2010 Election: Scharf on OC Transpo

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.

Mayoral candidate Jane Scharf has a few different ideas on how to complement OC Transpo bus service, from interprovincial rail service between Ottawa and Gatineau and aerial gondolas to add some spice to Ottawa's transportation infrastructure. But she also has several ideas based on her observations on how to improve bus service itself, which she thinks can help make for a more efficient service.

And there’s other things [I think are worth looking into], like putting more buses on the Transitway. It’s not overly busy, especially coming out this way—I’m in Kanata. It’s really congested--traffic congested--really badly. More buses, and more attention to that process. Like right now, it’s hard to use the Park’n’Ride, there’s not a lot of spaces; they could extend that, that would be cheap. Certainly cheaper than $2.4B. They could do all of that, what I just said, and that would make a huge impact on the congestion issues.

Scharf also thinks that there are big ways the city can change how they deal with the transit union in particular, and unions in general, to make for better relations and, as a result, better service.

I actually think that—this is a personal thing, I don’t even know if it’s something that they’re looking at in general—but personally, I think that the union process could be improved. And not just with OC Transpo, but everywhere, to make it more of a cooperative effort. For example, in Germany, in the 70’s they had a model of unions that was working really well where the government would train union negotiators and place them in a company, and once they’re placed they would be paid by the company, and it would be their job to set up a committee between management and labour—in equal numbers—and it was a requirement by law that all books would be open. And this labour guy just facilitated negotiations, and they had great results with it. Wages could go up, or down, depending on what profits were.

And it’s all open, so there’s not none of this adversarial ‘give us more’, ‘we don’t have any’, ‘give us more’, ‘we don’t have any’, that we have here. I think that you’d see better results, more effective. Doesn’t mean that I want them to change totally like that, but I think that they can go closer to that. For example, they could, say, make all the books open. Leave, by and large, the structure that’s there now, and just open all the books. To just the negotiating committee, not to everyone who works there, but whose ever coming on the negotiating committee.

2010 Election: Scharf on the DOTT

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.

One of the main questions Jane Scharf has about the current transit plan is why Ottawa is moving forward with the Downtown Ottawa Transit Tunnel (DOTT). Scharf claims that there is a tunnel in place right now in downtown Ottawa, and that should be able to handle rail for the city. She also feels that rail should go across Alexandra Bridge into Gatineau, and that Byron Way should be looked at for an O-Train extension.

I think that there are a few questions we need to investigate before proceeding with this LRT tunnel deal. They would include: an investigation of the feasibility of putting the O-Train across the Alexandra Bridge, and the train link; investigating the use of the Byron right-of-way, we could have a streetcar on it; and a proper explanation of why the existing tunnel can’t be used.

I suspect that they don’t want to use it because there’s a plan to extend the congress centre across the area where the train would come up, you know, where Union Station is there?

[...]

There’s no reason, I don’t see any reason [why this tunnel isn't used], and I’m not getting any answers. I discussed this at length with Alex Cullen, and I have it on e-mail, the e-mail discussion, on my blog.

While talking to Scharf about these ideas of hers, a number of questions came up. Chief among them was her claims of a tunnel in downtown Ottawa; as far as I can tell, this 'tunnel' is the small opening at the former Sapper's Bridge downtown, underneath Wellington Street. This is the tunnel Alex Cullen describes in the e-mail discussion he and Candidate Scharf had. Scharf maintains that "one existing tunnel is enough", which is true, but this is hardly a tunnel, and even if it were, the question of getting trains to it and from it raise more questions.

Second is the possibility of using Alexandra Bridge for an O-Train extension. I thought Scharf had mis-spoke and, in fact, been referring to the Prince of Wales Bridge--which seems an obvious extension of the existing O-Train, and has been suggested by many in the past. But Scharf maintained that Alexandra was her desired spot for a river crossing, but she failed to outline how the train would get across downtown from where the O-Train arrives at Bayview to the Alexandra Bridge, which is to the east of the city's centre--although I assume the small tunnel under Wellington would be part of her explanation.

Finally is the suggestion of using Byron Avenue and the City's right-of-way there as an extension of the O-Train. This seems like the Western leg of the current transit plan and, as far as I understand, Byron will be one of several possibilities (also including the Ottawa River Parkway and Carling Avenue) investigated.

Scharf's main problem, though, is that she doesn't feel these possibilities have been suitably explored.

But they haven’t even investigated it, that’s my point. I’m not saying this is my transportation plan, but I’m saying that all viable options haven’t been investigated.

2010 Election: Scharf's transit idea

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.

Rather than propose this possibility as a 'transit alternative', mayoral candidate Jane Scharf has presented it as a possible idea for council to consider--she feels the mayor's role is to "keep the process operating" rather than proposing a pet-project "to ram down everybody’s throat". Her idea? Aerial gondolas, positioned around downtown Ottawa and across the river into Gatineau, to complement existing transit infrastructure.

I like the idea of putting some gondola. Ottawa would be very suitable for that. Like the one they’re proposing for Montreal, to go over to the island; it’s seven miles long, and the stats on it are that it can move 5,000 people in an hour, and it goes roughly 60 miles an hour. Seven miles in seven minutes. It’s electric, there’s no drivers, you can get two-seater or four-seater—just like the ones they use to ski—they’re very cheap to put in, they’re one-third of the cost to install and one-third to operate. And, of course, no direct pollution, because it’s all electricity.

As Scharf mentioned, Montreal had plans to run an aerial gondola (the MAG) for seven miles over the St. Lawrence River, connecting the city's Old Port with Île Notre-Dame and Île Sainte-Hélène. The project seems to have hit a snag with the Old Port Corporation (similar, in a way, to the NCC), but the $100M privately-funded project was expected by some to bring in an extra $120M in tourist revenue per year, and was popular with some residents. According to Scharf, it could be a good fit for Ottawa:

I was thinking we could put them around downtown, and during the day or during rush hour it could help with congestion. But other than that, it’s worth it. And that’s what they’re saying in Montreal, they’re expecting it to be a world-class tourist attraction. So it’d be on the list of something to do when you come to Ottawa, and you could put those across the river, too, very easily.

Recap of the mayoral debate on the environment

The first ever Ottawa mayoral debate on the environment took place at Saint Paul University on Sunday night, and there was no shortage of... excitement for those in attendance.

Fireworks started right off the bat, when candidate Jane Scharf questioned the fairness of the questions participants were to be asked, and withdrew from the debate. This opened up a spot for candidate Andy Haydon (who hadn't responded in time to be an official member of the debate), but he declined the opportunity--but still joined into the debate, informally and periodically. Candidate Joseph Furtenbacher was also in attendance, but because he hadn't responded in time to become an official candidate (he said he wasn't invited, possibly because he joined the race late) [Ed. note: Mr. Furtenbacher contacted be to explain that he wasn't invited to the debate because invitations were sent out prior to his registration as an official mayoral candidate], he wasn't invited to participate, and simply sat in the seat vacated by Scharf--without participating.

And all that excitement was before the debate had even officially started.

Over the course of the debate, a large number of environmental issues came up, from protecting aquifers and sensitive ecological areas to water management to 'smart growth' and urban planning. Although no question was directly asked about public transit, it did come up periodically, and there was a significant discussion about cycling in Ottawa.

As for public transit, candidates spoke up about their plans. Incumbent Larry O'Brien spoke about his support for the current plan, as did Jim Watson; Mike Maguire and Clive Doucet each briefly mentioned their alternative transit plans; Andy Haydon very briefly mentioned his support for expanding Ottawa's BRT system, and called Ottawa's transit system Canada's best (citing ridership per capita to support his claim); and Robin Lawrance one again expressed his concerns for public safety with regard to the plan to build a tunnel. The only other speaker given an opportunity were César Bello--who didn't discuss transit plans, but did say he'd ensure no more transit strikes--and Charlie Taylor, who didn't speak much to public transit in general (but has in the past expressed grudging support for the city's current transit plan).

As I write this post, hours after the debate, I'm still not sure what to think about what I just witnessed. There were some good points made, but they were rare gems hidden in the personal attacks and ideological statements and slogans that dominated the debate. And, as was pointed out by Taylor, the whole thing was dominated with 'greenwashing', and many of the candidates were definitely speaking to the audience in front of them.

Still, the debate can be seen as nothing but a positive thing for this city. There were a couple hundred people in attendance (it was standing-room only by the time it started), and most of the audience were very interested in what was said. In terms of getting the environment on the radar for the mayoral race, as well, the event was a huge success.

Good news for those of you who missed the debate, but want to watch it: It will be on Rogers 22 in Ottawa this Tuesday, Sept. 28, at 8:30 p.m. Tune in, if you can; you won't be sorry.