Feds commit $1B for LRT's Stage 2 extension

In the lead-up to this year's federal election, the current Conservative Government has committed its one-third share of Stage 2, the City of Ottawa's planned $3B extension of our nascent light-rail system.

From the Ottawa Metro:

Ottawa-Orleans MP Royal Galipeau confirmed Wednesday the long-awaited money from the Conservative government that have been earmarked to fund phase two of the $3 billion project, which will extend the LRT farther east, west and south for a combined 30 kilometres of rail and 19 stations.

Ottawa City Council recently endorsed the full plan, which will extend rail service south to Riverside South (and likely the Airport), west to Bayshore and Bayview, and east to Place D'Orléans. All in all, the expansion will add 10 new stations to the system, with construction expected to begin as soon as the current phase is done with the expanded system scheduled to take its first riders in 2023.

The province has not officially committed its share of the funding, but the current Liberal government has heavily invested in transit for other cities and should be expected to do so for Ottawa, as well.

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 Outdated cards with pending balances become an asset after they expire, about two years from the date of sale.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.

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.

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."

In the news: Ottawa's proposed Transportation Master Plan

The City of Ottawa's proposed Transportation Master Plan was released publicly earlier in the week, and it features light-rail extensions from the current Confederation Line spine to Bayshore, Baseline, Bowesville, and Place D'Orleans (plus a whole bunch of other stuff complementing those extensions). Such a massive and ambitious project is rare for our usually conservative and glacially-paced city, so it should come as no surprise that the TMP is receiving ample media coverage--including prominent front-page coverage in all three local dailies:

Here's a quick look at what some people are saying:

General coverage

David Reevely, Ottawa Citizen:

"Hoping to position himself as a transportation visionary before next year’s civic election, Mayor Jim Watson announced major changes to the city’s master plan for transit, roads and cycling Wednesday morning that would extend rail west, south and east by 2023. 

"It would also handcuff the city’s transit spending for 25 years after that, and it relies on charging buyers of new homes and offices a lot more in development levies than they’re used to paying."

Jon Willing, Ottawa Sun:

"A $3-billion expansion of Ottawa's rail system can happen in 10 years with the help of upper-tier governments, a 2.5% annual property tax increase and inflationary increases to transit fares, Mayor Jim Watson said Wednesday."

Steve Collins, Ottawa Metro:

"Light rail emerged Wednesday as the showpiece of the city’s new Transportation Master Plan, with an ambitious $2.48-billion proposal to add 35 km of rail and 19 new stations."

Matthew Pearson, Ottawa Citizen: Collected initial reactions from local federal and provincial politicians, including John Baird, David McGuinty, Lisa MacLeod, Glen Murray, and Yasir Naqvi.

Mark Brownlee, Ottawa Business Journal
Catherine Kitts, Orléans Star
CBC News


Opinion

Joanne Chianello, Ottawa Citizen:

"In an unusually pre-hyped speech Wednesday morning, Watson not only laid out his vision for transit expansion in the capital but signalled what will undoubtedly be one of his major re-election platform planks: expanded rail. 

"Instead of eking rail service out across the city over the next two decades (or more), Watson opted for the bolder move of extending service to the east, west and south simultaneously in a single $3-billion project he says can be completed between 2018 and 2023. [...] 

"Watson’s plan is a brilliant tactical move, not only because it’s actually a great idea to fast-track rail — finally! — but there’s almost no political downside."

Susan Sherring, Ottawa Sun:

"Under Watson's plan, the cost of the light-rail portion of the plan is roughly $3 billion, requiring about $1 billion each from the city, the province and the feds. 

"That is problematic on many levels. 

"How likely is it either the province or the feds are going to belly up to the bar — all in?"

Eric Darwin, West Side Action:

"Mayor Jim made a big deal of his success on the Confederation Line project by having a budget first, then build to the budget (rather than design the best line, and figure out how to pay for it). He praised his initiative in bringing in this new budgeting system, and announced other cities are copying it. (Having just read Margaret Thatcher’s biography, I recall that she fought the same battle in the 1980′s in Britain and was roundly vilified for it. Maybe Jim will do better; it is, after all, 30 years later.)"

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.

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.

Fare hikes don't pay for capital projects

I was rather perturbed when I came across an article on the 580 CFRA website, entitled "Fare Bumps Down the Road," which included the following lede:

A long road of transit fare hikes is facing OC Transpo riders to help pay for the $2.1 billion Light Rail Transit system.

It then went on to discuss the long-range financial plan for Ottawa until 2048, which states that transit fares and taxes can be expected to increase at the rate of inflation.

It's a strange story for two reasons:

1. Transit fares will not be used to "help pay" for Ottawa's $2.1B light-rail system; the construction of it has long been budgeted out using $600M from each of the federal and provincial governments, and another $900M from the city's treasury. Transit fares are, in fact, never used to fund capital projects; they're put towards the operating costs of OC Transpo.

2. Even if a decision were made to use transit hikes to fund the project (which, I will state once again, is not the case), rises in fares which follow the inflation rate will do nothing but compensate for inflation. There's no net gain when fares rise with inflation, because expenses also rise with inflation.

I'm not sure if this misconception is a common one, but I figured I'd point out that it's misleading.

Bus ride reading: Urban Nation

While browsing through the Ottawa Public Library collection, my interest was piqued by Alan Broadbent's Urban Nation: Why We Need to Give Power Back to the Cities to Make Canada Strong. Broadbent's premise is that Canada is becoming an increasingly urbanized nation, and the powers currently reserved for provinces need to be given to certain cities so that they've got the capacity and flexibility to respond to unique obstacles.

Although Broadbent mentions Toronto, Montreal, and Vancouver as the cities which in particular deserve (and, in his opinion, need) this authority, his focus is undoubtedly on Toronto. Only a few passing examples show a concern for Vancouver, and Montreal is only mentioned a handful of times. The book is very much focussed on how a possible re-organization of government would benefit Toronto.

I was somewhat disappointed in Broadbent's dismissal of the City of Ottawa; although not nearly as large as the cities he focuses on, the Ottawa census metropolitan area is in the unique position of being affected by five levels of government as well as numerous different government agencies (the National Capital Commission and Parks Canada, to name a couple). If the idea is to build a more efficient and specifically capable municipal body, few Canadian cities would benefit from the change more than Ottawa would. But that wasn't a focus Broadbent dealt with, although I think the book would have benefited from it.

Much of the book is focussed on taxes: How taxes could shift towards urban uses, different taxation mechanisms that would open up to cities with province-like authorities, tax credits, and financing infrastructure projects through taxes. Which is rather interesting, if somewhat dry at times to read. Still, Broadbent brings up some very good points about the benefits that could come about.

Peculiarly, however, are the significant jurisdictional modifications Broadbent suggests towards the end of the book. Noting a disparity between representatives in the federal government and population between rural and urban populations, he not only proposes more representatives for urban areas, but also proposes a provincial reorganization for less populous provinces. The Atlantic provinces of Newfoundland and Labrador, Nova Scotia, Prince Edward Island, and New Brunswick would be united as "The Maritimes" (a label which I'm sure residents of Newfoundland and Labrador wouldn't appreciate, given that that province isn't a maritime province), while Alberta, Saskatchewan, and Manitoba would be united as "The Prairies". It seemed to come out of nowhere, but I suppose the point is that if cities are to gain powers, it's likely that someone else would have to give them up. In Broadbent's vision, that would be the lower-populated provinces across Canada.

Putting aside his vision for a "New Canada", Broadbent's point about a lack of sufficient powers setting cities back is very apropos. He uses more examples that I can recount here, but his bottom line is that Canadians are flocking to cities, and our governance structure--established almost 150 years ago--has failed to adjust to reflect changing realities. As it is, cities are subject to the whims of provincial and federal funding partners, virtually relegated to beggars coming hat-in-hand to other levels of government to seek funding for significant projects.

For readers interested in urban issues in Canada or the relationship between different levels of government would likely enjoy reading Urban Nation. But don't go into it expecting much of an Ottawa perspective.

2010 Election: Cullen on LRT affordability

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

The second in a series of posts looking at Alex Cullen's thoughts on transit leading up to the election deals with the affordability of Ottawa's current $2.1B light-rail transit plan, including specifically the $735M Downtown Ottawa Transit Tunnel (DOTT). Cullen started by addressing the criticism that the LRT plan, and specifically the DOTT, has no upper limit budget.

I don’t want to fool people; the idea is not $735M come hell or high water, the idea is to get a tunnel in place that meets the need of our community. We think it’s $735M, but if it tends to be $750M, or $720M, that’s not such a big deal for me, as long as we get it in place, because we’re able to accommodate that. What is not sustainable is if a $735M tunnel becomes a $1.2B tunnel; that’s not sustainable. There are limits, and there would have to be limits, because we only have so much capacity. But we’re not in the danger zone of adopting something we cannot afford.

Leading up to and through the campaign so far, Cullen has been insistent that the City would be able to afford the current $2.1B LRT plan without breaking the bank. I asked him where that confidence came from.

We have the financial capacity [to fund this plan]. It does not bring us to our limit, and, as a matter fact, we’ve taken the whole transportation master plan, at $3.8B over the lifetime of that transportation master plan, and we can do it. So that’s where my confidence comes from. We have the revenues identified from development charges—that’s the portion of development charges dedicated to transit, that’s not 100 per cent of development charges—and we have the gas tax rebate, we have our federal and provincial funding partners, and we have what we normally allocate for transit capital, which is about $75M, and that gets us to $900M. And we don’t threaten our triple-A rating on that basis.

It is the biggest single project, it is going to transform our city, but the work that has gone into estimating the costs and estimating our financial capability of handling these costs, gives me the confidence to say that this is a very doable project.

NCC looking to work with city on DOTT stations

According to an article in the Ottawa Citizen, the National Capital Commission is looking to get involved with the City of Ottawa to offer some input into Ottawa's light-rail transit stations during the upcoming design process.

From the Citizen article:

“As they were explaining the project to us, with the 13 stations, it just seemed like such a wonderful opportunity to put a national or a capital component to it,” Lemay said.

The transit system will be a “capital-changing” project, she said.

“It would be wonderful to be able to involve the provinces. … One of the things we’ve heard from Canadians is they don’t feel represented in their nation’s capital. What a wonderful opportunity to actually give them that opportunity to be represented.”

The fact that there are to be 13 transit stations along the LRT line, the same number of provinces and territories within Canada, is an intriguing coincidence--adding in some design element bringing that home would certainly make for a nice train ride through the core. And although the NCC has said that their offer doesn't come with further funding (they're offering their "expertise" and an ability to connect with the whole country) it's probably not too much to think that provincial and territorial governments may be interested in investing in "their" LRT stop along the line. Perhaps not significant investments, but even a small amount of funding to help improve the aesthetics of the station could allow Ottawa to have some terrific-looking stations without breaking the bank on the design aspect.

Still, the blog Maple Manifesto--a newcomer to the Ottawa blogging scene--is wondering why the NCC is looking to have input in the City's infrastructure affairs when they aren't always willing to cooperate with the City in other areas.

The image at the top of the page (click to enlarge) is of the projected 'Downtown East' station--in the middle of the downtown tunnel, tentatively slotted right in front of Parliament Hill (or within a couple blocks, anyway), and likely the stop most tourists will be disembarking at in order to get to events in the area. Of all the stations the NCC might get involved in, this seems the most likely for them to invest into. And, if we go from west to east along the line as we do with provinces (relegating the territories to the eastern portion, for arguments' sake), Tunney's Pasture would be British Columbia, and Downtown East would be--you guessed it--Ontario.

Oil money pays for public transit in Alberta

There's little question that, from the environmental movement's perspective, oil=bad while public transit=good. But what happens when money generated from oil revenue goes to pay for massive public transit infrastructure projects, using money from current emissions to help reduce future pollution? It may not work out to an equal equation, but it certainly muddies the picture.

And that's what's happening these days, out west in Alberta.

There's little question that oilsands development, on its own, is bad for the environment. Even conventional oil is difficult, but the more intensive refining process of the oilsands (although getting better thanks to new techniques, oilsands remains a much more environmentally-damaging source of oil than conventional sources) makes for even higher emissions. But as the province's deficit shrinks, thanks largely to oil royalties and related income, that money is being shared with her biggest cities, for public transit--culminating in a $2B funding pledge last month.

With the promise, each of Calgary and Edmonton will receive $800M for their respective transit infrastructure, and other Alberta cities will duke it out over the remaining $400M. Officials in Edmonton are breathing a sigh of relief thanks to the promise, because it means their NAIT (Northern Alberta Institute of Technology) light-rail line will proceed as scheduled, and should be completed in 2014.

And Edmonton will be able to complete more transit projects, as well. From the Edmonton Journal:

The provincial money also gives Edmonton a big boost toward completing LRT lines to Lewis Estates and Mill Woods, but the federal government must also kick in cash, as it has for transit systems in Toronto, Vancouver and Ottawa, Boutilier said.

So, although it might mean a deal with the devil from an environmentalist's perspective, some good is coming out of the oilsand development in Alberta: upgrades to public transit.

Citizen's Gray laments the cancellation of the north-south LRT line

On his The Bulldog blog yesterday, Ottawa Citizen columnist Ken Gray eulogized what he called the 'tragic' cancellation of the 2006 north-south light-rail line, citing a large number of reasons outlining why he thinks the move was a mistake:

• The first project would have cost $884 million with the Siemens consortium paying for any overruns. The current plan is expected to cost $2.1 billion or as much as 25 per cent more if overruns occur. The city is unlikely to be able to stick the builder of the project with overruns because of possible expensive difficulties with the tunnel
• Four lost years of planning
• The first project ran from Barrhaven to the University of Ottawa. The new project runs from Tunney's Pasture to Blair Road ... 12.5 kilometres or one stop west of where the north-south plan would have done
• The first project would be operating now. The new plan is expected to be completed in 2019
• The environmental assessment for east-west rail would be completed or near completion now, putting east-west rail farther ahead today than it is with the current plan

Those are just a few of the many points Gray outlined, before he began outlining some reasons he believes the downtown tunnel is a mistake. And, as long as the construction went as scheduled, every point he's made there is correct. The north-south line was to include 29km of surface rail through downtown (8km of which is existing O-Train service), while the current plan calls for 12.5km, including a tunnel downtown. Obviously, the distance traveled is a significant difference, but proponents of cancellation have consistently gone back to their suggestion that a tunnel downtown represents the only solution to the current congestion there.

Still, opponents of the cancellation have plenty of good arguments of their own--the most powerful being the fact that had we gone through with it, we would now be looking at adding an east-west portion to the north-south line that would be running today.

The process of cancellation was a complicated one, still shrouded in a fair bit of mystery. In the inaugural issue of the Journal of Public Transit in Ottawa, I tried to offer some clarification in the process, but it remains difficult to fully comprehend. The quick version is that many were put off by the secrecy surrounding the process, and many others opposed surface rail in the core; when a truncated line leaving the downtown portion out, the Ontario government refused to support the different plan; when it was restored, the federal government wasn't prepared to re-commit their money. So the plan was cancelled, and the process of building a new one began.

Whether you agree with Gray in seeing the cancellation as a mistake or not, there comes a point where re-hashing the same old arguments over and over again is no longer constructive. The plan was cancelled four years ago, and perhaps we all need to take the lessons from that plan, and focus on ensuring that the current plan doesn't fall victim to the same mistakes.

So, about that federal LRT funding...

The City of Ottawa is still waiting to hear the federal government announce their intentions to match (or hopefully exceed) the provincial $600M funding pledge for the city's $2.1B light-rail transit plan. Queen's Park made its pledge back in December, and the general understanding was that a similar announcement from Federal Infrastructure Minister John Baird would come in a matter of days.

And then days became weeks. And now weeks have become months.

Some councillors, including Transit Committee Vice-Chair Marianne Wilkinson, are getting a little antsy waiting for the announcement. From 580 CFRA:

Vice Chair of Ottawa City Hall's Transit Committee Marianne Wilkinson says the environmental assessment is almost complete and she'd like to hear something concrete soon.

She suggests a delay in funding could slow down the project.

The actual groundbreaking for the project is still a ways off, but that date is getting closer, and we haven't really heard a peep since the federal governments most recent re-committing its $200M in transit plan funding--that money that's been on the table for years, waiting for a transit plan to fund.

Hopefully the announcement will come soon; light-rail transit in Ottawa has already been delayed long enough.

Ottawa to buy 226 new buses for $155M

In what seems like a deal that's almost too good to be true, the City of Ottawa decided to approve a purchase of 226 new diesel-powered articulated buses from New Flyer last week. The deal, according to the San Francisco Chronicle, represents a 19 percent discount from standard costs, and comes after Chicago delayed an order of their own due to funding problems.

Ottawa city council voted 18 in favour of the deal, three against. Although there weren't funds budgeted for a bus purchase of this size, city staff explained how it would work (from the Ottawa Citizen):

Staff say $142 million of the $155.7-million cost would be financed by borrowing the money, and the cost “will be more than offset by savings created by replacing the aging fleet of 2001-2004 models with new, fuel-efficient models.”

The deal comes at an opportune time, less than a month after the Province of Ontario released a budget which outlined a stoppage to their subsidized bus-replacement program.

Read more...

• Ottawa Citizen, "Company offers OC Transpo discount articulated buses"
• CTV.ca "City council approves $155M bus deal"
• Trading Markets, "New Flyer Announces Bus Purchase by The City of Ottawa for OC Transpo"
• San Francisco Chronicle, "Ottawa Buys 226 New Flyer Buses After Chicago Cuts Funding"

TransitOttawa talks transit on Talk Ottawa

You may have missed it, but Peter Raaymakers, Executive Director of Public Transit in Ottawa, was on Talk Ottawa on Monday evening to discuss transit issues of the day. Also on the show was Bay Ward Councillor, Transit Committee Chair, and 2010 Mayoral Candidate Alex Cullen and River Ward Councillor and Transportation Committee Chair Maria McRae. Topics of discussion were the cancelled buses early last week, problems with new fare boxes on OC Transpo buses, the upcoming mayoral election, the possibility of establishing a transit commission, and this week's City Council meeting to vote on the city's $2.1B transit plan.

Discussion revealed that an operational problem at OC Transpo garages was the main cause for the route cancellations last Monday and Tuesday, and the city is expecting more information--particularly with regards to accountability for the costly error--at the upcoming Transit Committee meeting on Jan. 20, 2010.

As for the fare boxes, some of the newer models have been jammed because of confusion about their use, and as a result some rides are free because the buses can't accept fares. According to Cullen, this design is commonplace, and the only way forward is to wait for riders to become more used to the new boxes.

On the issue of creating a transit commission, McRae and Cullen butted heads. McRae suggested that it was something she would favour, but more than anything, there needs to be a debate about it. Cullen wondered whether or not there would be anything gained were an arms's-length commission established, and suggested there would be a loss of accountability if it were instigated. On the panel, I suggested that it could address the politicization of certain issues (including, for instance, the labour disputes and individual route cuts), and was one of the chief recommendations on the 2006 Mayor's Task Force on Transit--a suggestion which has received little discussion. (Read more on that here.)

Finally, the question of whether or not city councillors would support the new transit plan on Wednesday in council came up, and neither councillor on the panel suggested it was a lock. A significant question was whether or not the city would be willing to cover any shortfall in federal or provincial funding, given that the province (counted on to fulfill one-third of the $2.1B price tag) only offered $600M for the city. Both were quite confident that federal partners would be waiting for the official request for funding, with Cullen suggesting they would have it within weeks of Wednesday's decision. There will certainly be more discussion of this on Wednesday.

Anyone interested can watch a replay of Talk Ottawa on Monday at midnight or Tuesday at 9 a.m. on Rogers cable 22 in Ottawa.

Province pledges $600M tunnel funding

Dalton McGuinty and the Ontario provincial government announced on Friday that the province will give Ottawa its one-third share of the first phase of the city's ambitious transit plan.

The first phase of the plan is now estimated to cost $2.1B (higher than earlier estimates of $1.8B), and includes light-rail transit from Tunney's Pasture to Blair with a tunnel below the downtown core. With its pledge of $600M, the province tripled their previous funding promise to the city and ensured Ottawa now has two-thirds of their funding in place. There are suggestions that the announcement puts pressure on the Federal government to pledge their share of the price tag (although I'm not sure the Feds are the type to be pressured into anything, and certainly not pressured by a Provincial Liberal government).

From the Ottawa Citizen:

“In Ottawa we’ve talked a lot about moving forward with rapid transit. Today, together, we take a giant step towards making our shared vision a reality,” [Ontario Premier and Ottawa South MPP Dalton] McGuinty said. “We are making the biggest transit investment in Ottawa’s history … This commitment is all the more significant given the challenging economic times we all find ourselves in.”

And from Mayor Larry O'Brien's blog:

This significant funding announcement illustrates the Ontario Government’s clear confidence in the City of Ottawa’s transit future. As your Mayor, I am pleased that the Province is on board with, and committed to, the transit plan that we currently have on the table - a transit solution that will change the pace and efficiency with which you, the residents, move around our great City.

Premier McGuinty also expressed strong confidence in City Council’s ability to make the necessary decisions to move this critical project forward, and to eventually implement our plan for light rail and rapid transit across Ottawa.

Transit plan first phase price tag climbs to $2.1B

Tentatively predicted to run the City of Ottawa $1.8B, it turns out the more realistic cost estimate for the first phase of Ottawa's ambitious transit plan is around $2.1B, according to CBC.ca:

Light rail between Blair Road and Tunney's Pasture, including a three-kilometre downtown tunnel, will cost $2.1 billion, city staff estimated Friday. That's $400 million more than their December 2008 estimate and $300 million more than the estimate in the city's recent funding request to the federal and provincial governments.

In initial discussions of potential direction for Ottawa's transit plan, the above-mentioned first phase of the was estimated to cost $1.4B. In recent weeks, reports indicated it would climb due to unforeseen design changes and land procurement costs. After a more thorough examination, which included consultations with "experienced firms involved in transportation and tunnelling projects" and a review, according to the above-linked CBC story, seems likely to be the best estimate, which City officials will present when appealing to federal and provincial governments for funding.

Although federal officials have been rather quiet in awaiting an official request with hard numbers, Ontario Municipal Affairs Minister and Ottawa West-Nepean MPP Jim Watson has for weeks been announcing his concern with the affordability of Ottawa's transit plan. This past weekend, as reported in the Ottawa Citizen, Watson re-iterated his concerns:

"I'm becoming increasingly worried about the city's capacity to bring this project to a conclusion," said Watson, the MPP for Ottawa West-Nepean. "We're very, very concerned. I have to simply question the affordability of this plan."

[...]

"They've designed the plan without an upper-limit budget. The price just keeps going up," said Watson. "We cannot simply send a blank cheque to the City of Ottawa."

Although Watson is concerned with the city's ability to pay for its third of the transit plan, the recently-unveiled $24.7B provincial deficit in Ontario, which will undoubtedly affect the province's ability to offer cash to municipalities. The deficit is the largest the province has ever carried, according to the Ottawa Citizen. The City is looking for at least one-third of the capital cost of the project from each of the provincial and federal governments, meaning $700M from each level over the course of the first phase.

Funding partners--including, albeit on a smaller scale, citizens of Ottawa--are all likely mindful of the (mostly negative) perceptions of staff and decision makers in this city, which combine to make what Steve Collins refers to as a "trust deficit" in the Ottawa Metro. That scepticism certainly shines through in Watson's comments. It remains to be seen what federal ministers, particularly Ottawa West-Nepean MP and Infrastructure Minister John Baird, have to say about the recently-announced cost increase.

City staff are convinced that Ottawa can foot their portion of the transit plan.

The cost for the full four-stage transit plan is now an estimated $6.6B, up from the initially-predicted roughly $5B price tag.

LRT cost estimate "had no basis in reality", continues to climb

After news of a $100M cost increase to the first phase of Ottawa's light rail plan came out last week, yet another unforeseen expenditure has been unearthed by the Ottawa Sun, this time $200M in order to purchase property for the east-west leg of the city's light-rail extension.

The Sun released the reaction of a number of interested parties, including Deputy City Manager Nancy Schepers, who suggested that a deviation of up to 25 per cent of the estimated cost--which in this case could be a difference of $450M--should be expected as typical. River Councillor Maria McRae called the new information "alarming and shocking," and posed the question of whether or not this transit plan--replete with rapidly increasing costs--remains affordable. Gloucester-Southgate Councillor Diane Deans said that the original estimate "had no basis in reality" and questioned whether or not this type of inaccuracy will negatively impact the city's ability to secure funding from the federal and provincial governments.

Ottawa West-Nepean MPP Jim Watson questioned the city's transit plan over a month ago, and suggested his concerns that the plan wasn't affordable, and he predicted that costs could escalate quickly. Turns out that was a prescient concern.

Rising transit plan costs concern province, citizens

According to a report in the Ottawa Sun, the first phase of Ottawa's light rail plan is already running about $100M over the budgeted cost. The phase, initially pegged at between $1.7M and $1.8M of the plan's total roughly $5B price tag, hasn't broken ground yet, and includes the city's proposed downtown tunnel. Contributing to the cost overruns, according to the report, are design changes to a maintenance yard and some light-rail platforms.

The Sun has learned several significant design changes to the $1.8-billion project have sent costs soaring. City staff have underestimated the pricetag for the east-west LRT maintenance yard that’s expected to be located in the St. Laurent area, a senior staffer told the Sun.

Bay Coun. Alex Cullen, who is also chairman of the city’s transit committee, confirmed last night there are several unexpected design changes, including to the maintenance yard.

“There have been scope changes that shows us adding on to the cost,” said Cullen.

It seems unlikely that many people expected the project to finish on budget, chief among the sceptics being Ottawa West-Nepean MPP and Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing Jim Watson, who voiced his concern a month ago. Watson came out again today, again in the Ottawa Sun, calling into question the City's credibility:

Watson’s major concern is that the financial commitment expected from the province has jumped from $200 million to $600 million, and the final number could be even higher.

“We (the provincial government) have serious financial limitations. They have to make sure the project is affordable.”

[...]

“We can’t be funding one-third of a question mark,” he said, adding the city’s numbers have to be “firm, defensible and credible.”

The $200M figure cited by Watson was that initially pledged for the now-cancelled North-South light-rail extension, which was scrapped in 2006 when city council decided to move in another direction (literally and figuratively). It's somewhat deceptive to use it as the starting point, but his message is quite clear: The city needs to figure out what it's doing, and what it's asking for, before the Province of Ontario is going to offer any significant funding above and beyond what's already been promised.

Innes Ward Councillor Rainer Bloess suggested that city staff will have to find an efficiency elsewhere in the plan in order to offset the increase.

Transit projects of this magnitude have a tendency to go over budget due to unseen or overlooked expenses, and the City of Ottawa has had problems with similar budgeting before--including, most recently, the $5.6M budgeted to outfit the OC Transpo fleet with technology to call out stops, which has now more than doubled to $12M.

Still, it's got to be concerning for funding partners and particularly citizens of Ottawa that these issues are coming up already, before the work has even commenced.

It poses a couple of pertinent questions: Were you expecting to see news like this? If so, were you expecting to see them so soon? Is it likely staff will be able to find some other area to cut from in order to restore the previously-estimated cost?