Canadians want to live, work, and play near public transit

Building on my post yesterday about Ottawa's $72M investment in transit-oriented development, it's interesting to see that more and more Canadians are choosing proximity to transit--and especially rail-based transit--as a key factor in deciding where they'd like to live.

As documented in a Globe and Mail article, consultancy firm PwC (formerly PricewaterhouseCoopers) recently published a report entitled "Emerging Trends in Real Estate 2014." A partner at PwC told the Globe that more and more Canadians are seeing access to transit as a legitimate and foremost consideration when house-shopping:

"With challenging infrastructure in all major Canadian centres coupled with the urbanization trend, there will be a continued demand for retail, office and residential space in our urban centres where there is easy access to mass transit."

In fact, Ottawa's investment in transit and cycling infrastructure also falls in line with the lifestyle preferences of generation Y residents, according to the report:

"Gen Y takes transit, walks, and bikes. Of all the generations, generation Y is the most likely to use transit daily, or at least once per week."

Although Ottawa's decision to move towards rail-based high speed transit is overdue, the city's well-placed to take advantage of these demographics and lifestyle preferences. There's ample room for intensification within Ottawa's Greenbelt, including around the rail stations that will be found along the Confederation Line and, in the future, near the further-out stations along the Stage 2 phase of the light-rail system.

In an ideal world, these preferences will lead to a reinvigoration of those parts of downtown near the Central Business District, including Sparks Street Mall, which seem like dead zones outside of the business hours. Hopefully PWGSC and the NCC are able to recognize the opportunities presented by a more lively downtown and invest some resources to enable a transition towards multi-use development in the core.

Ottawa's upcoming $72M investment in transit-oriented development

According to the Ottawa Citizen, the City of Ottawa is budgeting to spend about $72M in order to provide adequate water, sewer, road, and electrical services to three east Ottawa Confederation Line stations in order to enable the level of transit-oriented development that city staff are envisioning around the light rail stops.

The stations included in this $72M investment (as I'd like to think of it) are Lees, Hurdman, and Blair. The biggest price tag within that overall envelope is an estimated $25M to improve cycling infrastructure around and connecting to the stations, which seems like a wise concept that might allow people living and working in the area to forego personal automobiles in favour of cycling and transit (and, if the visions of progressive citizens become reality, bike- and car-sharing when necessary).

From the Citizen:

Lees, on the edge of the University of Ottawa campus, needs the least work: a mere $11 million, much of that in upgraded electricity service.
Hurdman, just across the Rideau River but practically isolated with fields on three sides (thanks to its location amid old closed landfills), needs the most: $35 million, with sewer pipes making up $15 million.
Blair, much farther east, needs $26 million worth of work, and the single biggest chunk of that is $13 million to improve the almost nonexistent bike routes to and from a station that’s tucked between the Gloucester Centre mall and a Highway 174 overpass.

I consider this a $72M investment, rather than an expense, because of the long-term benefits that would come as a result of encouraging higher-density and less car-dependent living around transit stations, and it seems likely that development charges around these stations may be able to recoup some of the costs. It's good to see the city putting money where their mouths are when discussing transit-oriented development, and hopefully developers and businesses also recognize the benefits of building in the vicinity of major rail stations.

LRT Planning

It's been a while since my last post and much has changed about the LRT project in a year.  Since the tunnel was moved north to Queen Street, this massive transit project is becoming less and less of what I would imagine it to be.

By now, we know that staying within the budget seems to be the only reason for moving the tunnel further north and building Rideau station further east.  This is disappointing since city planning is taking a back-seat to political promises.  While still within the core, the downtown tunnel has somewhat moved further away from the denser areas.  The new location for Rideau station will no longer be serving Elgin Street with much higher density than the Sandy Hill neighbourhood.

Rideau station should remain where it was initially planned and the station at O'Connor Street be placed eastwards towards Metcalfe Street.  That way, the same number of stations remain and Elgin Street is better served.  The Mayor is correct to say that an extra station will slow down service, especially when Ottawa's density in the downtown core is no where near close to Toronto's.  Having the stations too close leads to unnecessary stopping when the density isn't there.

Plopping a station here and instead of there isn't easy and requires much more time and money.  If the money is the issue, which it always seems to be, we could delay another project and use those funds for this project.  There is no other future project in Ottawa near the magnitude of this one and this is one of the few that will benefit the entire city.

Money could be saved by not re-constructing Train station and not having it at all.  Instead, bus service to the Tremblay VIA station from Hurdman or St. Laurent stations could be coordinated with VIA schedules. There is supposed to be some new development for Train station once it re-opens as an light-rail station.  But, it isn't guaranteed.  Besides the few apartment buildings, new development around Cyrville and Hurdman stations has been disappointing since the Transitway was built.  Currently, Train station seems to the least-used Transitway station that will be served by light-rail.  With the Transitway, all stops are requested, unlike light-rail, at least in Ottawa's case, trains are required to stop at all stations.  If there were a station that will slow down the system, Train station would be the front-running candidate.  Having trains stop with few people getting on or off doesn't seem very cost-effective.

We could shorten the LRT line to Bayview station or St. Laurent station and use that money for fixing the planned downtown portion.  Of course, some may look at is as "back-tracking" or "scrapping the LRT plan" and no one at City Hall seems to keen on that.  I live in the east-end and use VIA rail on occasion.  So, this isn't a view from someone living in the downtown core, who wants what is best for themselves.

What about the bus routes feeding into the light-rail line?  A story from the Ottawa Citizen says that buses from neighbourhoods in the east will terminate at Rideau Centre on Rideau Street, while buses from areas in the west will end at the mall on Mackenzie King Bridge.  Here is the reason for it:

Keeping bus riders walking through the mall is one of the city’s objectives: “My understanding is there’s discussions with the Rideau Centre, and discussions on maintaining through-flow of people on foot through there,” [Councillor] Fleury said.

The City's goal should be to make transferring easy and quick for passengers, not help business for Rideau Centre.  Rideau Centre has an LRT station and doesn't require assistance in directing people into their mall.  As for transferring, passengers hate it and is one of the reasons why some don't use public transit at all.  If passengers get off a bus on Mackenzie King Bridge and have to walk through the length of the mall to transfer onto the underground LRT, then travel time will be lost, accessibility doesn't sound promising and it will be complicated for those not familiar with the mall.  Also, does this proposed route configuration imply that time-based proof-of-payment transfers will continue to exist?  Otherwise, Rideau Centre will have to be declared as a paid-fare zone, which is completely out of the question.  As well, with frequent fare increases, it's highly likely that the downtown area will be a fare-free zone.

What are your thoughts on the latest developments of this evolving project?

In the Year 2012: Billboards and Screens

Yesterday, OC Transpo's new fare system was discussed. Today, we will look at advertising and customer information from OCTranspo's 2012 business plan.

Besides fares and government subsidies, OC Transpo generates a small fraction of its revenue from advertisements. The business plan states 1.5% of revenues, nearly $3 million annually, are from advertisements on buses, shelters and stop benches and the typical percentage for large North American transit authorities is 2%. OC Transpo plans on “using billboards on transit property to meet the needs of transit users and the general public.”

They can start with...anywhere on the Transitway. There are very few ads to be seen at transit stations, which has been puzzling since OC Transpo seems to be strapped for cash quite often and space does exist at most transit stations. Take Mackenzie King Bridge, for example. There are no ads to be seen on one of Ottawa's busiest transit stations. OC Transpo could make some significant revenue if they placed ads on the median fence facing the platform. As a passenger, I wouldn't mind more advertisements if it means not cutting service or better yet, improving service.

Google Street View of Mackenzie King Bridge looking east.

OC Transpo also says it will have less paper-based customer information and more electronic information this year. Besides the mobile website, there will be “next-bus arrival information delivered through fixed displays”, assuming this is real-time GPS information. When Open Data is released to the public by March 22, OC Transpo may not be in as much of a rush to provide the new displays. Still, they would benefit all customers, especially those without a smartphone, and one day, we won't have to look at those MS-DOS screens anymore.

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.

Helping developers help public transit at the Westboro Convent site

Following Joanne Chianello (@jchianello) on Twitter is probably one of the best ways to keep in the loop on city council meetings, and Tuesday's Planning and Environment Committee Meeting on Ashcroft Homes' proposed development on the grounds of the former site of the Les Soeurs de la Visitation convent was a perfect example.

The meeting will continue Wednesday (and possibly Thursday, as well), and has brought out a huge number of concerns with the site proposal, including those about the nine-story buildings proposed, the number of units (600 in total), traffic concerns with the new residents, and the disruption of a community "linear park" at the south end of the lot (in the image above, it's parallel to Byron Ave., and would be dissected to give the lot access from Byron).

One interesting possibility that came out as the city seeks some level of compromise with the developer, however, concerned public transit. As tweeted by Chianello:

Staff recommending that developer give free bus passes for a year to every new resident of the convent redevelopment. #ottcity

After first misreading the proposal, I realized the potentially positive effect of encouraging people to use public transit by offering them a complimentary bus pass (funded by the developer, of course). It would not only offer people a period of time to 'get the hang' of public transit, so to speak, but also may serve to mitigate the traffic concerns with this particular site. The Convent site is a 10-minute walk to Westboro Station, right on the Transitway, which would get riders downtown within only about another 10-15 minutes.

Obviously a lot of unfinished business remains in the city's discussions with Ashcroft (a lot of which could be for naught given that Ashcroft has already filed with the Ontario Municipal Board to fast-track the plan), but a partnership between the developer and OC Transpo to offer, for instance, a free bus pass for a year seems like something good for the city, and makes the homes even more attractive for new residents.

Smiths Falls looking into commuter transit

The Town of Smiths Falls and Lanark Community Transit (LCT) are working on putting together an arrangement to offer commuter transit for residents of the town, according to the Kemptville EMC.

A Carleton Place-based and managed not-for-profit organization, LCT has been offering bus service to and from Ottawa since May 3. And now, if it is feasible, it would like to expand that service to neighbouring Smiths Falls.

The LCT currently runs a return trip from Carleton Place to Ottawa four times in the morning, and runs the opposite route for the evening. Spacing Ottawa had a great article about "The Green Corridor", as it's called, back in May.

Light-rail transit spurs development in Los Angeles

artist's rendering of L.A. Expo Line's Trousdale Station

The city of Los Angeles has had light-rail for 20 years, some at-grade, some underground. Still, according to an article in the New York Times, new projects are still paying off for residents of the city. Early in June, the Times published an article about the business development along the Expo Line, the newest addition to the Los Angeles County Metro Rail system. Along the Expo Line, transit-oriented and mixed-use development that will not only revitalize some stagnating neighbourhoods--and bring money and jobs to those who need them.

From the Times:

In addition to removing tens of thousands of cars from the road — 64,000 daily riders by 2030, according to transit authorities — the 15.6-mile Expo Line is expected to spawn a variety of mixed-use real estate projects, as some of the city’s previous rail lines have done. A project including more than 500 units of housing and a 300-room W hotel was recently completed at Hollywood Boulevard and Vine Street, and a rental and retail complex was built at Wilshire Boulevard and Vermont Avenue in 2007.

The Expo Line's first phase (from Culver City to downtown Los Angeles) runs 8.6 miles, or almost 14 km--a little bit longer than the 12.5 km LRT plan in Ottawa. One end of the line begins underground (the 7th Street metro center), which quickly emerges and runs at-grade for much of the route, with the exception of "aerial stations", one over La Brea Avenue, and the other over La Cienega Boulevard. The budget was initially supposed to run USD640M, but delays pushed the cost up $220M and pushed it back by a year, and now sits at mid- to late-2011. Still, even though we're comparing apples and oranges, it's a little reassuring to see an LRT line cost USD860M (about CAD890M) when ours is budgeted at CAD2.1B, even if it is concerning to hear of yet another LRT project with massive delays and cost overruns.

Still, it's worth noting that many of those delays and cost increases have resulted from changes to the plan, including specifically the decision to add a station at the University of Southern California. Makes it all the more important for the City of Ottawa to keep in mind--cancelling or altering a transit plan once it's underway will often lead to cost repercussions, so it's important the plan is the right one before it's started.

Bixi bike-rental program in Ottawa hits a snag

Last year, the National Capital Commission ran a successful pilot project with Montreal-based Bixi bicycles for a bike-rental service. The program found the service would be economically viable, but the NCC, who wanted the bikes to be available beginning in June, hasn't found a company to take on the contract to manage the service this year.

From CBC.ca:

However, officials say the terms of the proposed contract appear to have scared off bidders.

The NCC wanted the winning company to own the bicycles and locking stations, but companies didn't seem to want the financial risk of that kind of arrangement: No bike-sharing companies responded, including the Montreal company whose Bixi bicycles were used in the pilot project.

It's too bad the system has hit this snag. It gained a fair bit of momentum last year, and seemed rather popular with locals and tourists--one would expect that momentum to have carried into this year. Hopefully the problem can be resolved before all that momentum is lost, and the program has to start over from scratch.

2010 Election: Cullen on Lansdowne

image of the winning Lansdowne redevelopment design by Phillips Farevaag Smallenberg

Over the course of the 2010 Mayoral Election campaign, Public Transit in Ottawa will be sitting down with as many mayoral candidates as are available, discussing their platforms and thoughts on transit in this city, and what they hope to achieve during their mandate, if elected mayor.

As councillor for Bay Ward, Alex Cullen has been a vocal critic of the redevelopment plans for Lansdowne Park--mostly because of the questions marks surrounding transportation on the site. Redeveloping the swaths of land devoted to parking is great, Cullen said, but without being served by public transit, building a huge number of destinations at Lansdowne is contrary to the City of Ottawa's goals of building a more sustainable city--and, he says, is a "disaster".

Lansdowne, in my view, is making a huge mistake in terms of urban planning. It’s taking an example of a site which has tonnes of uses, and not "walking the walk" when it comes to transit. The whole notion that you have a 24,000-seat stadium, a 10,000-seat arena, 1,700-seat cinema, 340,000 square feet of commercial retail located at a site with no access to rapid transit; if someone came into this town with a 340,000-square-foot shopping centre in Orleans, Riverside South, in Kanata, we’d obligate them to be located by the Transitway. But we’re not doing that here. On top of all that, it’s an area that doesn't have sufficient parking, so you’d think transit would be the solution--but there’s no access to transit. [...] It’s a disaster, and it’s just bad urban planning. [...] Why create this obligation to spend hundreds of millions of dollars to fix a mistake that you can avoid?

Instead, Cullen has suggested perhaps using a different site to house a stadium for pro football (or even soccer) in Ottawa, one that lies along existing transit lines.

We have an inventory of football sites in this town, there are about 30 other places that meet the criteria of being on rapid transit. Bayview Yards is one example, it’s not the only one, but there it is: City-owned site, right by the Transitway, with proximity to downtown, and it just meets those criteria that are there in our official plan, and has the hierarchy of walking/cycling/transit that respects smart growth. But you’re not dealing with rationale here; you’re dealing with the emotion of football glory days.

Although Cullen has suggested an alternative site, such as Bayview Yards, to house an outdoor stadium for Ottawa, there hasn't been much political capital invested in building the stadium elsewhere--much of the energy has been directed at stopping the Lansdowne development. Still, Cullen thinks it's feasible for a brand new stadium to be built at Bayview Yards.

For $130M, you could certainly put a sports stadium up at Bayview Yards, and you’re on rapid transit. You could marry in some trade-show space, as well, to make better use of the facility—that makes sense—so that would help offset some of those costs. It’s not a startling new idea, this idea has been debated around the Council table during this Lansdowne proposal, but the lobbying by the developers has put it on the backburner. The developers are going for the bird-in-hand, and the bird-in-hand is that the city puts up the money, refurbishes the stadium, and gives them the keys to the whole site, and they have access to land for 50 years for commercial development, and that commercial development will pay for the football franchise. Great for them, but it’s a horrible example of urban planning, with all these uses and no access to rapid transit. It’s council that has the obligation for good urban planning, and it’s council that’s dropping the ball.

After Cullen spoke with Public Transit in Ottawa, city council debated the redevelopment of Lansdowne and, after rejecting Cullen's motion to defer the decision on the site to the next council, ended up supporting the current plan. Still, with some councillors suggesting legal action may be taken, it seems unlikely that the redevelopment of Lansdowne Park is a done deal.

Questioning Ottawa's downtown tunnel

On last Thursday, the Ottawa Citizen's Ken Gray wrote an editorial raising the significant number of questions surrounding the light-rail route recently approved by city council. The route, whose downtown portion is shown above in a map courtesy of The Ottawa Project, has raised some concerns from interested parties.

Many of these concerns were raised by Gray in his editorial:

• Transport Canada believes the city's $550-million cost estimate is low
• Minister John Baird isn't sold on Phase 1
• Ottawa doesn't have permission from the Department of Public Works and Government Services Public Works to "drill beside the Langevin Block where Stephen Harper toils, or near the war memorial or the federal conference centre"
• The National Capital Commission (NCC) is, according to Gray, "unlikely to permit rail to run down the Ottawa River Parkway"
• Ontario Premier Dalton McGuinty "is wary about rail"
• That the depth of the tunnel, which will have to run below existing structural foundations, makes it less beneficial for business interests downtown to invest in the stations
• As well, Ottawa's downtown business community had expressed preference for a different route
• The route is, in Gray's words, "unlikely to garner many more riders because it travels much the same route as the Transitway"
• There is little room for further development on route, particularly the Parkway (assuming the NCC gives permission to use that route)
• And that Gray, and many other critics, argue "that tunnelling is financially and technically risky"

There are, certainly, plenty of positives to take from Ottawa building a transit line, but it seems to be the concerns which are dominating the news these days.

What are your opinions on the tunnel, and how it's progressed so far? Are you in favour of the route, or do you have problems with how it's going forward (or, if it's your belief, backward)?

Will businesses reduce their support for a downtown tunnel?

When the idea of a tunnel was presented to Ottawans in its current incarnation, businesses largely supported the idea. But as an article in the Citizen yesterday pointed out, now that the route has been proposed by staff, some businesses aren't so gung-ho.

The city’s downtown train subway should run farther south than city planners have plotted, said Hume Rogers, of the Downtown Coalition. He said the city’s proposed route, gradually turning north beginning at Kent Street, takes the commuter rail line too far north downtown too early. Rogers says the Downtown Coalition property owners believe a better route is to continue under Albert Street for another three blocks, then turn north at Metcalfe Street.

Rogers said the problem with veering northward at Kent Street is that it will reduce the rail line’s future potential ridership because there will be new development on streets like Slater and Laurier Avenue, rather than farther north on Queen and Sparks. Rogers said that by staying farther south, the city would be able to include buildings such as the Bell Canada tower within reasonable walking distance of the subway.

Bay councillor Alex Cullen, the chair of the city's transit committee, told us in an email that he isn't shocked by the concerns raised by Rogers:

Downtown businesses are pleased to see progress on the downtown tunnel, but want to see it serve their properties (Here! No, here! No, over here!). No surprise here.

Whether or not businesses will accept whichever tunnel route is ultimately selected is, of course, unknown at this point. But we'll see how much council wants to appease the concerns as the public consultation unfolds.