'Next Stop' system means no more fines

By this point, most OC Transpo riders have probably had the chance to hear the Next Stop Announcement System on many of their buses--according to 580 CFRA, half of the fleet had the system installed as of this Monday. And although there have been some issues with the service--stops for wrong routes called out, or multiple stops called out at once--at least we can look forward to one thing (aside from knowing where the bus is, obviously): No more fines from the Canadian Transportation Authority.

The CTA had fined the City of Ottawa $5,000 in July 2009 and then another $12,500 in March 2010 for failing to call out the stops, determined by the tribunal to pose an undue obstacle to the visually impaired, among others. And although OC Transpo tried to have drivers call out stops, if just wasn't reliable enough: Some drivers were great about it, some less than enthusiastic, some refused to do it, and some were just too darn pre-occupied with driving a huge vehicle filled with people to worry about it. But now it's on.

My favourite stop so far? Alta Vista, because when translated into French it, for some reason, becomes Aulta Veesta.

LegoC Transpo, Lego-Train

Just a funny awesome transit-related news item from late last week: A Lego Public Transport Station. And they've got it right: Multi-modal system, complete with streetcars, buses, bike racks, parking, and... well, a street sweeper, for some reason. I'll be honest, I want one, although $139.99 is a little out of my price range.

(via The City Fix)

2010 Election: Doucet on ParaTranspo

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.

Many users of ParaTranspo would suggest there are a lot of areas that it can improve, and Clive Doucet sees that there are problems with it, too. But instead of further investments into trying to make ParaTranspo more efficient, Doucet thinks that the increasing accessibility of OC Transpo's regular fleet--including wheelchair-accessible buses, priority seating, audio and visual stop-calling, and other measures--will allow ParaTranspo to narrow its focus.

Well, ParaTranspo is its own world. The problem with Para, I guess, is money. I think we’re slowly moving away from that as we get our system to be more accessible to the handicapped. Hopefully Para won’t be so necessary as we roll out; our buses will soon be 100% disable-friendly, and the same thing with our rail system. I’m hoping that Para will actually diminish in size, as we grow our capacity in other ways.

Public initiatives: Keep the TTC public

My attention was brought to some very well-done videos yesterday (thanks, commenter John G) about privatization of public transit utilities--and the risk that such an action could present. The videos, created by KeepTTCPublic.ca, present a two-part argument against privatization in general, and against privatization of the Toronto Transit Commission in particular.

To be fair, privatization isn't quite as completely negative as the videos say. For instance, partial privatization--in the form of contracting out services--has worked for Toronto and York, according to an article in the Toronto Star. But putting aside to the standard arguments in favour of privatization--namely, that private owners are more innovative and less bureaucratic, and thus (the reasoning goes) more able to generate cost savings--consider this quote, also presented in the above Star article, from Marie Chapple of the Phoenix Public Transit Department:

“As we reduce service, we will reduce employees. Through the private contractor, it’s easier to expand and reduce staff,” she said.

Emphasis mine. In Ottawa, many of the arguments for privatization of OC Transpo seem to go back to the labour costs for bus operators. And basically, the idea is that the city--for political as well as ethical reasons--isn't as keen on holding a hard-line or hiring 'scabs' to bring down labour costs as a private owner might be.

But is this a good thing? It's certainly idealistic, but it would be a lot better for all involved to reach a mutually acceptable salary structure, instead of contracting out services--which, it could be argued, essentially contracts out the unpalatable responsibility of cutting costs by firing people.

2010 Election: Maguire on walking and cycling

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.

In discussing forms of 'active transportation', at least in terms of walking and cycling, mayoral candidate Mike Maguire would be more than happy to encourage people to use these types of transportation. But he does caution that, in his mind, there has to be a limit to what is offered to cyclists in order to ensure building cycling infrastructure doesn't do undue damage to business interests.

There has been an enormous focus on things like bike lanes downtown. I read this material, I think it was the Somerset BIA who just had a question from council about putting in a substantial bike-lane system, and their comment resonated with me—unfortunately it doesn’t resonate with council—their comment was, “You’re going to kill our businesses. We need areas to park; if the cars don’t come here, nobody buys our stuff.” There’s a limit to the generosity available out of any given body of people, and at the municipal level, we’re way past the limit of our generosity.

Maguire has mentioned that should his commuter-rail transit alternative move forward, it would result in fewer cars and less congestion in the city's core--which would then create more space and more safety for cyclists at street level.

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.

Reminder: Mayoral debate on the environment TONIGHT

Just a reminder that tonight (Sunday, Sept. 26, 2010) at 6:30 p.m. at Laframboise Dining Hall in Saint Paul University (233 Mann), the Mayoral Debate on the Environment will be taking place. Candidates who have confirmed their attendance include Jim Watson, Larry O’Brien, Clive Doucet, Mike Maguire, Cesar Bello, Jane Scharf, Charlie Taylor, and Robin Lawrance, so make sure you don't miss this opportunity to hear where these candidates stand on public transit, and other environmental issues.

Haydon drops the gloves

Before spending Millions of your dollars on a needless venture I would like to provide Mr. Watson with the opportunity of defending his position on this very important, and expensive venture.

I am willing to make myself available, any time, any place of Mr. Watson's choosing.

That's what mayoral candidate Andy Haydon challenged Jim Watson with in a blog post lat last week. Haydon, as has been much publicized, is very much in favour of bus rapid transit (BRT), and very much against light-rail transit (LRT), while Watson, after initially expressing skepticism about Ottawa's LRT plan, has recently come out in favour of it. Not sure if Watson will take Haydon up on his challenge, but tomorrow's environmental debate of mayoral candidates (which TransitOttawa.ca is co-sponsoring, and takes place at 6:30 at St. Paul's University's Laframboise Dining Hall at 233 Mann) offers them a perfect opportunity.

2010 Election: Liscumb's transit alternative

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.

Although he's one of many mayoral hopefuls with new ideas on transit for Ottawa, Fraser Liscumb's transit is very different from anything else proposed. Very, very different; in fact, it's not even an existing technology, as he envisions it: Electric-magnetic field (EMF) rail.

In Liscumb's mind, Ottawa needs to embrace the cutting edge of transportation technology, instead of following the lead and investing into older technologies, like LRT.

The bottom line is we’ve got to come in to the 21st century, and you can’t come in to the 21st century with a stop-and-go train. I can’t even take the stop-and-go.

So his idea is to look to the future, and build EMF rail--a system similar to Maglev Transport, but different. The system runs on a track, about 35 feet above the road surface, and has a fleet of smaller, family-sized cars with a capacity of 4-6 people. And although the technology doesn't exist yet, Liscumb thinks that he can develop it, making use of the collective abilities of Ottawa's inventors, engineers, and research and development companies to make it a reality in the near future.

I would say EMF, we could have it to the market in about five years. Think about it: Everything is modular. We’ve got the companies, they’re going to be partners, we’re not going to buying them, or paying them to do any of it. We’re going to create a team effort, and they’re going to be part of it, and if they don’t want it then that will be their decision. I will offer it. If they do not take it, I’ve got contacts across this world, including in China, that will more than jump up and down and say that they’re coming in.

And although the cost is an unknown right now, Liscumb is sure he can make EMF rail cost less than Ottawa's current LRT plan.

I understand the issues. I’m not going to make any promises, because things move too fast, and there are too many players in it, but I will find a way. But if I do put the EMF rail in, only one thing I can guarantee: If it goes in, and they want it there, it will bring down the costs.

The economics of BRT and LRT

The graph pictured above? Originally from a City of Hamilton briefing report, but recently cited in a column by David Reevely on how effective light-rail transit can be, when compared to bus rapid transit. The conclusion? When done well, LRT is almost always more efficient that BRT.

But that's the caveat: When done well. Is Ottawa's LRT plan set up to maximize the efficiencies that LRT can provide, as the systems above--notably San Diego and Houston--seem to be? I've never ridden any of those systems so it's difficult to speak from personal experience, but there does seem to be similarities. Houston has 12.1 km of light-rail, which includes a line through downtown and extending south--compare with Ottawa's proposed system: 12.5 km of light-rail, including a line through downtown and moving east and west of there.

But they aren't the same systems, and Houston can't be seen as an exact model for Ottawa. Better is to look through all the systems above, see what has been done right and what has been done wrong, and take the lessons learned to set Ottawa's system up with the best chance to succeed.