Where does unspent Presto Card money go?

An interesting story came out a few months ago in the New York Times, which revealed that New York's Metropolitan Transportation Authority (MTA) was able to claim over $500M of unspent balances on previously-purchased MetroCards:

Cards that are bought, never used but still valid are counted for bookkeeping purposes as a liability, because they might eventually be used. Outdated cards with pending balances become an asset after they expire, about two years from the date of sale. The balances are listed as revenue under the category of “fare media liability.”

Although Metrolinx (the Toronto-based provincial agency that manages Presto) isn't near the size of the MTA, there still must be the possibility that some amount of funds are occasionally left on Presto cards once they expire--which, for the record, happens after five years.

When this happens, where does this money go? Presumably it gets swallowed up into Metrolinx' bottom line, which doesn't seem fair for OC Transpo when it comes to money initially purchased for use in Ottawa. I'm not sure what happens, but it would be interesting to find out.

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.

Coffee and comfort for riders, extra revenue for OC Transpo

Some years ago, I proposed the idea of a bar car on Ottawa's trains as a way of recouping operating costs on the upcoming light-rail system--a bar car, of course, is a car on the train that offers drink service for riders. There's definitely a potential for revenue in the system, especially once Ottawa's LRT system grows out beyond the first phase from Tunney's Pasture to Blair.

But bar cars aren't everything; you can avoid the questions of licensing and still make money (potentially far more money) by operating a café car on trains--which is what happened earlier this month in Switzerland, where a Starbucks location recently moved into a train. From Fast Company:

"Starbucks locations already seem to be everywhere you look. But starting November 21, the company will take on a new frontier: trains. Starbucks, with the help of Swiss train company SBB, has converted a double-decker car running from Geneva Airport to St. Gallen in Switzerland into a fully functional Starbucks store, complete with wood tables, leather chairs, and, in another first for the company, waitstaff."

The train route in question, from the Geneva Airport to Saint Gallen, is a four-hour trip each way; the long haul and lower passenger count probably makes installing a café in a train car a slightly simpler proposition than, say, doing it on a Confederation Line train. But there's no reason why it couldn't be done in Ottawa.

There are plenty of questions about it, including how you'd have people line up and, after receiving their drinks, how you'd get them out of the way. Plus a café car raises the spectre of spills and resultant burns, a potential lawsuit waiting to happen. But maybe a discussion with Tim Horton's or some other local coffee chain would be a good way to start assessing the feasibility of the idea.

What might Surrey's transit funding request mean for Ottawa?

The City of Surrey is in the Metro Vancouver region of British Columbia, and it boasts a population of less than half a million people.

It's also hoping to embark on a massive light-rail project to bring the city together, not unlike that Ottawa city council has recently approved. For their part, Surrey recently applied for $1.8B in federal funding for their plan, and they expect that--if approved--they'd receive about one-third of that (which is in line with historical funding agreements between the three levels of government). That would equal about $600M from the feds--the same amount they pledged to Ottawa for the first phase of this city's light-rail transit system, which is under construction now.

Apparently TransLink, the provincial transit authority for Metro Vancouver, is advocating an extension of the SkyTrain further into Surrey in combination with bus-rapid transit, while Surrey city council favours an all-light rail system in the city. Each option is roughly $2.2B (SkyTrain/BRT just over, LRT just under). The province is considering a regional referendum in Metro Vancouver to determine priorities for TransLink, which--as one might expect--has concerned Surrey, considering the relatively small population and large spread of the municipality.

But setting aside provincial and regional politics on the west coast, Surrey's ask is an interesting one because of the potential influence it has on other decisions. Ottawa, which is a municipality twice as large as Surrey, received $600M from the feds some time ago, and is now beginning to spend it on the first phase of the light-rail plan. But Stage 2, that plan's second phase, is slated to begin construction immediately after completion of the first stage and expand LRT service in three directions at a cost of about $2.5B.

(Note: Although you would be right to mention that Metro Vancouver is twice as large as Metro Ottawa, this proposal from Surrey isn't a Metro Vancouver improvement--it's a locally-oriented transit solution for Surrey specifically, so I don't think comparing metro populations is right.)

That $2.5B price tag sets the stage for a near-future federal funding ask of another roughly $830M, plus the equivalent from the province. In proportional terms, it's not far off what Surrey is asking for their plan, so it might not be as much of a reach as it seems at first glance.

Supposing, of course, that Surrey's request gets support from the federal government.

Does bike-sharing work?

National Post columnist Jesse Kline penned an intriguing article a couple weeks ago questioning the wisdom of municipalities investing in Bixi or Bixi-like bike-sharing systems. Although they've long been seen as a potentially valuable component of urban transit, it's hard to deny Kline's points throughout the article:

The best that can be said about the bureaucrats behind Bixi is that they’ve done a good job of selling the bike-sharing service to other cities. Indeed, the only profitable part of the company, which was later sold off in order to comply with Quebec law, was tasked with marketing the program abroad. Unfortunately, Montreal also has managed to export many of the problems that go along with the Bixi model.
[...]
Examples from other countries also provide cautionary tales. The Washington, D.C., bike-share system received $16-million in federal, state and local subsidies. This money was supposed to give disadvantaged people access to a low-cost mode of transportation, but one user survey found that it was almost exclusively used by affluent, well-educated people — hardly the demographic that needs taxpayer subsidies to get around town.

Although the City of Ottawa's prudent fiscal managers have so far resisted to give money to the system, the NCC has put forward a good deal of money (according to Kline, about $600k). It might be sensible to them, as it provides tourists with a low-cost way of travelling between local attractions, but little is known about adoption or usage rates.

On the surface, a large-scale Bixi system in partnership with OC Transpo could offer a good solution to the "last mile" conundrum of getting commuters to and from transit stations, but at what cost? It would certainly be more expensive than the current solution of having riders walk (or get a drive) to and fro.

Flaherty not in favour of national transit strategy

Although it likely comes as no surprise, Finance Minister Jim Flaherty--the member of parliament who holds the purse strings for the federal government--is not in favour of a national transit strategy to offer predictable funding to municipalities for public transit projects.

Flaherty was recently quoted in the Edmonton Journal about a project taking place in Alberta's capital on the issue:

"Quite frankly, I’m not a big fan of fancy, big national programs. I’d much rather take the approach we’ve been taking, and deal with the City of Edmonton … deal with the various municipalities."

So far, that strategy has worked fairly well for Ottawa, as the city has received $600M in federal funding for the $2.1B Confederation Line LRT project. However, it also means that the city--as well as other cities across Canada--are forced to plan transit blindly, designing systems they'd like under the assumption that the federal government might offer one-time funding for it. We're seeing that right now with Ottawa's Stage 2 draft transit plan, which has a price tag of about $2.5B and therefore expects the federal government to come forward with another $830M or so--roughly one-third of the overall cost (the remaining two thirds, in line with past funding agreements, would be split equally between the city and the Province of Ontario).

A national transit strategy was a campaign promise of both the NDP and Liberal parties in the last federal election (the NDP even tabled a motion to establish one), and it's something very strongly supported by the Federation of Canadian Municipalities (FCM). The idea behind the strategy would be to commit dedicated funding in the annual federal budget that would be invested in eligible transit-related projects. Ideally, it would provide more predictable funding and make municipalities more able to plan transit projects thanks to the guaranteed funding.

Canada is, according to FCM, the "only OECD country without a long-term, predictable federal transit-investment policy."

Old OC Transpo buses hit the streets in Sault Ste Marie

photo © Soo Today

Anyone heading to Sault Ste Marie in the near future might recognize some of the buses running around the city, which bear a slight resemblance to OC Transpo's fleet--because they were recently purchased from the City of Ottawa.

As shown on Soo Today, the Orion VI buses retain the characteristic maple leaf on the back of the bus, but the OC Transpo name and other branding has apparently been removed.

Sault Ste Marie got a pretty good deal on the buses, too; they're expected to be in service for at least another five years, and the city offered Ottawa $80,000 for approximately 12 buses--roughly the same cost as refurbishing one of their existing Orion VI's would have been (Ottawa's buses had been previously refurbished, specifically with their front-end suspension design). It works out to a little over $6,000 per unit, and Soo city staff expect it could save the city as much as $650,000 in avoided maintenance costs (see page 142-3 of this very large document for more info).

According to Wikipedia, OC Transpo once had 140 Orion VI buses in its fleet, which were purchased in 1999. All have now been retired or sold off.

#CivilTransit: Tips on using transit from New York city

Last month I posted a question on Twitter asking people what the most annoying thing a fellow rider could do while on OC Transpo. It's part of my embryonic #CivilTransit project, a (probably misguided) project to inform people of just how irritating their behaviour can be in order to make the transit experience more enjoyable for everyone.

Responses to my Twitter poll included many things you'd expect. The most serious of infractions was harassment, an issue that's been in the news for some time and was mentioned by a few respondents. Less illegal (but still obnoxious) infractions included listening to music absurdly loud, blocking the aisle when there's room at the back, talking loudly on cell phones, back-door boarding on buses not equipped for it, putting feet on seats, and running after 95s in rush hour (you know, when the next one is no more than five minutes away).

Along a similar vein, New York City-based artist Nathan Pile recently released a bunch of fun, animated .GIF images that demonstrate "basic tips and etiquette" for visitors or residents of his place of residence. They're all funny, but the transit-related ones apply as well to Ottawa as they do to New York.

For instance, regarding your music: Here's a failsafe way to determine whether it's actually obnoxiously loud...

Also, something that I experienced recently, here's a way to determine if the food you're considering eating on the bus is inappropriate...

If you're not aware who the Courtesy Seating section is intended for, this should help...

And finally, here's a demonstration of how illogical it is to jump on the bus before allowing others to make their way off of it...

Shortly after publishing his cartoons on Imgur (here and here), Pyle got a call from a publisher asking to turn his tips into a book--which is scheduled for publication in April 2014. Hopefully his cartoons make people more aware of their surroundings on public transit.

And if you like his stuff, you can like Pyle on Facebook.

Bus ride reading: Makeshift Metropolis

If you're interested in municipal issues and city building, few books offer an overview as quickly and effectively as does Witold Rybczynski's Makeshift Metropolis: Ideas About Cities. The depth of Rybczynski's work belies the short length of the very accessible book (just 199 pages), and is definitely worth a read while you're riding around town.

Rybczynski examines the theories of many thinkers at the forefront of urbanism, especially Jane Jacobs and Lewis Mumford, but also Charles Mulford Robinson, Ebenezer Howard, and Le Corbusier. With the benefit of retrospect in many instances, the author looks at where the ideas of these thinkers have worked in contemporary cities, and where they haven't.

There are many issues facing cities today, and in the latter parts of the book Rybczynski looks at where cities might need to go in the future to remain places people can and will want to live. The answer, in the mind of the author, is density. Not necessarily hyperdensity, as with cities like New York City and Hong Kong (although there are lessons to be learned from those examples), but simply an increased density compared to what is seen in most cities today. This is particularly important in Ottawa, where a relatively low population density offers ample opportunity for the city to develop within the city without needing to move out of it--an obvious reason why City Council has worked hard to limit and altogether avoid expanding the urban boundary.

In the end, Rybczynski concludes that good planning makes good cities, citing the Israeli city of Modi'in as proof. But rather than designing every detail of the city, Rybczynski calls for macro-planning, allowing for organic growth over time under parameters set forth. It's not the hyper-planned city of Le Corbusier, nor the anarchistic city of Jacobs, but something in between.

Bigger people need bigger buses

There is a well-documented general trend that people are getting bigger in general--particularly in the United States. And as Smart Planet reports, that's going to have an impact on just about every aspect of our lives, including public transit.

The US Federal Transit Authority, similar to its Canadian counterpart, the Canadian Transit Authority, is responsible for making recommendations and regulations on mass transit. Currently, the standards by which safety on public transit is based on surveys done in the early 1960s, and don't really reflect the way people are built in today's world. From Smart Planet:

The Federal Transit Authority has proposed to raise the assumed average weight of a bus commuter around the United States to accommodate the increasing waistline of most Americans.

The federal agency wants to raise the assumed average weight per bus passenger from 150 pounds to 175 pounds, which could mean fewer people will be allowed to board city buses to meet safety regulations.

The authority has also proposed to add an extra quarter of a square foot of floor space per passenger on buses. With several passengers weighing far more than 200 pounds, the new system seems slightly more realistic.

So public transit companies are going to have to make some changes (unless people in general make changes to their diet, but that doesn't seem likely). I haven't seen information about Ottawa or Canada, but in time, we're likely going to need to lower the number of people we allow on buses, or make buses bigger. Neither option is without a cost.

(via Treehugger)

Food etiquette on public transit: How far is too far?

In Ottawa, people are allowed food and drinks on the bus. A ban has been suggested, but I haven't really had or heard of problems about people eating on the bus--I think people realize that there is a line that can be drawn, and that excessively odorous or messy food just doesn't work on OC Transpo--not for you (you'll get it all over yourself) nor for your fellow riders.

Well, in New York City subways, things aren't quite set in stone. A couple weeks ago a video surfaced of a young woman eating spaghetti on the subway, and things went downhill from there. Someone gave her a hard time, she and an acquaintance shot back, and then... well, then I lost all hope for humanity things got out of control. Check out the video below, via Honkin' Mad.

(It gets really crazy--like, seriously, just pure nutty--around the 2:00 mark.)

So I ask readers out there: Where do you draw the line with eating on public transit? Is it ever okay?

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.

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.

Ignatieff promises national transit strategy

We're still very early in the 2011 federal election campaign, but already Liberal leader Michael Ignatieff has stated his commitment to establishing a national public transit strategy for Canadian cities. As quoted on CBC's Inside Politics blog:

Ignatieff: I think it's crucial to have a national strategy on this, if you go to the lower mainland, Vancouver they need dedicated transit money, you go to Calgary, Winnipeg, you go to Toronto and especially Montreal. We have to sit down. I got a $56 billion deficit I gotta bail you out of. But the key thing here is to give people choices. The thing that bothers me most about the way we live is people are locked! They gotta be in their cars and we gotta renew public transport. We've got to have a plan. Ottawa can't tell Montreal how to do this stuff but...

Norris: Are you prepared to commit to a dedicated, recurring, reliable source of federal money for public transit?

Ignatieff: I'm prepared to commit to federal investment in public transit. You'll see it in the next platform.

It's really the first I've heard of public transit so far in the very young campaign. We can probably assume the NDPs will outline a national transit strategy because, well, they're always talking about transit funding and just last month they tabled one, and the Greens would likely have something in their platform, as well. The Conservatives didn't include any notable public transit promises in their recent (failed) budget, but time will tell if it forms part of their platform for the 2011 campaign.

We'll see which party ends up as the top choice for transit funding, but Ignatieff got a head start.

The predictable relationship between oil prices and transit ridership

In 2008, the cost of oil and gasoline hit record highs. And with them, public transit ridership also hit all-time peaks. It was in headlines across North America for months, as records continued to be broken for ridership. Then, when oil prices came back to earth, driving went back up and transit ridership back down.

Now, with unrest throughout much of north Africa and the middle east, the cost of oil is going up once again. And once again, people are looking at public transit as a way to avoid paying the higher prices for gasoline. From CBS News:

In Pasadena, Calif., Jackie Gilberto rides the rails to her job in downtown Los Angeles.

So why did she ditch her car?

"About three months ago in November when I realized I was spending about $400 a month in gas," Gilberto said.

The train costs Gilberto $62 per month, and she now has plenty of company. Rail ridership in Los Angeles is up 8 percent versus last year -- from 273,756 in January 2010 to 298,180 last January, according to the local transit authority.

The city says these numbers are because of gas prices. Trouble in the Middle East caused pump prices to climb for the 21st straight day Tuesday, adding nearly a penny at the end of the day for $3.517 per gallon.

Environmentally speaking, it's a good thing: If the price of oil gets so high that it begins to reflect the environmental cost associated with burning it off, it will push people to alternative (and greener) transportation options, like walking, cycling, and--of course--public transit.

In Ottawa, the transit system is already pretty darn close to its capacity. Building light-rail is going to increase capacity, but it's still a long way off; if oil prices continue to rise and demand for public transit follows suit, how will OC Transpo respond?

Are bike lanes really this divisive?

Last month, the City of Ottawa approved a two-year pilot project in which a segregated bike lane will be installed on Laurier Avenue--but it wasn't without controversy. Cyclists, for a time, were opposed to Laurier, and non-cyclists (at least some of them) were opposed to a bike lane in general, wherever it would go.

But that's nothing compared to what's happening in New York City. That city recently opened a demarcated cycling lane along Prospect Park West, running 19 blocks in total. Opponents of the lane have gone as far as to sue the city, demanding the bike lane be removed. From the New York Times:

The lawsuit, filed by a group with close ties to Iris Weinshall, the city’s transportation commissioner from 2000 to 2007 and the wife of Senator Charles E. Schumer, accuses the Transportation Department of misleading residents about the benefits of the lane, cherry-picking statistics on safety improvements and collaborating with bicycle activists to quash community opposition.

The story actually made the front page of the Times today. And it's not even the first time New York has been sued over bike lanes: It happened in the 1980s, as well.

But the Guardian's "Bike Blog" thinks that this lawsuit is about more than just one bike lane in one city, but could affect cycling infrastructure projects worldwide:

Connect the dots, and this becomes a much more significant story than the future of one bike lane in Brooklyn, or even the career of one official. New York City justly sees itself as the world's greatest city: here, in some sense, people live the way everyone would live if they had the chance. How New York – the city that still has a uniquely low level of car ownership and use – manages its transport planning in the 21st century matters for the whole world: it is the template. If cycling is pushed back into the margins of that future, rather than promoted, along with efficient mass public transit and safe, pleasant pedestrianism, as a key part of that future, the consequences will be grave and grim.

Personally, I don't see why bike lanes are so divisive. We devote so much space and resources to automobile infrastructure; what's the harm in a little bit of love for the cyclists out there?

One tube station: Only £180,000

This is kind of awesome.

As recently seen on BLDGBLOG, Transport for London has recently put up for auction the old Shoreditch Tube Station, which opened way back in 1869 but was shuttered up in 2006, for a listed price of £180,000. Just a 20-minute drive to downtown London (at least that's what Google Maps says), it's hard to believe there haven't yet been stories about it being sold.

I assume a developer might purchase the property for the land, and tear down the old building in favour of newer ones (you can be sure if it was in Ottawa, that's what would happen). But how awesome would retrofitting the main station building into an office be? Or even a house? Would make for a heck of a story, anyway.

Making money on transit station names

Something I've written about a couple of times in the past has been the idea of selling transit station naming rights to business or corporate sponsors as an alternative revenue stream for OC Transpo. It's generally met with resistance--having geographically-specific names makes for a much more intuitive and user-friendly transit system, so people heading down Bank Street can easily figure out they've got to get off the Transitway at Bank and Slater, for instance--but with recent news of Washington, D.C.'s Metropolitan Transportation Authority considering the measure to help offset funding shortages, it's obviously becoming a real option for public transit utilities.

Ottawa has funding shortages, too, as do just about every other transit utility in the world. Selling naming rights is always an option, although some might like to see it as a last-ditch one.

NDP tables "national transit strategy"

The New Democrat Party of Canada has a long history of making transit-related announcements, a couple recent ones being a couple of bills to protect transit operators, and before that--during the 2008 federal election campaign--a series of funding announcements in major Canadian cities.

Last week, Toronto NDP MP Olivia Chow introduced a National Public Transit Strategy. In a press release, the NDP said Canada was the only OECD member state without one. From the release:

“Canadians deserve fast, reliable, affordable and accessible public transit,” said Chow. “Every year billions of dollars are lost due to traffic congestion while simultaneously transit authorities struggle to meet demands.”

Chow’s legislation outlines a strategy for the federal government to:

• Provide a permanent investment plan to support public transit
• Establish federal funding mechanisms for public transit
• Work together with all levels of government to provide sustainable, predictable, long term and adequate funding
• Etablish accountability measures to ensure that all governments work together to increase access to public transit.

Hard to imagine how this could be a bad idea for municipalities looking for consistent funding for public transit infrastructure. The release goes on to discuss operating costs, which have never been funded by federal partners, but... hey, if it can help offer "predictable" transit funding, cities will be better able to plan their transit infrastructure development with the knowledge that the funding isn't dependent on how generous the government of the day is feeling.

Collisions, injuries, and deaths involving OC Transpo

As reported in La Presse, OC Transpo has averaged an injury every other day and one death a year over the first decade of the 2000s. From the story:

Des documents obtenus en vertu de la Loi sur l'accès à l'information démontrent qu'entre 2000 et 2009, les autobus de la société de transport en commun de la Ville d'Ottawa ont été impliqués dans 2057 accidents de la route qui ont fait 9 morts et 1868 blessés.

Or, roughly translated (any mistakes being my own):

Documents obtained under the Access to Information Act show that between 2000 and 2009, the City of Ottawa's bus transit company was involved in 2,057 road accidents that resulted in nine deaths and left 1,868 injured.

As interim Transit Commission Chair Diane Deans said in the article, even one accident is too many, but they seem an inevitability given the number of hours logged driving across our city. The article goes on to say that in certain years, Ottawa had more accidents than even Montreal's transit system, despite a smaller fleet.

I will note, however, that considering how many cars and drivers are taken off the road on a transit system, the number of lives saved as a result of increasing public transit use would have to massively outweigh the number of accidents it costs; the American Public Transportation Association estimates that riding transit is 170 times safer than driving a personal automobile.