each, and in the 20 months since then they've gone up 30 per cent. That's a pretty massive jump for what was once a pretty affordable option for occassional transit users.