MINUTES

TRANSIT SERVICES COMMITTEE

OTTAWA-CARLETON REGIONAL TRANSIT COMMISSION

CHAMPLAIN ROOM

14 OCTOBER 1998

8:45 A.M.

Chair: A. Loney

Members: M. Bellemare, W. Byrne, C. Doucet, L. Davis, D. Holmes, H. Kreling

Regrets: R. Chiarelli, J. Legendre

CARRIED

The Transit Services Committee Chair, A. Loney, congratulated OC Transpo staff for winning one of the American Public Transit Association’s AdWheel Awards for Print Media in a Large Transit System for a poster and for an Employee Communications Program.

The Manager, Marketing and Customer Services, Ms. Oxana Sawka, described a number of marketing initiatives currently underway:

The Financial Statements for July and August 1998 were RECEIVED

Chair A. Loney indicated that the consultants involved in the Comprehensive Review will make a presentation to the Transit Services Committee at the 28 October 1998 meeting. The final report will have many implications and many decisions will need to be taken in order to achieve the ridership goals set out in the Regional Official Plan and the Transportation Master Plan.

Chair Loney continued by saying the comprehensive review process is ongoing. The Interim Report has been circulated to all Commissioners and is available on the Internet. A second Public Forum was held, and although it was reasonably well attended, there are problems attracting non-transit users. Part of convincing people to use the transit system will be through marketing initiatives similar to those described earlier by staff. Chair Loney pointed out that, for a system the size of OC Transpo, very little marketing has been done: this situation will have to change and there will be associated budget implications.

Chair Loney spoke about concerns expressed by the Unions about contracting out. This issue has been thoroughly discussed and the Steering Committee is on record as saying it does not intend to contract out. The preference is to have the system change and evolve from within and this will be accomplished by concentrating efforts on both customers and staff. The intent is to grow the business substantially, thereby creating more jobs. Chair Loney posited that if the focus is on delivering good, friendly service to clients, things will go well.

Chair Loney concluded his presentation by saying that a lot of work has been done in terms of not increasing transit usage and ridership: in every instance, costs have been higher when this is not done. The "watch-word" for the review process has been to achieve the growth targets and this will need to be the focus of all parties concerned.

RECEIVED

1. IMPROVING PUBLIC TRANSIT ACCESSIBILITY INOTTAWA-CARLETON

The Interim General Manager, M. Sheflin, began by saying that the Regional Official Plan calls for OC Transept to achieve a certain ridership and the consequences of not achieving this goal are unacceptable. The Commission is looking at ways of attracting people to transit and, to this end, the equipment used will be of paramount importance. The vehicles under consideration will increase the number of people who can access regular bus service and, wherever possible, this service will be provided on regular runs.

The Committee heard from Jeffrey Alguire, Chair, Accessible Transit Advisory Committee (ATAC). Mr. Alguire pointed out that the community of people with disabilities has been seeking better accessibility, and especially low-floor buses in the conventional fleet, for a number of years. He indicated that, in some segments of the community, patience has begun to wear thin, and any means to accelerate the process will receive support. In addition, ATAC and other members of the community want to be involved in the implementation process.

Mr. Alguire raised the following issues with regard to the Accessibility Plan for Ottawa-Carleton, adopted in September 1994:

The fleet to be completely low-floor by 2011: ATAC supports adopting a 12 year life for 1998 standard buses because (1) the Accessibility Plan is already behind schedule and (2) maintenance costs will be reduced;

Bus Stop Facilities Standards; with respect to bus shelters being made fully accessible where feasible, each individual case should be reviewed with as open a mind as possible and staff should be as ingenious as possible in achieving the accessibility guidelines;

Sidewalk Standards: the success of the low-floor bus initiative is dependent upon the appropriate state of sidewalks, as well as on the ability to access low-floor buses. This should include new as well as existing streets, and has to be seen as an overall plan, requiring the involvement of other Committees, where appropriate;

ParaTranspo: the current high level of refused trips is entirely unacceptable to ATAC and to the community of disabled persons in Ottawa-Carleton. ParaTranspo will remain a key element of the unified plan for accessibility of transit and having low-floor buses will not remove the need for vigilance on this issue.

The review of eligibility criteria for ParaTranspo should only be undertaken once the critical mass of low-floor vehicles has been reached. In the immediate term, the number of refused trips must be reduced. In the longer term, the Commission can expect benefits, in the non-winter season, from reduced demand on ParaTranspo through the use of low-floor vehicles.

Commissioner W. Byrne asked whether the large number of refused trips will be reduced with the new automated scheduling system, and what problems have been encountered to explain the delay in implementing this system. The Manager, Transportation Operations, Mary Whelan, said staff believe the problems are virtually resolved and training will begin in November. She added that most of the implementation testing will be done during week-end service to minimize the impact on regular service.

Councillor H. Kreling asked whether staff have had discussions with Orion about capacity and problems with brakes that need to be replaced early-on. The Manager, Equipment Division, P. Newgard, said discussions have been held with Orion and with Nova, since both their low floor buses will be purchased. Staff have been assured the newer axles are more supportable and will be a lot more reliable, thereby lowering maintenance costs. Speaking to vehicle capacity, Mr. Newgard explained that the buses removed from service by the Toronto Transit Commission were powered by natural gas, adding extra weight and decreasing passenger capacity. The Commission’s buses are diesel-powered, and with the design of the vehicles being considered will allow a carrying capacity of 76 passengers.

The Committee then considered the report recommendations. Chair Loney suggested Point C be deleted, indicating, in reference to comments made by Mr. Alguire, that the standard in the United States is currently twelve years Chair Loney felt it would not be necessary for staff to undertake the work described in Point C.

CARRIED

The Social Services Commissioner, D. Stewart, began by saying the Ontario Works Program has $2.8 million earmarked for "employment related expenses", key among which are mobility services, for the 22,000 registered Ontario Works participants in Ottawa-Carleton. He indicated the recommendation is an attempt to "lever" $1.5 million of that amount to expand the department’s purchasing power and give persons on assistance the mobility they require.

In response to questions from Commissioner H. Kreling, Mr. Stewart indicated that the Ontario Works budget is capped and that additional provincial funding will not be forthcoming. M. Sheflin noted the RMOC will lead the way with this program.

Commissioner L. Davis asked about the criteria used to assess eligibility for tickets/passes. D. Stewart replied the program will focus on participants in the Ontario Works Program, clients in self-employment programs, and clients already employed, as well as on participants in approved skills training programs. Replying to a further question from Commissioner Davis, Mr. Stewart said he did not anticipate there would be a large shift in demand.

CARRIED

4. AWARD OF MULTI-YEAR CONTRACT FOR THE SUPPLY OF LOW-FLOOR, ARTICULATED BUSES

The Finance Commissioner, Mr. J. LeBelle, circulated additional information relative to this item. In reply to a question from Councillor M. Bellemare, Mr. LeBelle indicated Council has already approved the acquisition and the project authority is on the books. The report before Committee speaks about spending that money sooner than later and incurring short-term financing costs.

Councillor Bellemare asked if it would be appropriate to refer this matter to the Budget Sub-Committee to weigh the imperatives in terms of the RMOC’s budget. Mr. LeBelle clarified that $700,000 of the $1.9 million will not be a cost until 2001, making the final amount $1.2 million. Mr. LeBelle suggested this could be part of OC Transpo’s submission to the Budget Sub-Committee.

Responding to a question from Councillor Bellemare about why this item cannot be deferred, Chair Loney indicated part of the problem is the availability of vehicles; the manufacturer has indicated that a reply is needed by 15 October 1998 in order to meet the timelines set out in the report.

6. CHANGE IN SEAT SPECIFICATION FOR 140 NEW LOW FLOOR BUSES

7. REZONING APPLICATION - BY-LAW 164/98: TEMPORARY
USE - SURFACE PARKING, 82 METCALFE (AT SLATER)

The Manager, Planning and Development, Dr. Helen Gault, indicated that OC Transpo has objected to temporary parking being supplied immediately adjacent to the Transitway in downtown Ottawa as this encourages more cars to come into the central area.

Mr. Barry Edgington, Director, Development Approvals Division, (RMOC) made reference to a Memorandum where he indicates that, from an implementation standpoint, the Regional Official Plan (ROP) does not have the policies to object to or appeal temporary use zoning by-laws. He pointed out that the City of Ottawa’s Zoning By-law and Official Plan (OP) are equally vague and that the City is not enforcing it’s own policies.

Ms. Linda Hoad, posited regional staff reach the right conclusion about not appealing the City’s Zoning By-law but for the wrong reasons. The City can approve temporary uses but it has to prove need in the case of surface parking. Ms. Hoad said she did not believe this could be proven in this instances. Secondly, the fact that the ROP was not in effect is irrelevant, as evidenced by the strong position the Region took with respect to the Nortel Development. Finally, as to whether or not an appeal to the Ontario Municipal Board (OMB) would be successful, Ms. Hoad recalled a successful appeal of a temporary zoning by-law by the King Edward Avenue Task Force several years ago (corner King Edward Avenue and St Patrick Street).

Ms. Hoad continued by saying she shares concerns about the replacement building and new parking spaces that would be provided. She said City staff must be made aware that a parking problem exists, that it affects transit services and will continue to do so unless supply is reduced and the cost of parking in the central area is increased. Temporary zoning problems are compounded by the flagrant abuse of the City’s parking by-laws: tandem, or wall-to-wall, parking is illegal and should not occur, except in the few cases where it has been sanctioned by a Site Plan Agreement or by a Variance approved by the Committee of Adjustment.

Ms. Hoad expressed the hope the City could be convinced of the urgency of the problem and that it needs to enforce it’s own by-laws. All taxpayers contribute to OC Transpo and will benefit if transit is more successful: policies in both the OP and the ROP require this. She posited staff may not be aware of the implications of their decisions, and may not be committed to OC Transpo’s success. She suggested that both regional staff and politicians approach the City, requesting it’s cooperation. Ms. Hoad spoke about two ongoing studies, one on Temporary Surface Parking, the other on the zoning by-law review for the central area. The Federation of Citizens’ Associations takes the matter very seriously and would support more involvement from regional staff in both these studies. Responding to a question from Councillor D. Holmes, Ms. Carol Christensen, Policy Planning Branch, indicated the RMOC was not successful in becoming a member of the zoning by-law review committee: as well, staff were not aware there was a committee examining temporary surface parking.

Councillor C. Doucet asked whether Ms. Hoad would suggest ways the Region could be more effective in bringing policies in line and making the central area more transit friendly. Ms. Hoad said she would encourage OC Transpo to continue commenting on rezoning matters, and if niceties don’t work, perhaps the threat of an OMB Hearing would be more effective. OC Transpo could undertake appeals on it’s own or work through citizens and/or citizens’ groups, offering financial and legal assistance. The Committee Chair could attend City Planning meetings to make presentations, as well as encourage staff to attend when zoning matters come before that body.

Councillor D. Holmes expressed her frustration when considering what should be done to increase OC Transpo ridership and seeing that everything being done is in direct opposition to this goal. She cited the example of 400 short-term spaces at the World Exchange Plaza being converted into 400 long-term spaces for commuter travel, with no opportunity for the RMOC to appeal because this was done through a development agreement. She posited the new tax system encourages the creation of additional parking lots through lower tax rates, another step in the wrong direction. She asked that staff report back on whether the subject property, 82 Metcalfe, should be rezoned, or whether the RMOC should join the appeal launched by the Centretown Community Association against the temporary use by-law. With respect to the ROP relying on the City’s OP because it contains all the safeguards, Councillor Holmes felt the next steps would be for the ROP to have it’s own, strong policies on the central area.

Tim Marc, Legal Department, suggested the Committee consider joining the appeal of the temporary by-law by the Centretown group. In a property rezoning, the Board would expect staff to point to policies in the ROP on which the rezoning is based, and these are not as strong as they should be. Seeking party status to the Centretown Citizens’ appeal would entail relying on policies contained in the City of Ottawa Official Plan.

Replying to questions of clarification from the Committee Chair, A. Loney, Mr. Marc indicated there is nothing preventing the Transit Commission from seeking party status at the OMB. The Commission may refer the request to have the RMOC take a similar position to the Planning and Environment Committee (P&E), and the request for stronger policies in the ROP must be referred to P&E. In response to a question from Councillor H. Kreling, Mr. Marc indicated the RMOC has sought party status in Consent to Sever matters in rural areas where it was neither the appellant nor the respondent.

The Interim General Manager, M. Sheflin, suggested the Chair write to the City of Ottawa on behalf of the Transit Services Committee, pointing out the urgency of controlling parking in the central area.

CARRIED

LEGAL

8. AMENDMENTS TO FINANCE AND ADMINISTRATION PROCEDURES MANUAL

CARRIED

1. CONTRACT AWARDED UNDER CHAIR’S DELEGATED AUTHORITY

- Interim General Manager, OC Transpo memorandum dated 9 Sep 98