DOWNTOWN TRANSIT OPERATING STRATEGIES 2007-2010

STRATÉGIES D’EXPLOITATION DES TRANSPORTS EN COMMUN DANS LE CENTRE-VILLE 2007-2010

ACS2007-PTE-TRA-0006

Dr. Helen Gault, Manager, Transit Service Planning & Development, reviewed highlights of the above report by means of a PowerPoint Presentation that is held on file with the City Clerk. Ms. Nancy Schepers, Deputy City Manager, Planning, Transit and the Environment; Mr. Alain Mercier, Director, Transit Services; and Pat Scrimgeour, Program Manager, Service Planning were also present to answer questions from the Committee.

The Committee then heard from the following public delegations:

Cheryl Doran did not have problems with the report in general; however, she had serious concerns with the idea of a possible extension of the O-Train to Leitrim Road. Chair Cullen noted that the extension to Leitrim was not before Committee at this time. As it was mentioned in the report, the Committee allowed the delegation to speak to the issue.

Ms. Doran expressed her concern that the extension of the O-Train would bisect the habitat of the Blandings Turtle, a species at risk. She noted that this species of turtle requires several contiguous wetland bodies. She suggested there was an opportunity to display Ottawa’s environmental initiatives and promote this area as a tourism, research and educational attraction. She expressed her strong objection to any further discussion of trains going through this area.

In response to questions from Councillor Bloess, Ms. Doran confirmed that there is an existing rail corridor, but it is used only approximately 10 times a year, by a train that goes about 5 km/h.

In response to questions from Councillor Cullen, Ms. Schepers confirmed that if this corridor were used for an extension of the O-Train, the City would be taking mitigating measures following consultation with appropriate biologists in order to deal with the issues put forward by the delegation and protect the turtles both during and after construction.

Edelweiss D’Andrea also spoke to the issue of the potential effects of a rail extension on the habitat of the Blandings Turtle. She began by expressing her concerns regarding the plight of species at risk and the loss of their habitat worldwide. While she supports public transit and uses it regularly, she is horrified that Ottawa would consider paving over the habitat of known species at risk. She echoed Ms. Doran’s concerns that the wetland home of the Blandings Turtle would be fragmented, noting that it had already been fragmented by the extension of Lester road in 1993. She maintained that the Blanding’s turtle would not support further fragmentation.

She advised that there were viable alternatives that would not cut though such a bio-rich area, such as running the rail corridor alongside the Airport Parkway. She noted that this alternative would also bring the train closer to the airport. She strongly urged the Committee not to consider putting the O-Train through to Leitrim Road through the wetland and to consider putting it adjacent to the Airport Parkway instead.

In their presentations, Ms. Doran and Ms. D’Andrea referred to a map they had prepared of the area in question. They also distributed photos of the Blandings’ Turtles. These materials were distributed to Committee and Staff, and are held on file with the City Clerk.

Klaus Beltzner, a member of Friends of the O-Train (FOTO), began by congratulating staff on the report. He suggested it provides a compelling analysis of the downtown congestion problem. He was also pleased that the City’s analysis confirms the information put forward by FOTO at the April 4 meeting of the Transit Committee. In particular, he concurred with staff’s analysis of the positive impacts of the existing O‑Train and the potential impacts of an O-Train extension to Leitrim. He proposed that this extension should begin this year. He also noted that there are mitigating factors to address the issue of the turtles. He suggested that the City needs to move more aggressively towards a 30% modal split by providing riders with significant improvements to public transit, and maintained that the FOTO vision and plan could accomplish this. A copy of Mr. Beltzner’s comments is held on file with the City Clerk.

In response to questions from Chair Cullen, Ms. Schepers confirmed that the process of developing a new rapid transit plan for the City would consider the ideas that FOTO had brought forward, both in terms of long-term and in terms of short-term investments that could be made, the latter to be outlined in a report to Committee and Council in July. She also confirmed that, although the report speaks of considering extending the existing O-Train to Leitrim at some point, it is not in the 2007 Capital Program.

Timothy Lane spoke to the issue of using double-decker buses to relieve some of the downtown congestion. He suggested that the only advantage to double-decker buses is that they have a greater number of seats than regular buses. Conversely, he outlined the following problems with using double-decker buses:

· There are only 2 doors, compared with 3 on an articulated bus.

· The interior area for getting to the staircase is congested.

· It will take more time for people to get on and off the bus.

· It would not be suitable for many routes.

· The staircase is narrow, so people have to wait for others to descend before they go up to the top level.

· Double-decker buses will need to have dedicated stops away from regular bus stops in heavily traveled areas such as Slater and Albert, so as not to delay other buses while loading and unloading.

· There are few seats on the lower level that are accessible to mildly handicapped persons. There are a higher number of seats on the articulated buses that could be used by people who have trouble going up steps.

· There are no overhead handrails along the aisle.

· The design of the back rows of seats are poorly designed and difficult to get in and out of. Thus, it is a bus that is not well suited for routes where people are getting on and off on a frequent basis.

· There is limited headroom.

· There is no way for the passengers or driver to know if there are any seats available on the top row. Thus passengers will have to go up the stairs to check, and then come back down if there are no seats, as standing is not permitted on the top deck.

· As it weighs much more than an articulated bus, with that weight spread over a smaller area, a double-decker bus will cause more wear and tear on roads, bridges, and other infrastructure than other buses.

· The fuel consumption of a double-decker bus will be greater than an articulated bus, a concern as fuel costs escalate.

· The double-decker buses will require a new garage, which will increase deadheading costs, as the buses will have to be routed out of this one garage.

· He also suggested that conducting the trial for the double-decker bus on the #96 route was not a real test, as that route is not very busy.

Councillor Bloess suggested that he had some of the same concerns as the delegation regarding the use of double-decker buses, and noted that the main concern with downtown is getting people on and off the buses quickly. In response to the Councillor’s questions, Mr. Lane maintained that with limited room, and only two doors, double-decker buses would take considerably longer to load and unload, resulting in delays. He suggested double-decker buses would only be useful on routes where you pick up people in an outlying area and bring them all to the same area. He proposed that if there was a system of electric light rail downtown between Hurdman and Lebreton, double-decker buses could be effectively used to bring people in from the outlying areas to those transfer stations. However, he maintained it would be problematic on any full cross-town routes. In response to further questions from Councillor Bloess, Mr. Lane suggested that double-decker buses would be even harder on the infrastructure than articulated buses. He confirmed that his data on the weight and wheel ratio of the double-decker buses came from the OC Transpo web site.

In response to questions from Chair Cullen, Mr. Mercier confirmed that the issues raised by the delegation were part of staff’s review. He noted that they would be coming back to Committee in late June with a more formal evaluation of the double-decker trial, and would be tabling some recommendations.

David Jeanes of Transport 2000 spoke in support of the report, its conclusions and the proposed solutions. However, he did regret that the report did not have any public consultation. He was also concerned that, while these solutions address the present situation, they do not address the issue of increasing the modal split, nor does it address the nearly 100% planned increase in the size of the bus fleet. He expressed his support for the idea of diverting buses onto other cross-town corridors, and suggested Somerset and Gladstone as two potential routes that had not yet been considered.

He agreed that the O-Train was helping with downtown congestion. He suggested, however, that the O-Train would need other things to meet this objective, many of which Council had already approved. He proposed that the following additions be considered:

· A short-term extension to a new Park and Ride at Leitrim.

· Another station at Gladstone, connecting to the #14 cross-town route, which does not run on Albert or Slater.

· A station at South Keys, as the Greenboro Station is at capacity.

He suggested that the extension of the O-Train could be done in a short period of time, and noted there are now a variety of sources for a new train. Finally, he suggested that an extension to the O-train could help address the issue of interprovincial transit, which is a critical issue in relation to coming pressure on downtown Ottawa.

Robert Diotte wished to speak to the issue of double-decker buses. He suggested that many of the issues brought forward by an earlier delegation, Mr. Lane, could be addressed through modifications at the point of purchase, such as increasing the size of the doors. His main proposal was that the City consider using double-deck trains as part of Ottawa’s transit mix. He outlined the various advantages to this form of rapid transit, particularly their high capacity, and the possible impacts their use would have on the downtown transit picture. A copy of Mr. Diotte’s detailed presentation was distributed to the Committee and staff, and is held on file with the City Clerk. Councillor Wilkinson suggested that Mr. Diotte forward his information to the Mayor’s Office, for distribution to the Mayor’s Task Force on Transportation.

David Gladstone, Founder, Friends of the O-Train, who registered to speak, was not present at the meeting. However, the Committee noted receipt of his comments via e‑mail on 15 May 2007, and a copy of his letter dated 14 May 2007 addressed to Mayor O’Brien, copy of which is on file with the City Clerk.

Having heard from all delegations, the Committee then posed questions to staff on the present report.

In Councillor Bloess noted some of the observations made by a previous delegation, Mr. Beltzner, namely that the tracks and EAs are in place to extend the existing O-Train to Leitrim, and that the capital costs of such a project would be less than the cost of 10 minutes of delays on Slater Street. Dr. Gault maintained that there is not an EA in place to go to Leitrim. She was not able to comment on the relative costs proposed by Mr. Beltzner without a more significant cost-benefit analysis.

In response to questions from Councillor Bloess regarding the report data on congestion in the corridor, Dr. Gault projected that they were projecting that it would take about 15‑16 minutes to get through the downtown core in 2009-2010 if the actions proposed by staff were undertaken, the same amount of time it takes now.

Councillor Bloess wondered how many of the proposed changes would shortly be irrelevant in light of possible recommendations by the Mayor’s Task Force on Transportation. Dr. Gault proposed that the changes staff was proposing are relatively minor and are not costing a great deal of money. She noted that the City had delayed them longer than they should have with the expectation that there would be light rail. She maintained that these changes would be very good value for money.

In response to further questions from Councillor Bloess regarding the timeline, Ms. Gault noted that they were already doing the design work for the improvements on Slater St. She hoped they would be finished the work by September.

In response to questions from Councillor Wilkinson regarding why staff was no longer considering the idea of a hybrid hub-and-spoke system, as was previously planned. Dr. Gault noted that the concept was intended to support the light rail system, and to reduce the number of buses on Albert and Slater. She advised that this plan was developed to reduce the number of buses on Albert and Slater Street at a level that allows for smooth operations. She also explained that the hub-and-spoke service design is actually more expensive than the existing service design, because the scheduling system optimizes the use of buses, and has reduced the number of buses needed. It would have cost 4% more in operating costs to maintain the same ridership with a hub-and-spoke hybrid bus transit network.

Councillor Cullen noted that this report in part flowed out of a Motion by Councillors Bellemare and Hume in the aftermath of the light rail decision. Mr. Mercier confirmed that this report addresses that motion and recommends a number of temporary solutions for the downtown, while the new rapid transit plan is in development.

In response to further questions from Chair Cullen, Mr. Mercier confirmed that the extension of the O-Train to Leitrim would be part of a different process which would come forward after the recommendations of the Mayor’s Task force, no earlier than the 2008 Budget.

The Committee then received and approved the following report recommendation:

That the Transit Committee recommend that Council receive this report for information.

CARRIED