Report to/Rapport au:
Transportation and Transit Committee /
Comité des transports et des
services de transport en commun
and Council/et au Conseil
9 July 2003 / le 9 juillet
2003
Submitted by/Soumis
par: Ned Lathrop, General
Manager/Directeur général
Development Services Department
/ Services d’aménagement
Contact/Personne-ressource: Vivi Chi, Manager, Transportation Infrastructure/ Gestionnaire,
Infrastructure des transports
580-2424,
ext. 21877, vivi.chi@city.ottawa.on.ca
|
Ref N°: ACS2003-DEV-POL-0036
|
SUBJECT: OTTAWA RAPID
TRANSIT EXPANSION PLAN (ORTEP) – IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGY
OBJET: PLAN D’EXPANSION
DU TRANSPORT EN COMMUN RAPIDE – STRATÉGIE DE MISE EN OEUVRE
REPORT RECOMMENDATION(S)
That the Transportation and Transit Committee recommend that Council
receive the Consultant’s report (dated July 2003) and direct staff to:
1.
Proceed immediately
with the Environmental Assessment for the priority O-Train Expansion LRT line
from Rideau Centre to Limebank (Riverside South), thus allowing the city to
proceed with the option deemed most appropriate once funding mechanisms have
been confirmed;
2.
Proceed with the
Environmental Assessment on the East-West LRT corridor;
3.
Continue to
negotiate with the Federal and Provincial Governments to receive at least 1/3
funding from each level of government for the priority O-Train Expansion LRT
line;
4.
Explore
public-private partnerships for rapid transit in other jurisdictions and bring
forward a recommended approach for the City of Ottawa;
5.
Continue
negotiations for acquisition of the CP Rail corridor between Leitrim Road and
the Prince of Wales Bridge;
6.
Continue
negotiations and undertake the necessary due diligence studies to acquire
property for a required maintenance and storage yard for the priority O-Train
Expansion LRT line;
7.
Prepare a detailed
Ottawa Rapid Transit Expansion Program (ORTEP) financial plan for 2004 for
inclusion in the 2004 budget deliberations; and
8.
Include ORTEP
project costs in the upcoming Development Charges By-law review.;
RECOMMANDATION(S)
DU RAPPORT
Que le Comité des
transports et des services de transport en commun recommande au Conseil de
prendre connaissance du rapport du consultant (fait en juillet 2003) et de
donner pour instruction au personnel :
1.
de débuter immédiatement
l’évaluation environnementale sur la ligne prioritaire de train léger sur rail
(TLR) du projet d’expansion de l’O-Train, depuis le Centre Rideau jusqu’au
chemin Limebank (Riverside Sud), de façon à permettre à la Ville d’appliquer
l’option jugée la plus appropriée une fois les mécanismes de financement
confirmés;
2.
de débuter immédiatement
l’évaluation environnementale relative au couloir est-ouest du TLR;
3.
de poursuivre les négociations avec
les gouvernements fédéral et provincial afin d’obtenir au moins un tiers du
financement de chaque palier de gouvernement pour la ligne prioritaire de TLR;
4.
d’analyser
les partenariats publics-privés du transport en commun rapide dans d’autres
administrations et de présenter une approche recommandée à la Ville d’Ottawa
5.
de poursuivre les négociations en
vue de l’acquisition du couloir du CP entre le chemin Leitrim et le pont Prince
of Wales;
6.
de poursuivre les négociations et
d’entreprendre les études nécessaires, dans des délais raisonnables, en vue de
l’acquisition de terrains pour l’entretien et le faisceau de garage requis à
cette fin;
7.
de préparer un plan financier
détaillé concernant le programme d’expansion du transport en commun rapide
d’Ottawa pour 2004 aux fins d’inclusion dans les délibérations budgétaires de
2004;
8.
d’inclure les coûts du projet
d’expansion dans l’examen du Règlement sur les redevances d’exploitation.
BACKGROUND
In the early 1970’s, the Regional Municipality of
Ottawa-Carleton began to plan for the future needs of rapid transit in what is
now the City of Ottawa. The Rapid Transit Appraisal Study identified
the future direction and priorities for transit development in the region to
accommodate population growth to 750,000 and anticipated an investment of $300M
($1973) – or approximately $1.27B ($2002) - over a period of 20 years.
At
that time, the City had a population of 472,000, with an employment base of
214,000 jobs. Most jobs were located in the downtown area and government was
the primary employer. A few
developments were in the suburban area, mainly in Nepean and Gloucester. The first development was just beginning in
Orleans, with very little happening at that time in Kanata and Barrhaven.
The subsequent Rapid Transit Development
Programme, completed in 1981, led to the construction of the initial 31km of
transitway network (the section from Baseline Road in the southwest to Blair
Road in the east and Hunt Club Road in the southeast). The initial program was completed in 1996 at
a cost of $420M (or approximately $600M in $2002) and, since then, has been
expanded through new stations, park and ride lots, and freeway and arterial
bus-only lanes. The City operates a
fleet of over 900 standard and articulated buses on more than 140 individual
bus routes. The City of Ottawa
introduced its first rail transit service, the award-winning O-Train, as a
pilot project in the fall of 2001.
Ridership on
the entire system has increased almost 25% over the past six years, with
a total of 87 million trips in 2002.
Per capita, Ottawa has the largest public transit ridership levels of
any city its size in North America.
Some of these accomplishments were part of
the original vision of the 1970s, others were a response to the changes that
took place as the City grew. They
represent an investment of nearly $1 billion for the approximately 50 km
transitway system. This investment took
place over 25 years, with 75% of that funding coming from the provincial
government until 1996. As the end of
the lifecycle of the previous transit plan came near, plans for the next two
decades have been developed.
The Rapid Transit
Expansion Study, approved in February 2003, sets out the next steps and
future direction for rapid transit in Ottawa over the next 20 years. It identifies 13 separate transit corridors
to be studied for the implementation of an integrated 163 km light rail/bus
network. The recommendations approved
in the Rapid Transit Expansion Study and its companion document, the
Transportation Master Plan (TMP), support Ottawa’s drive to build a more
sustainable city. Becoming more
sustainable and maximizing the City’s investment in new infrastructure are critical
factors in promoting economic growth.
Since
the first transit plan was developed, Ottawa’s population has grown to 800,000
and has an employment base of 480,000.
We now have strong economic clusters in government, high tech,
agriculture and tourism. We are the
fourth largest city in Canada and a significant player in the Ontario and
Canadian economy. The west end now has a significant high tech
employment base, the east end has a solid biotech industry base, and federal
government departments have expanded to areas beyond the downtown. As well, Ottawa’s south end is poised to
begin exponential growth which, if not appropriately supported by transit, could lead to
significant conflicts between the needs of the new south urban community and
those of more established communities in Alta Vista, the Glebe, and Centretown.
A large part of Ottawa’s successful economy can be
attributed to investments in municipal infrastructure, particularly in
transportation infrastructure. The
importance of transportation infrastructure was better understood at the
federal and provincial levels of government in Canada during the seventies and
eighties – and these levels of government are still reaping the benefits of
their previous investments in municipal infrastructure. Ottawa has enjoyed strong employment creation
between 1993 and 2001, averaging 3.5% each year. For every new tax dollar created in Ottawa, the federal and
provincial governments receive 93 cents.
In the two years between 1998 and 2000, the federal and provincial
governments collected $753 million in new tax dollars from growth in contrast
to the $77 million collected by the City.
The politics of the 1990s saw the provincial government
abandoning itstheir
traditional roles in investing in public
transportation in order to meet some shorter-term political goals. What was once sustained, strategic funding
has dwindled to ad hoc, project-based grant programs at considerably lower
costs. This change began to occur at
the same time as cities were taking on greater importance in the global economy,
and as national governments in Europe and the United States were reinvesting
heavily in transportation infrastructure in order to make their cities more
competitive – which, in turn, helped their national economies.
Canadian federal and provincial government policy has not
yet caught up with the increased importance of Canadian cities as drivers of
the national economy, with investment in public transit as one of its
cornerstones. In its 2002 Territorial Review of Canada, the
Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development noted that,
“Canadian
metropolitan regions have gone through remarkable expansion. They are not only vital to the economic
health of their provinces but also to that of the whole country. Yet, they are confronted with several
challenges, including the need to be competitive in a context of globalization,
to limit urban sprawl, provide adequate public transportation, and avoid the
deterioration of their inner neighbourhoods … Cutbacks in federal social and
infrastructure investments were accompanied by the decentralization by the
provinces of such responsibilities to the municipalities without always
granting them the corresponding finances and capacities for revenue management
and generation. The whole approach to
urban areas and their economic growth needs rethinking.”
Canada is, in fact, the only G8 country without a national
urban transit investment fund. As the
City of Ottawa moves forward to implement the vision articulated in the Rapid Transit Expansion Study to support
our continued economic growth while maintaining our quality of life, there is
evidence that the political priorities of the federal and provincial
governments are beginning to change, and the importance of renewed investments
in municipal infrastructure recommended by economists, international experts
and the international business community are receiving more consideration.
Because building a sustainable city is
about fiscal sustainability as well, the implementation strategy for the Ottawa
Rapid Transit Expansion Program involves a series of options that will allow
the City to move forward to meet it’s long-term needs while being able to adapt
to current and future circumstances.
DISCUSSION
The Rapid Transit Expansion Study (RTES) used land use, population and
employment forecasts to identify travel demand patterns for rapid transit needs
over the next two decades. These travel
demand patterns were matched with potential transit corridors and suitable
technologies to determine the best fit.
The resulting preferred network, comprising of complementary light rail
and bus rapid transit corridors (to be phased in over the next 20 years or
more), was approved by City Council in February 2003. The implementation of the rapid transit network, along with transit-supportive
land use policies, will ensure that the City’s overall transit modal split
target of 30% will be achieved.
Upon approval of RTES, staff was
directed to develop an implementation strategy for this long-term plan,
including timelines, funding and partnership options, and financial
implications. It was important to
ensure that the implementation of Ottawa’s Rapid Transit Expansion Program
(ORTEP) reflect both sound development and transit principles along with fiscal
sustainability so that Council would have enough information to determine the
next steps to be taken.
Since the development of the program’s costs and
schedules are important components of the overall implementation plan, detailed
descriptions of each unique corridor and field reviews were undertaken in order
to determine what would be necessary to actually complete each project. For example, conditions of each structure
were examined and any future upgrades or expansions were costed based on the
unique characteristics of that individual structure. Difficulty of construction, potential complexity of design,
location, function etc. are all factors that influence the cost of a specific
element of the project. In other words,
a detailed project scoping and costing exercise, using the comprehensive Work Breakdown Structure (WBS)
technique was undertaken. This provides
for greater confidence in the resulting project (and ultimately program)
cost. Other work included the identification
of all planning, design and construction steps required as well as program-wide
tasks that impact all projects. Funding
sources and financing alternatives have been investigated along with the
assessment of approaches for project delivery, identification of staffing and
project management issues and requirements, and the development of detailed
work programs for the overall ORTEP plan and for the priority LRT O-Train
expansion project.
ORTEP consists of additions and
extensions to the existing rapid transit network and is mainly based on
exclusive or semi-exclusive rail or bus rights of way. The LRT corridors (102 km) include double
tracking, electrification, frequent (5 minute) service, 105 LRT vehicles, 7
park-and-ride lots and 75 stops and 2 storage and maintenance facilities. The BRT additions (61 km) include 5
park-and-ride lots and 49 new stops in addition to new vehicles and storage
facilities.
The ORTEP corridors are listed
below and are shown in Document 1.
·
(1-LRT) O-Train
Expansion Corridor – Priority Project
·
(2-LRT)
East-West Corridor (including an interim BRT Cumberland Transitway)
·
(3-LRT) Carling
Corridor
·
(1-BRT) West
Transitway Corridor
·
(2-BRT)
Southwest Transitway Corridor
·
(3-BRT)
Baseline Corridor
·
(4-BRT) Hurdman
to Blair Corridor
·
(5-BRT) East
Transitway Corridor
·
(6-BRT) Albert/Slater
Corridor
The Priority Project is planned
to go forward as the first initiative, with others rolling out over subsequent
years to 2021, although this is obviously dependent on the level of funding
available from senior levels of government and the City’s own financial
situation. The schedule for ORTEP projects is shown in Document
2. In
1972, when the Transitway was first envisioned and then planned, funding levels
were known and the City was able to move forward with implementation as foreseen. The fact that this is no longer the case
makes the long-term process more difficult.
The ORTEP schedules,
outlined in Document 2,
generally follow the priorities set in the RTES report and are based on the
logical rollout of each project and their interdependencies.
The 163 km
expansion of the rapid transit program will cost $3.4B (in $2003) over 20+
years. This cost is very much in line
with rapid transit expenditures in the past (in the order of $1B in $2002),
since the expansion program is 3-times that of the existing system. Document 3
shows the summary table for the cost of ORTEP over the entire 20+ years.
The Priority Project (Rideau
Centre to Limebank (Riverside South) as identified in the RTES report, is
described in Document 3 and Document 4 (Summary Report), and is estimated at
$750 million.
The actions undertaken as a
result of the motions approved by Transportation and Transit Committee on 19
February 2003 when the RTES findings were deliberated are outlined in Document
5.
Priority LRT Project – Staging Options
Given the need to continue to develop the rapid transit network in
Ottawa in order to support continued economic growth, staff looked at moving
forward with a staged approach for the Priority Project based on current likely
levels of partnership funding from the federal and provincial governments and
what the City is able to afford to contribute now and in the near future.
The initial conditions for
staging development were that the project had to go to at least LeBreton, and
south to at least a park-and-ride station.
As well, this staging must allow for subsequent extensions into the
downtown and further south. If the
Priority Project were to be implemented in increments, it was important to
determine where costs could be reduced as an interim measure while still ending
up with a value-added stand-alone project.
Minimal “throwaway” costs and minimal interruption to service as the
project is expanded/extended has to be considered. Staging of the Priority Project will result in a further time
extension in the achievement of the goals of the rapaid transit
expansion plan. These issues will all
be brought forward during negotiations with senior levels of government on the
full priority LRT line.
Council has already approved the
RTES recommendation for electric LRT.
However, given current fiscal realities, the option of whether to
continue with diesel trains in the corridor and convert to electric LRT in
subsequent phases or to convert now to electrification was investigated. From the perspective of network continuity,
compatibility and integration with urban design and land use, and environmental
considerations, the delay of electrification and the continued use of DMUs (diesel multiple
units) presents the following issues:
·
Electric vehicles maximize the reduction of greenhouse
gas emissions (a very important consideration in applying for Federal funding);
·
Grade-climbing capability is restricted to a maximum of
5% compared to 9% for electric vehicles (this would affect construction costs,
performance of vehicles);
·
Wide minimum turning radius of 90m compared to 20-25m
for electric vehicles (wide turning radius consumes more land and is
inappropriate for extensions into dense, built-up areas such as the downtown);
·
DMUs are approximately 30%
more expensive than electric trains;
·
Conversion to an electrified system in the future would
be disruptive and more costly in the long term;
·
A mixed fleet (combination of DMUs and electric
vehicles) costs more to operate due to lack of commonality.
Because of the City’s cash flow requirements, staff
investigated the expansion of existing DMU service even though it does not
comply with the ultimate network plan.
The existing service would be extended on a single track to LeBreton Station----
and to Leitrim Station----
in the south. An improvement to 10
minute frequency service is possible, with 1--- additional
siding at South Keys, 10---
stations (5 new) and 1--- park-and-ride lot at Leitrim. At this stage, there would be no requirement to grade-separate the DMU line over
the Walkley rail Subdivision and VIA rail service on the Beachburg Subdivision.(mention need or no need to
grade separate??) An
improved maintenance/storage yard would be required at Walkley. The greatest benefit for extending the
existing DMU service is the lower initial outlay of capital, estimated at $150
million initially. The City’s average annual capital contribution would be
approximately $10---- million for the next 5 years,
with early operation by 2008----.
Deferring the move to double
tracking presented another staging opportunity. Although this equates to a lower service frequency at the outset,
fewer vehicles would be required. It
would necessitate additional sidings, but would defer the construction of
several new structures and reduce initial maintenance and storage
requirements. Eventually, however,
double-tracking will be necessary to improve frequency of service and to
increase ridership in order to meet the Official Plan’s transit modal split
target.
There are 3 feasible options for
staging the Priority Project as electrified LRT. With the extension of the rail service to LeBreton, the existing
transitway east of Bayview would also have to be relocated at a cost of about
$45million. Each option has a different
cost and different service level (and consequential ridership). These options are being presented within an
implementation framework that will be responsive to funding as it becomes
available.
1. Full
Implementation: Rideau Centre to Limebank $750M
2. Partial
Implementation: LeBreton to Leitrim - double track $530M
3.
Start-Up Implementation: LeBreton to Leitrim -
single track $295300M
Full implementation would
result in frequent 5-minute service on electrified double-track rail for the
entire section from Rideau Centre to Limebank.
It would bring LRT service into the downtown and serve the fast-growing
community of Riverside South, and link to the Airport. With a total of 19 stations and 2
park-and-ride lots (at Lester and Leitrim), this entire corridor can be
operational by early 2011. Assuming 2/3
funding from senior levels of government, the City would still be required to
contribute $250M (an average annual capital commitment of approximately $31M
for the next 8 years).
This project
can only be begun in full if the federal and provincial governments make in the
near future the kinds of significant investments in municipal transportation
infrastructure that are being made in by the
upper levels of government in Europe and the United States. While the call for this kind of investment
has been growing among economists and international business leaders for some
time, political awareness at the federal and provincial levels of government
has come at a somewhat slower pace, and it is not likely that the levels of
investment needed will be forthcoming in the near future.
Partial implementation
would focus on the middle section of the Priority Project (LeBreton to
Leitrim). Frequent 5-minute service on
electrified double-track rail is still retained. This project includes the 2 km single-track rail link to the
Airport, 12 stations, 2 park-and-ride lots (Lester and Leitrim) for the benefit
of the south-end and rural residents, and a new maintenance and storage yard
for 25 new LRT vehicles (and later additions to the LRT fleet). Extension to LeBreton (Booth Street) would
serve as a major catalyst for the redevelopment of LeBreton Flats, south of the
Aqueduct. The terminus at LeBreton
would provide direct transit connections to the City of Gatineau, as well as to
downtown Ottawa. Service on this
section could begin in 2009. The
remainder of the Priority Project (to Rideau Centre, and from Leitrim to
Limebank) would be extended later, as more funding becomes available. There would be no throw-away costs and
service disruption would be minimal when the line is extended. The City’s average annual capital
contribution would be approximately $29.5M for the next 6 years.
Start-up implementation
would further scale back the Priority Project while still operating from
LeBreton to Leitrim. Seven to eightTen- minute service (an
improvement over the current 20-minute frequency) would operate on a single
track, with 4 additional sidings, 11 stations and 1 park-and-ride lot. Grade separation would still be required over the two
crossing railways. The extension
to the Airport would await a later stage.
The major advantage of the start-up project is the lower initial capital
investment required. However, there
will be some future “throwaway” costs and some disruption to service when the
line is twinned and expanded in the future.
AnyThis
interim staging will also result in a further time
extension in the achievement of the goals of the rapid transit expansion
plan. These issues will all have
to be considered in continuing negotiations for senior government subsidy for
the priority LRT line. For
the start-up project, the City’s contribution would be $100M, or approximately
an average of $17M annually for the next 6 years.
Major
drawbacks of the DMU options include: (elaborate on points made
previously, or addition of new points.
What’s the throw-away cost?, Cost to convert to Option 3? etc.)
Public-Private Partnership Potential
The City of Ottawa has begun to investigate the benefits
of using public-private partnerships to help meet some of its infrastructure
needs. ORTEP has several potential
types of structures for public-private partnerships. Once the range of acceptable options is narrowed down at a
strategic level, either a Design-Build-Operate-Maintain (DBOM) or a
Design-Build-Operate-Finance-Maintain (DBOFM) partnership structure may be
appropriate.
Moving forward with an Expression of Interest could
reveal the potential of these partnership options and the degree of risk
transfer to a private partner. These
options would need to be carefully investigated and weighed as a project moves
toward implementation.
Funding the Program (First Stage and Beyond)
ORTEP continues a significant
investment for the City in transit infrastructure and requires major funding
commitments by all levels of government for the program to be implemented to
meet the needs of now and future citizens.
As has been described earlier, governments’ previous investments in
Ottawa’s infrastructure have yielded significant economic benefits for both the
federal and provincial governments.
Again, in its 2002 Territorial
Review of Canada, the Organization for Economic Co-operation and
Development concluded that,
“…Whereas Canadian cities have long boasted a
better quality of life than American cities, it seems that the United States is
currently more involved in solving its urban problems than is Canada… Canadian
cities have limited financial capacities to embark on infrastructure
spending. They have benefited from
timely infrastructure investments in the past, but these investments were not
renewed when appropriate during the 1990s… Canadian cities are therefore at a
comparative disadvantage, since infrastructure is critical to enhancing the
competitiveness of cities and their export potential.”
If the City of Ottawa is to
continue to grow and compete in the world economy for the benefit of its
residents and the provincial and federal economies, it requires significant
additions to its rapid transit infrastructure.
Ottawa, like other large cities in Canada, cannot and should not do this
alone.
Federal and Provincial Funding
Currently, there are two primary shorter-term funding
sources for transit infrastructure in Ontario:
the Federal Government’s Canada Strategic Infrastructure Fund (CSIF),
and the Ontario Government’s Transit Investment Partnership (TIP).
CSIF, established in 2001/2002
with an initial commitment of $2 billion, was doubled in Budget 2003 to a total
$4 billion over the next ten years.
Together with a doubling of the CSIF commitment, the Government of
Canada also announced a specific commitment to an additional $1 billion in
funding for municipal infrastructure in Budget 2003.
In September 2001, the Province
of Ontario (through MTO and SuperBuild) announced a new ten-year $3.25 billion
program of investment in transit in Ontario.
Of this, $1.5 billion was earmarked for inter-regional transit
expansion, with $1.25 billion for the Golden Horseshoe and $250 million for the
remainder of the province. The
orientation of both funds has now expanded from inter-regional transit to all
transit projects (urban or regional).
The $250 million earmarked for the rest of the province over the period
from 2001 to 2010 is called the Transit Investment Partnership (TIP). With over 80% of the transit ridership
outside of the Golden Horseshoe, Ottawa should be eligible for a large
proportion of the available funds.
For 2002/2003, the province
announced funding for public transportation in Ottawa from two programs. The
Transit Capital Renewal Program earmarked $25.8 million over 2002 and 2003 for
bus replacements and refurbishing, and the Transit Investment Partnership will
invest $19.7 million for transit expansion.
It is essential
if Ottawa, like any other Canadian municipality with a major transit system, is
to expand its rapid transit system, a minimum of 2/3 funding must be provided
by the federal and provincial governments.
Recent discussions with the
federal and provincial governments indicate serious interest in rapid transit
projects in Ottawa. Although no actual
amount of funding has yet been confirmed, there has been an indication from
federal sources that $75-$100 million might be available for an initial
investment.
City funding
The City’s Long Range
Financial Plan: First Steps (LRFP), brought forward in October, 2002, notes
that funding transportation infrastructure is one of the major challenges of
growth, and that transportation solutions may need to involve the expansion of
both transit and road networks. Both
the Transportation Master Plan (TMP) and the Rapid Transit Expansion Study
(RTES) identify the importance of these initiatives to the long-term health and
sustainability of the City of Ottawa.
One of the major observations in
the LRFP is that investment in sustainable development saves money in the long
term, and that,
“The City’s capital infrastructure
deficit can be reduced by changing the way the City develops. One alternative
is investing in high quality transit, which in turn reduces the need to build
more arterial roads and expressways. This alternative also provides significant
side benefits, such as less air and water pollution, and the creation of high
quality community living. Any increase in the share of trips taken by transit
reduces infrastructure costs.”
At the same time, the City of
Ottawa, which has frozen property taxes for eleven consecutive years, is
currently facing a capital funding gap of about $148 million over the next four
years for all of its transit, roads, lifecycle and infrastructure
requirements. It is estimated the
Priority Project will average $17-31 million per year over the 6-year
implementation period.
At this point, $29 million has
been identified for rapid transit initiatives over the next four years.
The City cannot afford to do all
of the projects that currently make up its total 2004 capital envelope. Fundamentally, City Council will need to set
priorities for which projects it will fund within the available resources and
determine how they will be funded.
As both ORTEP and the
Transportation Master Plan move forward, the policies and principles for
funding priority projects as set out by the LRFP should be considered as
funding is allocated. One major
consideration is whether or not the Priority Project should be funded through
pay-as-you-go or through debt financing.
Although the City’s goal is to move to a maximized pay-as-you-go funding
model overall, it was noted that there were some projects that could be best
funded through debt financing. These involved those large, long-term projects
related to capacity expansion or growth and those that leverage funding from
others, and specifically include those to be financed from development charges,
future new non-traditional infrastructure projects such as new transit
programs, or projects that are tied to third party matching funding.
Development Charges
Municipal development charges
must provide some level of support to offset the municipal share of major
transit investments as they have in the past for major municipal road
infrastructure, as was indicated in the LRFP.
The City’s Development Charges Bylaw is being reviewed this year and
required transit investments will be included in the revised development
charges calculations.
Other Potential Funding Mechanisms
Currently, a number of
municipalities in Canada receive a share of their province’s fuel tax. Calgary
and Edmonton receive 5 cents per litre, Vancouver collects 2.5 cents per litre
and Montreal receives 1.5 cents per litre.
This revenue-sharing arrangement has been widely recommended by
economists and is presently being pursued by large municipalities, including
Ottawa, through their federal and provincial municipal associations. Even a 2.5 cents per litre share from each
level of government would provide the City with $60 million annually.
Required Near-Term Action
Present O-Train Status
The current O-Train operation has
been extended until 30 April 2005. The
service operates with three Bombardier Talent trains, which have been purchased
by the City with a sellback option that can be exercised by the City until 30
April 2005. The return of the trains to
Bombardier at this point would realize approximately $9 million. In addition, import duties on the trains of
$1.6 million have been deferred until January 2005. These may be payable if the trains are kept much beyond the
beginning of 2005.
The use of the rail corridor from
Bayview to Leitrim and the maintenance facility at Walkley Yards is governed by
a lease agreement between the City and Canadian Pacific Rail. This lease continues until 2005. During the term of the lease, the City can
purchase the corridor and/or Walkley Yards at a pre-agreed price.
It is clear from the time-lines
developed for this report that the current O-Train service can be continued
until at least the Spring of 2007, perhaps longer depending on the next steps
taken for the Priority One project.
Continued running of the Talent vehicles will require the continued use
of the current maintenance facility at Walkley Yards whether or not this site
is ultimately selected for the LRT maintenance facility.
The arrangements with both Bombardier and CP Rail will
need to be adjusted to take account of the current circumstances as the
detailed project plan is developed. The
purchase of the rail corridor should take place as soon as possible since it is
clear that this property will be needed for any new LRT system. In the short term, an agreement to extend
the lease on the Walkley Yards property should be pursued, while a thorough
investigation of the suitability of that site and other possible locations for
a long-term maintenance facility is undertaken.
East-West Corridor - Opportunity
Although initial travel demand levels indicate that this
LRT line is not required immediately, the implementation of the LRT would also
present a unique opportunity to influence development within growth areas of
Kanata and Orleans as well as inside the Greenbelt. As such, it would be prudent to undertake the environmental
assessment for this corridor now. If
the planning work were completed ahead of time, the City would then be in a
position to discuss public-private partnerships with interested parties as they
come forward. This creates the
opportunity to advance the implementation of the East-West corridor earlier
than planned.
Initiating the environmental
assessment also signals to senior levels of government that the City is serious
about its entire comprehensive rapid transit network - not just one priority
component. The entire network has to be
realized in order to fully attain the vision, goals and targets of the Official
Plan.
Required Actions
The following activities should be initiated now and in
2004 in order to advance the priority O-Train expansion LRT project:
·
Undertake the environmental assessment for the Priority
Project;
·
Undertake the environmental assessment for the
East-West LRT Corridor;
·
Continue negotiations with the senior levels of
government for Priority Project funding
·
Extend the existing O-Train agreements to at least
2007;
·
Complete acquisition of the CP Rail line;
·
Investigate suitable locations for the maintenance yard
(Walkley or elsewhere); and
·
Establish a program management team.
An early estimate of approximately $24 million may be
required in the 2004 budget (this will be discussed as part of the 2004 budget
deliberations) to:
·
Initiate the environmental assessment for the East-West
LRT corridor;
·
Purchase the CP Rail line;
·
Purchase an appropriate LRT yard site; and
·
Development of the 30% design and standards for the LRT
project.
COMPLIANCE WITH OFFICIAL PLAN
AND TRANSPORTATION MASTER PLAN
The ORTEP program complies with
both the Official Plan and the TMP.
This implementation strategy is a detailed examination of the cost and
priorities of the rapid transit projects identified in the TMP to support the
projected growth of the City.
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPLICATIONS
Implementation of any elements in
the rapid transit expansion program will result in reduced levels of
transportation-generated greenhouse gasses and contribute to Canada’s
achievement of Kyoto Protocol targets.
For the electrified
Priority Project alone, this means an annual reduction of up to 50
million kg (or higher) of greenhouse gas emissions.
CONSULTATION
Public consultation was not
undertaken as this implementation strategy is a follow-up action to the RTES.
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS
Funds for the required environmental assessment of the
priority O-Train Expansion LRT project are already included in the 2003 budget
allocations. Most
of the costs related to this program were not included in the 2003 capital
budget and four year forecast. Additional required funds will be submitted and
discussed as part of the 2004 budget deliberations. Annual impacts of the
various options outlined in the report will need to be prioritized against
other initiatives to fit into existing funding envelopes.
ATTACHMENTS
Document 1 ORTEP Corridors
Document 2 ORTEP Project
Schedules
Document 3 ORTEP Cost Summary
Document 4 ORTEP – Summary
Report
Document 5 Actions Arising
from Transportation & Transit Committee’s Motions (19 Feb 03)
DISPOSITION
Following
Committee and Council approval of these recommendations, Development Services
Department will initiate the required environmental assessment studies for the
priority O-Train Expansion LRT line and the East-West Corridor.
Staff
will continue to negotiate for funding from the Canada Strategic Infrastructure
Fund and the Transit Investment Partnership program and will continue to
supplement supporting documentation if and when required by the funding
partners. As well, negotiations will
continue towards establishing fairer and more appropriate revenue-generating
arrangements, such as sharing revenues collected from fuel taxes.
Funding
for required rapid transit expansion will be included as part of the review and
update of the City’s Development Charges Bylaw.
Staff
will prepare a detailed funding plan for the initial City funding for the Rapid
Transit Expansion Program for inclusion in the 2004 budget deliberations.
Staff will continue to negotiate
a property agreement for the CP Rail corridor and for an appropriate site for a
storage and maintenance yard along the priority LRT corridor.
The Strategic Delivery Unit will
work with Development Services and Transportation, Utilities and Public Works
staff to explore public-private partnerships for rapid transit in other
jurisdictions and prepare recommendations for the Committee and Council.
ORTEP CORRIDOR Document 1
ORTEP PROJECT SCHEDULES Document 2
ORTEP COST SUMMARY Document
3
Project Corridors and Program Costs
|
Corridor
|
Cost ( $M 2003)*
|
|
|
Item
|
Totals
|
|
1-LRT –
O-Train Expansion Priority Project (Rideau Centre-Limebank)
|
$600
|
|
|
Priority LRT Vehicles
|
$150
|
|
|
Priority
LRT Subtotal
|
|
$750
|
|
1-LRT –
Future Extensions (Rideau-Montreal; Barrhaven)
|
$330
|
|
|
2-LRT -
East West Corridor
|
$976
|
|
|
3-LRT -
Carling Corridor
|
$254
|
|
|
Other LRT Vehicles
|
$480
|
|
|
Other
LRT Corridors Subtotal
|
|
$2,040
|
|
LRT Total
|
|
$2,790
|
|
|
|
|
|
1-BRT -
West Transitway
|
$230
|
|
|
2-BRT -
Southwest Transitway
|
$101
|
|
|
3-BRT -
Baseline Corridor
|
$46
|
|
|
4-BRT -
Hurdman to Blair Corridor
|
$119
|
|
|
5-BRT -
East Transitway
|
$30
|
|
|
6-BRT -
Albert/Slater Corridor
|
$20
|
|
|
BRT Corridors Subtotal
|
|
$546
|
|
BRT Vehicles
|
$53
|
|
|
BRT Total
|
|
$598
|
|
|
|
|
|
ORTEP Total
Estimated Cost
|
|
$3,388
|
Priority
Project Cost ($M 2003)
|
WBS
|
Cost Element
|
Full Implementation
Rideau
Centre to Limebank
Double
Track
|
Partial Implementation
LeBreton
to Leitrim
Double
Track
|
Start-up Implementation
LeBreton
to Leitrim
Single
Track
|
|
10
|
Property
|
25
|
21.9
|
20
|
|
20
|
Grading,
Track & Structures
|
137.5
|
103
|
32.5
|
|
30
|
Stations
& Park and Rides
|
61
|
47
|
16.5
|
|
|
Yard
|
37.5
|
37.5
|
19.5
|
|
|
LeBreton
Transitway
|
45
|
45
|
45
|
|
|
Associated
Works
|
23
|
0
|
0
|
|
40
|
Vehicles
|
150
|
84
|
60
|
|
45
|
Traction
Power
|
70
|
48.5
|
30.5
|
|
50
|
Signals
/ Train Control
|
31.5
|
23
|
12
|
|
60
|
Utility
Relocation
|
6.5
|
0
|
0
|
|
70
|
Engineering
|
50.5
|
37
|
18
|
|
80
|
Project
Management
|
33.5
|
24.7
|
12
|
|
90
|
Contingency
|
79
|
58.4
|
29
|
|
Total
|
|
$750
|
$530
|
$295
|
ORTEP SUMMARY REPORT Document
4
CITY of OTTAWA
RAPID TRANSIT
EXPANSION PROGRAM
(ORTEP)
SUMMARY REPORT
July 2003
In April 2003, the City of Ottawa
initiated the development of an implementation strategy for the Ottawa Rapid
Transit Expansion Program (ORTEP). The
need for this implementation strategy follows the completion of the Rapid
Transit Expansion Study (RTES). The
RTES project identified a rapid transit network for Ottawa comprising both
light rail and bus transit technologies.
RTES also included some conceptual level costs and implementation
timings. The purpose of this study is
to define the costs of the ORTEP more closely, develop an implementation
schedule that considers all of the required planning, approval, design and
construction stages necessary for each of the individual projects that make up
the rapid transit network, and lay out a detailed implementation plan for the
LRT O-Train expansion project (Priority Project).
Higher-order public transit, in the form
of Bus Rapid Transit (the Transitway), has been part of Ottawa since the
1980’s. The initial 31 km Transitway
network was completed in 1996 and has been expanded through new stations, park
and ride lots, and freeway and arterial bus-only lanes. The City of Ottawa introduced its first rail
transit service as a pilot project in the fall of 2001. Known as the O-Train, this diesel rail
transit service operates on a leased Canadian Pacific Railway branch using
Bombardier Talent rail vehicles. The
City’s Transit Services Branch, OC Transpo, also operates over 900 standard and
articulated buses on more than 240 individual bus routes. Ridership has increased almost 25% over the
past six years, with a total of 87 million trips in 2002.
Ottawa is one of the most desirable
cities in Canada in which to live and do business, and it is also one of the
fastest growing. Over the past 20
years, the City’s population has increased by 41.6%. In the next 20 years, the population is forecast to increase by a
further 50% from approximately 800,000 to 1,200,000 people.
In order to maintain Ottawa’s
attractiveness as an innovative and competitive city with an exceptional
quality of life, while managing this tremendous level of growth, the City of
Ottawa’s new Official Plan describes a transportation system that emphasizes
transit, walking and cycling in a compact city. The plan assumes that the proportion of peak‑hour travel on
transit will increase from 17% to 30%.
Given the forecast increase in population, this means that transit usage
would grow from 87 million to almost 260 million trips annually over the next
20 years.
The purpose of the Rapid Transit
Expansion Study (RTES) was to develop a long-range strategic plan for rapid
transit in Ottawa. The study used land
use, population and employment forecasts to identify travel demand patterns for
future rapid transit. The strongest
travel demand patterns were matched with potential transit corridors in a
screening process to determine the best fit. Potential rapid transit corridors
were identified from previous transportation plans, stakeholder/public
consultation, and field observations; then the most promising corridors were
combined into rapid transit networks and matched with
suitable technology.
Five network options
were developed and assessed. The
networks were evaluated using factors reflective of the 2020 Charting A
Course principles to formulate a ‘preferred’ network
concept. Based on public and stakeholder input, the preferred network was then
refined and resulted in the recommended Rapid Transit Network. It includes the following elements:
§Electrified
light rail (LRT) to replace the existing O-Train service, extended south to the
Airport and Riverside South, then west to the South Nepean town centre;
§LRT
service through downtown Ottawa connecting the O-Train corridor to Rideau
Street, Montreal Road, and the Blair Transitway Station;
§LRT
service on the east-west CN corridor connecting Kanata North, Bells Corners,
Colonnade, Greenboro and Cumberland;
§LRT
service on Carling Avenue between the O-Train corridor and Bayshore and
connecting Bayshore to the new east-west LRT service on the CN corridor;
§A
new BRT corridor between the Innes/Blair intersection and the Southeast
Transitway serving the Smyth Road Hospital complex;
§Substantial
improvements to the Albert/Slater downtown Transitway;
§Transitway
improvements and extensions along:
oThe
West Transitway between Bayshore Station and Pinecrest Road, west from Eagleson
past Terry Fox and the Corel Centre, to Hazeldean Road;
oThe
Southwest Transitway between Hunt Club and Nepean Town Centre;
oThe
East Transitway beyond Place d’Orleans to Trim Road;
§BRT
service in the Baseline/Heron corridor between the West Transitway and the
Southeast Transitway.
The
recommended Rapid Transit Plan was approved by the City of Ottawa’s
Transportation and Transit Committee oin 19 February
2003 (subsequently approved by council on 26 February 2003) and included a recommendation to
develop an implementation strategy for the plan. City staff and the
Consulting team have proceeded to develop an Implementation Strategy including
timelines, funding and partnership options, and financial implications. TThis report
summarizes that implementation
strategy.
Developing the
implementation strategy involved detailed assessments of potential corridors,
costing of each project based on the selected corridors, identification of all
planning, design and construction steps required for each project, and project
scheduling. The strategy also involved identification of funding sources and financing
alternatives, assessment of approaches for project delivery, identification of
staffing and project management issues and requirements, and the development of
detailed work programs for the overall ORTEP plan and for the priority LRT
O-Train expansion project.
ORTEP Project Summary
Description
The 2003 RTES report identified 13
separate transit corridors to be studied for the implementation of an integrated
Light Rail Rapid Transit (LRT) and Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) network. These have been regrouped into 3 LRT and
6 BRT corridors in the ORTEP study. Exhibit
3.1, on the next page, displays this corridor grouping. Table 3.1 , below,
describes outlines key specifications
of the corridors and their costs excluding vehicles. Exhibit 3.1, on the following page, displays the
corridor grouping.
At
this time, individual ORTEP corridors have been shown as an alignment that is
representative of what could be considered for further refinement as detailed
planning and design tasks are undertaken.
The alignments have been developed based on the RTES report, information
available from previous environmental assessment reports and field
reviews. It is important to note that
all corridors have
or will be subject to some level of environmental assessment (EA), which
will include public input. That work
will result in a definitive alignment with a functional design level of detail. Current assumptions will be re-evaluated
during that EA work.
Some
of the current assumptions are:
LRT
is on twin tracks unless identified otherwise;
LRT
will not be run on existing freight track;
Existing
freight tracks to be relocated within ROW to accommodate LRT;
LRT
will be located on new continuous welded rail (CWR);
Existing
subway structures will be retained for current rail usage;
New
subway structures will be constructed for the LRT;
Overhead
road structures will be modified to accommodate LRT;
Exclusive
transit right-of-ways will be grade separated from other means of
transportation;
Semi-exclusive
right-of-ways will have controlled access and may be co-located with other
means of transportation;
Transit
priority measures will be employed on all facilities that share roadway
right-of-ways; and
A
reduction in road capacity for non-transit vehicles is acceptable.
|
TABLE 3.1 - ORTEP
CORRIDORS
|
|
Corridor
|
Project
|
Distance (km)
|
Stations
|
Cost
|
|
|
|
Semi.
|
Excl.
|
Stops
|
P&R
|
2003 $M
|
|
1-LRT corridor
|
O-Train
Expansion Corridor
|
19.7
|
22.4
|
33
|
3
|
$930
|
|
2-LRT corridor
|
East
- West Corridor
|
3.2
|
43.6
|
25
|
4
|
$976
|
|
3-LRT corridor
|
Carling
Corridor
|
10.5
|
2
|
26
|
-
|
$254
|
|
1-BRT corridor
|
West
Transitway Corridor
|
2
|
9.5
|
12
|
1
|
$230
|
|
2-BRT corridor
|
Southwest
Transitway Corridor
|
-
|
8.0
|
5
|
1
|
$101
|
|
3-BRT corridor
|
Baseline
Corridor
|
6.5
|
-
|
13
|
-
|
$46
|
|
4-BRT corridor
|
Hurdman
to Blair Corridor
|
2.2
|
6.8
|
11
|
-
|
$119
|
|
5-BRT corridor
|
East
Transitway Corridor
|
5.6
|
1.0
|
2
|
1
|
$30
|
|
6-BRT corridor
|
Albert/Slater
Corridor
|
-
|
-
|
6
|
-
|
$20
|
Notes: P & R = park and
ride. Preliminary
property cost, engineering and contingency included in estimate, vehicle
costs not included in estimate
The following pages provide brief descriptions of
each of the ORTEP corridors as illustrated in the previous Exhibit 3.1. Table 3.1 below provides summary detail with respect to
type of right of way, number of stations, number of park and ride lots, and corridor costs exclusive of
vehicles.
|
|
|
Corridor
|
Project
|
Distance (km)
|
Stations
|
Cost
|
|
|
|
Semi.
|
Excl.
|
Stops
|
P&R
|
2003 $M
|
|
1-LRT corridor
|
O-Train Expansion
Corridor
|
19.7
|
22.4
|
33
|
3
|
$930
|
|
2-LRT corridor
|
East -
West Corridor
|
3.2
|
43.6
|
25
|
4
|
$976
|
|
3-LRT corridor
|
Carling
Corridor
|
10.5
|
2
|
26
|
-
|
$254
|
|
1-BRT corridor
|
West
Transitway Corridor
|
2
|
9.5
|
12
|
1
|
$230
|
|
2-BRT corridor
|
Southwest
Transitway Corridor
|
-
|
8.0
|
5
|
1
|
$101
|
|
3-BRT corridor
|
Baseline
Corridor
|
6.5
|
-
|
13
|
-
|
$46
|
|
4-BRT corridor
|
Hurdman
to Blair Corridor
|
2.2
|
6.8
|
11
|
-
|
$119
|
|
5-BRT corridor
|
East
Transitway Corridor
|
5.6
|
1.0
|
2
|
1
|
$30
|
|
6-BRT corridor
|
Albert/Slater
Corridor
|
-
|
-
|
6
|
-
|
$20
|
Notes: P
& R = park and ride.
Semi
= semi-exclusive right of way
Excl.
= exclusive right of way
Preliminary
property cost, engineering and contingency included in estimate.
Vehicle
costs not included in estimate
O-Train Expansion Corridor (1-LRT)
This $930M light rail corridor extends
consists
of twin tracks from Barrhaven near Jockvale Road in the South Nepean Town
Centre (tying in with the Southwest Transitway Corridor 2-BRT), easterly
through the Riverside South Community, northerly along the current O-Train
Pilot Corridor (crossing over the East-West Corridor (2-LRT), then through
LeBreton Flats and Downtown Ottawa on Sparks and Rideau Streets. The corridor
continues easterly on Montreal Road to the NRC campus at Blair Road, then south
through the campus and existing hydro corridor to its termination with a
connection to the East-West Corridor (2-LRT) south of Innes Road.
East-West Corridor
(2-LRT)
This $976M Light Rail corridor extends
consists
of 46.8 km of twin light tracks from the
intersection of Klondike and March Roads in Kanata, through the Kanata North
Business Park, along the Ottawa Central Railway and Beachburg Rail Subdivision
to the Queensway-Carleton Hospital Campus (tying in with the Carling Corridor
(3-LRT)). Service will continue easterly to the O-Train Expansion corridor
(1-LRT) at Greenboro, through Walkley Rail Yard, the Alexandria Rail
Subdivision, along a corridor south of Innes Road, connecting again to the
O-Train Expansion Corridor (1-LRT) at Blair Road, then traveling south of the
Blackburn Hamlet Bypass along the Cumberland Transitway alignment to Trim
Road.
Carling Avenue Corridor (3-LRT)
This $254M Light
Rail corridor extends consists of twin
tracks
from the Queensway-Carleton Hospital, along Holly Acres Road, to Bayshore
Shopping Centre, along Woodridge and Bayshore Drive to Carling Avenue, then
easterly along the median of Carling Avenue, past Lincoln Fields Shopping
Centre, to connect with the O-Train Expansion Corridor (1-LRT).
West Transitway
Corridor (1-BRT)
This $230M corridor of Bus Rapid Transit
corridor includes an extension of BRT from Hazeldean Road in Kanata near the
Corel Centre easterly, north of Highway 417 to Eagleson Road and a section of
BRT north of Highway 417 between Bayshore Shopping Centre and the existing
Southwest Transitway at Woodroffe Avenue.
This 11.5 km corridor includes nine stations and
one park and ride lot between Hazeldean and Eagleson Road and three stations
between Bayshore and Woodroffe Avenue.
Southwest Corridor
(2-BRT)
This $101M corridor extends from the Nepean Sports Plex at Hunt Club
Road west of Woodroffe Avenue to the Fallowfield Road Park and Ride Lot, then
southerly along the Smiths Falls Railway Subdivision to Greenbank Road, then
southerly east of Greenbank Road to the Nepean South Town Centre (tying to the
O-Train Expansion Corridor (1-LRT)). The
5 km corridor includes five stations and a park and ride lot at the Town
Centre.
Baseline Road
Corridor (3-BRT)
This $46M Bus Rapid Transit corridor extends
along the median of Baseline Road between Navaho Drive and Data Centre Road,
then along Data Centre Road to Billings Bridge Transit Station. Thirteen
stops are proposed along this 6.5 km long corridor.
Hurdman
Station to Blair Station Corridor (4-BRT)
This $119M section of Bus Rapid Transit Corridor extends from the
Southeast Transitway at Lycée Claudel Station easterly through the hospital
complex on Smyth Road, to Innes Road at Blair Road (connecting to both 1-LRT
and 2-LRT corridors), then northely along Blair Road to the Blair Transit
Station at Gloucester Centre. Eleven stations are
proposed along this 9 km BRT corridor.
East Transitway
Corridor (5-BRT)
This $30M corridor extends to the east
from the existing BRT station/ Park and Ride at Place d’Orleans Shopping
Centre, using shoulder Bus Only Lanes on City Highway 174, to Trim Road and the
Park and Ride Lot at that location. This 6.6km corridor
includes two stations and an expansion of the current Park and Ride lot at Trim
Road.
Albert/Slater
Corridor (6-BRT)
This $20M corridor extends along the
existing Albert and Slater bus mall between Bronson and Elgin. The work
includes improvements to bus operations, enforcement through design, and improved access and
amenities for transit customers.
Estimated RTES
Ridership
NEED TEXT ABOUT RIDERSHIP – 1 PP.
In order to implement, monitor and
control an infrastructure program of this size ($3.4 billion), a dedicated
program management team needs to be established by the City. In addition to the responsibility for the
planning, design and development of the individual rapid transit projects in
the City of Ottawa’s long range transit expansion plan (ORTEP), there are a
large number of program wide tasks, such as specifications and standards for vehicles, operations, and the
system itself. These are outlined
later in this report.
Table 4.1 summarizes the total estimated
ORTEP costs by project and includes required vehicles and maintenance
facilities. This program is a very
large long-range undertaking requiring a $3.4 billion investment by the City
and its funding partners. PThe
potential sources of funding are discussed in the following
section.
ORTEP COST SUMMARY - TABLE 4.1TABLE 4.1
|
Corridor
|
Cost ($M 2003)
|
|
|
Item
|
Totals
|
|
1-LRT – O-Train Expansion Priority Project
|
$600
|
|
|
1-LRT – Future Extensions
|
$330
|
|
|
2-LRT - East West Corridor
|
$976
|
|
|
3-LRT - Carling Corridor
|
$254
|
|
|
LRT Corridors Subtotal
|
|
$2,160
|
|
LRT Vehicles
|
$630
|
|
|
LRT Total
|
|
$2,790
|
|
|
|
|
|
1-BRT - West Transitway
|
$230
|
|
|
2-BRT - Southwest Transitway
|
$101
|
|
|
3-BRT - Baseline Corridor
|
$46
|
|
|
4-BRT - Hurdman to Blair Corridor
|
$119
|
|
|
5-BRT - East Transitway
|
$30
|
|
|
6-BRT - Albert/Slater Corridor
|
$20
|
|
|
BRT Corridors Subtotal
|
|
$546
|
|
BRT Vehicles
|
$53
|
|
|
BRT Total
|
|
$598
|
|
|
|
|
|
ORTEP Total
Estimated Cost
|
|
$3,388
|
·
Costs
include property, engineering, project management and contingency
Exhibit
4.2 below provides a graphical
illustration of the required total annual cash flow and the accumulated total over the next 18 years
if the program is to proceed as scheduled.
There are two funding sources that are
the primary vehicles for funding transit infrastructure in Ontario: the Federal
Government’s Canada Strategic Infrastructure Fund (CSIF), and the Ontario
Government’s Transit Investment Partnership (TIP).
Administered by Infrastructure Canada,
the CSIF was established specifically to deal with strategic, large-scale infrastructure
projects. Established in 2001/2002 with
an initial commitment of $2 billion, CSIF was doubled in Budget 2003 to a total
$4 billion over the next ten years.
ORTEP is an ideal candidate for CSIF under the “Local Transportation
Infrastructure” priority of the CSIF fund.
In September 2001, the Province of
Ontario (through MTO and SuperBuild) announced a new ten-year $3.25 billion
program of investment in transit in Ontario, of which $250 million was
dedicated for urban centres outside the Golden Horseshoe. The $250 million earmarked for the rest of
the province over the period from 2001 to 2010 is called the Transit Investment
Partnership (TIP). As the largest urban
area in Ontario outside of the Golden Horseshoe, and the only city with higher-order
transit, the City of Ottawa should be eligible for a significant portion of the
$250 million Transit Investment Partnership (TIP) funding. It is not unreasonable to anticipate
receiving close to 80% (based on ridership) of the committed $250 million over
the next ten years, with the potential for a higher portion.
Development Charges – Capital investment in public transportation infrastructure is
commonly supported by levying infrastructure support charges through
development charges (either city-wide or area-specific) and/or other
considerations sought from developers in exchange for increased density,
especially near transit stations.
Land Value Uplift - Public investment in major transportation infrastructure can
result in windfall increases in property value for the owners of private
property adjacent to and served by the new facility. This increase, or uplift, in property value is an untapped
potential source of funding for governments.
It is possible that some of this land value uplift (or windfall) can be
shared with the public and mechanisms will be investigated to determine whether
additional funds can be acquired for some ORTEP projects.
Local Payroll, Sales, Excise, Parking,
and Congestion Taxes - While, for the most part,
the levying of these taxes is not available to municipal governments in
Ontario, Canadian Provinces do have the ability to allow municipalities to
impose these taxes. Some support has
been expressed at the Federal level for the Government of Canada to vacate tax
room on the fuel excise tax, to be filled by municipalities.
City of Ottawa Financing - There are several conventional forms of debt finance available to
municipalities, as well as unconventional ones under new initiatives being
undertaken by the Province. The Ontario
Municipal Economic Infrastructure Financing Authority (OMEIFA) was established
in 2002 to provide subsidized financing for municipalities through the use of Opportunity
Bonds. Public transportation is an
eligible category of public infrastructure to receive OMEIFA financing.
Private Financing - While private finance tends to attract a higher cost of capital
than does public finance, this higher cost of capital is typically largely
accounted for by increased risk that has been passed to the private sector that
would have otherwise been borne by the public sector. It is likely that, given that fare revenues are unlikely to cover
operating costs and entail some revenue risk, the City will need to provide a
payment structure to support this type of financing structure. Further, it is possible that regardless of
the specific structure of a public-private partnership, the transaction is
likely to be regarded as a capital lease and may therefore be reported as a
capital lease on its balance sheet - “off-book” accounting treatment is
therefore not a certain outcome.
Impacts of Government Funding Support Levels
The following Exhibits 4.1 and 4.2 show the annual
cash flow requirements for each project and for the entire $3.4 billion ORTEP
program over the estimated implementation program period. Exhibit 4.1 provides
a graphical illustration of the cash
flow.
The impacts of differing levels of senior
government support on the project’s annual cash flow requirements were
examined. Two senior-level government
subsidy scenarios were considered. One scenario has each level of government
sharing 1/3 of the programme and providing a 67% total subsidy to the
City. The other scenario considered
only a total 33.3% subsidy provided by senior levels of government.
If the City of Ottawa had to finance the
entire program it would require an average of $132 million annually over the
life of the program, including $83 million per year over 8 years for the
priority LRT O-Train expansion project.
Projects of this magnitude cannot be (and never have been) funded by the
municipal taxpayer in Ottawa or any other city in North America. This is not
reasonably achievable out of the municipal tax base.
On a cost shared basis of 1/3 each or 67%
total subsidy to the City, it will still cost the City of Ottawa an average of
$63 million per year over the life of the program including $31 million per
year over 88
years for the priority LRT O-Train expansion project.
There is no clear advantage to having the
private sector provide financing for an LRT project and the terms required can
complicate the terms of the subsidy funding agreement, especially when the
project may be subsidized by 3 levels of government. As such it is recommended that the City of Ottawa self finance
its share of the first priority project.
It is also clear that a minimum
2/3 funding must be provided by senior levels of government if the projects are
to proceed in a timely fashion.
(insert cash flow table
spread over two rows - may need to cut
and paste to fit table in two pieces on this 8.5 x 11 page - File=ORTEP cash
flow formatted Jun 1.xls)
Delivery
approaches
Traditional delivery of large-scale
public transit infrastructure projects has followed the process of plan,
design, bid and construct a number of contracts (50-100 or more) to make up a
completed transit facility. The owner
(or agent for the owner) completes the design for each of the component civil
or system contracts and awards them to a large number of individual
contractors. The owner takes
responsibility for issuing the contracts in the proper sequence, for insuring
that each component contract is coordinated with the others and for testing the
completed system. Operation and
maintenance of the system is generally an owner responsibility.
This process gives the owner the maximum
control over quality and scope for the completed project but also leaves the
owner with the full risk for cost overruns and schedule delays. Because the construction contracts cannot be
initiated prior to the full completion of the tender design packages, the
schedule for the project tends to be longer.
There are several potential types of
structures for public-private partnerships.
Once the range of acceptable options in a particular case is narrowed
down at a strategic level, further, much more specific, structuring options
need to be considered. A key
distinguishing feature of each option is the degree of risk transfer to the
private partner. The strategic and more
specific options that are chosen depend on the transportation, urban
development, and financial objectives of the public partner and its private
partners, and on a range of other considerations. These options need to be carefully investigated and weighed as a
project moves toward implementation.
Subject to the foregoing, either a Design-Build-Operate-Maintain (DBOM)
or a Design-Build-Operate-Finance-Maintain (DBOFM) structure is likely to be
appropriate. These structures and
others are described below.
Three potential contract options for LRT
rapid transit under
public private partnerships are:
Design-Build
Contracts (DB):
Under this structure, the private partner both designs and builds the
rail and associated infrastructure for an LRT rapid transit system. Design and construction are awarded to a
single contractor, who is responsible for ensuring that both design and
construction satisfy performance specifications and are provided at a fixed
price within a specified deadline.
Because design/builders are bidding on the contract and trying to
minimize costs, the drawback of this approach is the potential for
short-cutting by the contractor on life-cycle, operating, and maintenance
costs.
Design-Build-Operate-Maintain
Contracts (DBOM):
Under this structure, the private partner designs, builds, operates, and
maintains the LRT rapid transit system, but is not responsible for securing
finance. By integrating responsibility
for operations and maintenance with responsibility for design and construction,
this approach (and all approaches that do the same) helps optimize the
life-cycle cost of transit system development and operation by internalizing
the capital-operating trade-offs to a single party. The project will usually get constructed to a higher standard
because of the inherent operating and, more importantly, maintenance
responsibilities.
Design-Build-Finance-Operate-Maintain
Contracts (DBFOM):
Under this structure, the private partner designs,
builds, finances, operates and maintains transit infrastructure. The main difference in the DBFOM option is
that the design builder also finances the line. Added discipline may be imposed on the private partner through
the introduction of creditors that seek to preserve their interest in the
project by ensuring its successful operation.
However, in financing the project the private partner usually cannot
borrow money at as favourable a rate as the City unless the City provides
financial guarantees.
The appropriate term
of a public-private partnership contract depends on a variety of factors, and
whatever term is set, it is invariably qualified by the right of either party
to terminate for cause, and the right of the public partner to terminate for
convenience. For the City of Ottawa, a
contract term in the order of twenty-five to thirty years is likely to be
appropriate as it reflects the expected useful life of the major assets, avoids
unnecessarily high contingencies related to long-term uncertaintieuncertainty, and allows the
City to finance the project with debt matching the term of the agreement.
For the Priority Project it is
recommended that an experienced consortium be hired through a competitive
process to Design-Build-Operate and Maintain the LRT line. While a DBOM consortium will not necessarily
complete the project at a lower cost than following the traditional
design-bid-build process, it will most certainly result in the project being
completed on a more accelerated schedule.
In addition, if the project is bid at a guaranteed maximum price with
appropriate schedule penalties/rewards, it will reduce the risk of project cost overruns and schedule
delays.
In addition to the individual rapid
transit projects within the ORTEP program there are a number of program wide
tasks that need to be completed. Due to
the complexity of the project and the length of the project schedule, a series
of standards need to be developed to provide performance guidelines, mitigate
risk, and ensure safe operations. These
tasks areinclude:
(refer to the full Technical Report for more information).
§
Program Procedures Manual
§
Risk Assessment Plan
§
LRT standards/operating procedures
§
Updated BRT Standards
§
LRT Vehicle Specifications
§
System Specifications
§
Property Acquisition Plan
§
Yards and Maintenance Facilities
§
Program Procurement Plan
Exhibits 6.1, starting on page 14 and continuing on page 15shows, shows the
proposed schedule for all of the ORTEP project program components. The associated cash flow tables and chart
have been included in Section 4.
It is proposed that the City set up its ORTEP program management team,
thenand then proceed with the implementation of
the first priority north-south LRT and the required planning for most of the
other projects. Construction of other
major projects would follow as financing allows.
Based on this schedule, the LRT
Priority Project Stage 1 between LeBreton and Leitrim would be operational by
Spring 2009. The bulk of the
expenditures for construction and vehicle purchase will be in 2007 and 2008.
Following the priority project, there are
a number of BRT projects which could be implemented and which would complete
the BRT network and have the required planning approvals. The BRT projects are:
- West Transitway between Pinecrest and Bayshore
- South West Transitway between the Sportsplex and Fallowfield
Road.
- Cumberland Transitway between
Navan Road and Trim Road (a BRT system would be implemented as a precursor
to a future LRT line)
Other BRT projects that should be
considered as the network is implemented are:
- Albert – Slater improvements between Elgin Street and LeBreton
Flats
- East Transitway between Place d’Orleans and Trim
- South West Transitway between Fallowfield and Strandherd
- Baseline Transitway (upgrading
the transit priority to a Transitway specification)
- Cumberland Transitway between Hurdman and Blair Road.
Exhibit 6.1 – Proposed Schedule, Full ORTEP Program
In
February 2003, the recommendations of the Rapid Transit Expansion Study were
approved by Council. The recommended network includes as a priority the
expansion of the O-Train corridor to downtown and to the growth areas in the
south. The downtown service would be at-grade on an east-west street (possibly
on Queen Street or Sparks Street depending on the outcome of an environmental
assessment study). The existing O-Train corridor would extend southwards to the
Riverside South community and eventually across the Rideau River to the South
Nepean area.
After 18 months in operation and an
investment of $30 million, the O-Train has been judged a success. Ridership has met expectations with more
than 6000 riders per weekday and it operates on time, 99% of the time. The
public feedback has been positive.
Based on the success of the Light Rail Pilot Project and the results of
analysis of future travel demand, the RTES has recommended that as a priority
the service be extended to the east into downtown and to the south to the new
growth area of Riverside South, the Ottawa MacDonald Cartier International
Airport and eventually across the Rideau River to the Barrhaven area.
The
O-Train service in the existing north - south railway corridor has been
successful. However, on its present
alignment running between Greenboro and Bayview, it will never be able to
realize its full potential unless the line is extended into the Central
Business District (CBD) and into the new development areas of Riverside South
and the Ottawa International Airport.
Based on a recent travel analysis for the
South East sector of the City, the number of riders per day on the LRT system
between the Rideau Centre and Limebank has been conservatively estimated to be
in the order of 60,000 to 80,000 persons per day by 2021. The LRT system would
also be an attractive option for travel within the Central Business
District. As a result the LRT is likely
to attract more than 100,000 riders per day.
There are a number of Light Rail corridors
that have been identified (see Section 3).
With the north south corridor having proven its potential, it is
expected that no other corridor would produce these ridership results within
this time frame.
A
‘lighter’, more flexible LRT vehicle (compared to the current O-Train
technology) will be needed to operate in the downtown setting of mixed-use and
pedestrian-friendly environment. The extension of the service through LeBreton
Flats and into the CBD will mean that the Light Rail vehicle will be running
along and crossing existing roadways within the downtown area. Consequently the vehicle must be able to
negotiate tight turning radii typically found at many downtown intersecting
roads. In addition, to ensure that the
platforms are the least intrusive within the downtown environment, low floor
(at least 70%) vehicles would be required. The resulting platform height would
be approximately 350 mm.
The
electric vehicle will be particularly environmentally friendly, with little or
no harmful emissions. Overhead
electrical wires will be supported by poles placed either on the sides of the
road or in the centre between the tracks.
The three Talent DMUs, currently used for the O-Train, will
no longer be required for the North – South LRT line once the service is
expanded and extended. The question has been raised as to whether the existing
DMUs could be used to provide a low-cost service on the East – West rail line
in the short term. The consulting team
has examined the feasibility of this service in detail. However, due to the
unsuitability of existing track and signalling and associated costs, and the
difficulty of gaining Transport Canada approval to run the Talent service on
active freight lines, extending the service using the Talent vehicles is not
recommended. The full ORTEP technical
report contains more information regarding this feasibility study.
Exhibit
7.1 following shows
a detailed schedule of the key elements of the Priority O-Train expansion LRT
project. The project is scheduled to start operation in early 2009 and in order
to achieve that fast track schedule there are a number of tasks that must be
initiated. These tasks are briefly described in the following
sub-sections.
Exhibit 7.1 –
Proposed Schedule, Full ORTEP Program
INSERT PRIORITY
SCHEDULE
The proposed schedule shows the opening
of the Priority Project between LeBreton and Leitrim stations by early 2009
with the extensions to the Rideau Centre and Limebank to follow immediately. In
effect this means that there are approximately five and half years to get the
first phase of the line in operation.
This is an ambitious but achievable schedule.
However, it is highly unlikely that the
conventional approach of planning, design, tender, award and construction will
result in project completion in this time frame. The Sheppard Subway in
Toronto, for instance, while on time and on budget, took approximately 12 years
from EA to service start. Consequently,
a fast tracking approach is required for the Priority Project. This means that a number of the major tasks
will have to be carried out either at the same time or with considerable
overlap. While there are risks that
have to be assumed in the process, the purpose of a well-defined implementation
plan is to understand and minimize these risks.
The following tasks will be required to
implement the Priority project:
Environmental Assessment - Provincial legislation will require an individual Environmental
Assessment be carried out for the complete project, and the study must also
meet the requirements of the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act. To avoid any duplication in the level of
effort, a harmonized assessment should be undertaken.
Preliminary Design (Project Scope
Definition) - As part of, or in parallel with, the
EA study, Preliminary Design Studies will be carried out. Typically, a minimum 30% design level by the
City would be required to meet the risk requirements of the suggested PPP. This task will establish project scope,
Baseline Schedule and a Baseline budget.
DBOM Consortium Procurement – If a DBOM approach to procurement is pursued, it is extremely
critical that the process for procuring one or more design/build/operate/
maintain contractors be carefully developed and contract requirements clearly
assessed before a competitive procurement process.
Development of Various Standards
and Plans - In conjunction with Environmental
Assessment Studies and the subsequent Preliminary Design work, plans must be
developed to assist in ensuring that the project proceeds smoothly, on time and
within budget. A number of the
additional activities will have to be carried out in parallel with the EA and
preliminary design activities, specifically:
§
LRT Planning and Design Standards
§
Vehicle and Systems Procurement Plan
§
Maintenance Operations Specifications
§
Communications and Public Consultation
Plan
§
Operational and Service Plan /
Integration with Bus and Transitway Services
Property
Acquisition - There are a number of properties to
be acquired for the LRT priority project.
These include:
§
CP Right of Way - the City is currently
leasing the track system it operates from CP Rail. The agreement with CP
contains a clause to purchase the leased line with or without the portion of
the Walkley yard also currently being used for the O-Train.
§
Maintenance and Storage Yards - Acquisition
of the lands to accommodate the initial LRT yard is a priority. The existing maintenance facility at Walkley
may not be adequate for use with the new system. Other yard sites are being
identified along the line and will be acquired in the event that Walkley is not
appropriate.
§
Riverside South - The required property
south of Leitrim is in the hands of a number of developers: A new right-of-way will be required from the
developers.
§
LeBreton Flats - Property requirements
for the relocation of the Transitway have already been negotiated with the NCC,
including protection for the co-location of the LRT line.
§
LeBreton to Rideau Centre - While as
much as possible, the chosen alignment will be within City rights-of-way, there
may be some property requirements through the downtown area.
§
Park and Ride Lots - Property will be
required for park and ride lots at Lester and Leitrim stations.
§
Airport Lands - A separate right-of-way
will be set aside for the airport LRT connection through Airport lands.
The first priority LRT project from
Rideau Centre to Limebank Station is estimated to cost $750 million ($2003).
Three major stages have been identified. The first stage is the upgrading,
double tracking, and extension of the existing O-Train corridor between
LeBreton and Leitrim including Park and Ride lots at both Lester and Leitrim
stations. The second stage will likely be the section from LeBreton to Rideau
Centre. The third stage (Leitrim to
Limebank) would either be constructed at the same time as stage 2 or follow
shortly thereafter. The airport
extension could also be included as a second stage but is presently included as
part of the first stage. The proposed preferred staging
plan is
shown in the following Exhibit 7.2
Exhibit 7.2
Proposed Staging of priority LRT
(insert staging map)
Table 7.1 provides the costs of the preferred staged
approach to the construction and implementation of LRT in this priority corridor.
|
Staging Plan Table 7.1
|
|
Stage
|
Section
|
Estimate
2003 $M
|
|
1
|
LeBreton flats to Leitrim, including the spurs to
OMCIA and Maintenance Yard
|
$530
|
|
2A
|
LeBreton to Rideau Centre, including relocation of
the Transitway and Booth Street
|
$120
|
|
2B
|
Leitrim to Limebank
|
$100
|
|
|
TOTAL
|
$750
|
STAGE
1: LEBRETON TO LEITRIM
Provincial and
federal EAs will have to be completed prior to construction of LRT in this
corridor. The existing O-Train
operation will continue in service until at least 2007 and continued as long as
possible while early construction is in progress. The relocated Transitway and grade-separation of Booth Street
will be completed at the same time as the LRT construction through this
area. A crossing of the Rideau River
and a tunnel under the canal will have to be completed as soon as possible.
Existing bridges at Heron Road will have to be replaced, the existing track
will be twinned, and a relocated freight track between the Walkley yards and
the NRC testing labs will need to be built as soon as possible. Park-and-Ride lots will be constructed at
Leitrim and Lester, along with new and upgraded stations at South Keys,
Greenboro, Walkley, Heron, Carleton University, Carling, Gladstone and
Bayview. Storage and maintenance yards
will also have to be built in this first stage. Finally, a connection into the airport is presently planned as
part of the first phase construction, but could be deferred to stage 2 if
required.
STAGE
2A: LEBRETON TO RIDEAU CENTRE
The specific
alignment of the LRT within the downtown will only be selected after a number
of options are investigated as part of an Environmental Assessment study. This section will inherently be more
complicated (and may take more time) than the LeBreton south section because of
a number of alignment constraints within the CBD. The first priority for construction will be the relocation of all
underground services along the selected route as well as around the war
memorial, Rideau Street and George Street. Track should be laid as the utility
relocation is completed, and retaining wall and structural elements of the LRT
from the LeBreton Flats to Sparks street constructed.
STAGE
2B: LEITRIM TO RIVERSIDE SOUTH
This section could be
constructed at the same time as Stage 2A or after it. This routing is currently
through an open space area planned for development. The LRT alignment and
stations will be integrated with development and probably constructed at the
same time. The only major structure
will be a bridge over Mosquito Creek.
Based on the real
possibility that initial funding allocations from senior levels of government
may be less than required to complete the recommended first stage of the
Priority Project a “minimum feasible start-up project” has been developed to
address this possible scenario. In order to come up with a minimum cost
start-up project, a preliminary review was conducted on the proposed LRT to
determine what options were possible and where costs could be reduced, while
still ending up with a feasible stand alone project.
The initial
conditions for the review were that the project had to go north to at least
LeBreton Station, south to at least a park-and-ride station, as well as being
subsequently extendable into the downtown and further south as an LRT line.
Using the existing 3 DMUs plus additional DMUs was briefly considered. This
option was set aside because it would not be as environmentally friendly as
electric propulsion, would result in similar civil costs to that of the
proposed electric LRT, would result in more throw away costs for the eventual
electrification and could not be extended into the downtown.
A minimum feasible
interim LRT project has been developed. This interim stage would run from
LeBreton Station south to Lester station on single track with 4 sections of
passing track. An extension to the airport would await a later stage. Service
would be run at approximately 10 minute intervals with fewer (8 rather than 25)
initial LRT vehicles required. In addition to vehicles, initial savings would
include no new tunnel at Dows Lake, no new structure over the Rideau River, less track, signal
and initial maintenance and storage requirements.
After a preliminary
review of this option, it is estimated that the minimum feasible start up
priority LRT project would cost approximately $295 million (in 2003 dollars).
It is doubtful that any further substantial savings can be made without
seriously affecting the viability and feasibility of the minimum start up LRT
project. This start up project would require approximately $100 million in subsidy
from each level of government. This minimum feasible start up project has to be
developed in more detail and attention should be placed on minimizing throw
away cost, minimizing service disruptions when the service and line is expanded
and minimizing additional operating costs.
While this start up project is not as desirable as
the LRT staging proposed in the main report, it is a feasible start up to the
proposed priority LRT. The service frequency and the start up ridership
potential will be less than the proposed project but it will still be a
considerable improvement on the existing O-Train service. It will be extended
to LeBreton Transitway Station with connections to the City of Gatineau as well
as to Ottawa downtown, and it will terminate in the south at a major
park-and-ride lot. The major advantage is that it will cost less as a start up
project.
However,
with this interim staging there will be some future throw away costs and some
disruptions to service when the line is twinned and expanded in the future.
This interim staging will also result in a further time extension in the
achievement of the goals of the rapid transit expansion plan. These issues will
all have to be considered in continuing negotiations for senior government subsidy for the
priority LRT line.Based on the real possibility that initial funding
allocations from senior levels of government may be less than required to
complete the recommended first stage of the Priority Project, as described in
the previous section, a “minimum feasible start-up project” has been developed
to address this possible scenario.
Using the existing DMUs (diesel multiple units)
plus new DMUs was briefly considered as a minimal service option. This option
was set aside for the reasons given above.
A reduced version of the LRT project would run from
LeBreton Station to Lester Station, which includes a large park-and-ride lot.
The LRT extension to the airport would be postponed to a later stage. Because
of the reduced service frequency, the City will be able to run the service on a
single track with the addition of four passing tracks. After a preliminary review of the project,
it is estimated that the minimum feasible start up priority LRT project would
cost approximately $295 million (in 2003 dollars). It is doubtful that any further substantial savings can be made
without seriously affecting the viability and feasibility of the minimum start
up LRT project. This start up project would require approximately $100 million
in subsidy from each level of government.
While this start up project is not as desirable as
the LRT staging proposed in the previous section, it is a feasible start up to
the proposed priority LRT. However,
with this interim staging there will be some future throw away costs and some
disruptions to service when the line is twinned and expanded in the future, and
will result in a further time extension in the achievement of the goals of the
rapid transit expansion plan.
ORTEP has a
preliminary cost, in 2003 dollars, of $3.4 billion. The Priority Project LRT is
in the range of $750 million, with initial stage operation by 2009. This program will be
the largest financial undertaking in the history of the City of Ottawa, greatly
surpassing the $450 million Transitway Program of the 1980/90’s As such, ORTEP will be an
extremely high profile and complex undertaking involving communities across the
City, all levels of government and experts from all disciplines. The Program is
not a single project but is a number of projects with priority sections, taking
approximately 20 years to complete the implementation.
All this makes
it imperative that the Program is managed carefully and competently. City
Council and all funding partners must have confidence in the management of the
Program. Expenditures must be
transparent, justifiable and accountable.
As discussed
and recommended in Section 5.3, implementation of the Priority LRT Project
should proceed under a “Design/Build/Operate/Maintain” model. This model would
see the City bringing a project up to the detailed functional design level
where the scope of the project is clearly defined. At this stage, a formal
proposal process would procure a private sector consortium that would be
responsible for detail design, supply, construction and maintenance of the
infrastructure and vehicles. Other
ORTEP projects could also proceed under a Design/Build model, or could be
implemented in a more traditional way whereby the City, or its consultants,
would design the infrastructure and tender for its construction.
Prior to
proceeding with a design/build/operate/maintain project, the City must clearly
define the scope of work to be tendered. For the City to minimize their risk
and have some control and assurance that the final project will be to their
satisfaction, it is essential that the City complete the preliminary design of
the priority LRT project to at least the 30% design level. The 30% design level is generally considered
to be the level of design necessary for the owner to minimize risk and exercise
control of the final product while still leaving the
design/build/operate/maintain consortia enough flexibility to exercise private
sector innovations and efficiencies and schedule improvements. In order to plan, manage and control a
program of this size it is essential that the City institute a strong and
experienced program and project management team.
The Program Management Structure should
be set up as a dedicated stand alone core team specific to this program while
at the same time calling on all of the required support resources from existing
City departments. In order to minimize the requirement for hiring new City
staff and to provide specialized expertise, outside resources will be required
to support the City staff in areas of program management, LRT technology,
transit design/build, and procurement of large private sector consortia unique
to this Program.
It will not
be possible for the project to proceed on a fast track basis with only the
existing City resources. The project
will also proceed on a slower basis if funding is inadequate or slow in being
provided. Based on experience else where,
the City will not receive final funding commitments until the environmental
assessment is complete. If the other preparatory elements such as preliminary
design and setting up the design/build/operate/maintain procurement process are
not completed concurrently with the EA process, then the City will not be able
to fast track the Priority Project implementation when the funds are
approved. These tasks must therefore
occur concurrently and as expeditiously as possible.
Summary
Conclusions
Ottawa has
endorsed the Rapid Transit Expansion Program (ORTEP) as a key approach to
meeting the goals of the new City of Ottawa Official Plan. This Program calls for the implementation of
approximately 101 km of rail (LRT) and 61 km of busway (BRT) forming a comprehensive network
with the existing O-Train service and the Transitway.
The
first priority - O-Train expansion - is a critical building block in
development of this plan and has been given the highest priority by Ottawa City
Council. In order to implement the
priority project on a fast tracked basis and to commence with the other
elements of the plan, it is recommended that the City of Ottawa:
§
Continue to endorse the $750 million
O-Train Expansion LRT as its first priority transit project;
§
Continue negotiations with both the
Provincial and Federal governments to secure at least a 1/3 subsidy from each
level of government for the priority LRT project;
§
Further define
the potential minimum first stage start up project for consideration in funding
discussions with the senior levels of government.
§
Proceed immediately with the required
Environmental Assessment studies for the priority LRT project;
§
Complete
negotiations for the purchase of the CPR railway corridor for the north-south
priority line and commence railway abandonment procedures;
§
Identify and
acquire the most appropriate maintenance and storage yard site along the
priority LRT line;
§
Construct the priority LRT project, in
stages if necessary.
If the City chooses
to expedite this project and pass some of the schedule and budget risk on to
the private sector, Ottawa should pursue a single competitive contract for the
design, construction, operation and maintenance of the priority LRT project. In
this regard it is recommended that the City:
§
Complete the preliminary design of the
priority LRT to a 30% level;
§
Based on this design,
issue a single competitive DBOM contract to a private sector contractor for
development and operation of the project, including the supply of LRT vehicles.
§
The entire rapid
transit expansion program includes a number of LRT and BRT projects.,
The plan is highly dependant on shared
funding from both Federal and Provincial levels of government and from the City
itself. To be prudent, it is
recommended that the City:
§
Carry out required planning studies on
all other transit corridors;
§
Proceed with design and construction
of some of the critical BRT links, including the Cumberland Transitway, as a
precursor to the East-west LRT;
§
Proceed with other LRT
projects/extensions as funds become available.
In order to manage a program and projects
of this size and complexity and to negotiate for appropriate funding, it is
important that a core team be assigned to manage the program. In that regard it
is recommended that the City:
§
assignAssign appropriate staff representatives to
an ORTEP management team, consisting of both City staff and outside assistance
to manage both the priority project, and
the overall program.
Document 5
Actions Arising from Transportation & Transit Committee’s
Motions (19 Feb 03)
The results of the Rapid Transit
Expansion Study (RTES) were presented to Transportation and Transit Committee
for approval on 19 February 2003 with the following recommendations:
1.
That the recommended Rapid Transit Network form the basis for
the transit component of the Transportation Master Plan;
2.
That the Rapid Transit Priority Plan be approved, pending
clarification of funding sources;
3.
That staff be directed to develop an Implementation Strategy
that would include timelines, funding and partnership options, and financial
implications.
The Committee approved
recommendations 1 and 3 and amended recommendation 2 to read “That the Rapid
Transit Priority Plan form part of the City’s Long Range Financial Plan,
pending clarification of funding sources.”
The Committee also approved the
following additional recommendations (which were subsequently approved by
Council on 26 February 2003) and these have been addressed as noted in italics
following each recommendation:
·
“That the Rapid Transit Expansion Study, as part of the
implementation strategy, cost out and incorporate an interim bus rapid transit
option for the section of the Cumberland Transitway which has already undergone
an Environmental Assessment, in order to serve the proposed intensified
development in the East Urban Community.”
This has been included
as an interim BRT – as a precursor to the full East-West LRT line.
·
“That the City of Ottawa convey to the Ministry of
Transportation Ontario Queensway Widening Study, its position that current
transit lanes on the Queensway be protected in developing design alternatives.”
This request has been
forwarded to the Minister Of Transportation from the City Clerk in a letter
dated 7 March 2003.
·
“Whereas the City of Ottawa has developed considerable
expertise in maintaining and operating the Bombardier Talent trains and they
have given a reliable service; and whereas the Talent trains may be used to
service Cumberland and Orleans in the east and Kanata North in the west for a
number of years prior to the first choice electric light rail option being
available, be it resolved that staff look at the possibility of retaining the
Talent trains for this or other extended non-electric service as precursor to
the electric light rail service.”
The report discusses the
feasibility of using the existing diesel Talent trains in the East-West
Corridor as an interim measure but concludes that it would be costly and of
negligible benefit. Using the existing
trains on a line between Kanata and Orleans would only provide service every 90
minutes or so. The line is currently in
active use by freight trains and it is unlikely that Transport Canada would
approve joint use of the track, thus construction of new tracks for transit
operation would be necessary. There
area also a number of grade-separations to address along this corridor. However, there is still some time yet before
the diesel Talent trains are no longer required on the priority north-south
corridor. Therefore the possible use of
these trains in other corridors can continue to be investigated over time and
as conditions change.
·
“That the short spur to the Airport be included as part
of the South Keys – Riverside South element of the plan and that its priority
be adjusted accordingly.”
An Ottawa Airport spur
and station has been included in the priority O-Train Expansion LRT line.
·
“That given the concerns of the Riverview Park
Community Association and area residents, that staff review corridor options
other than the Browning Avenue corridor.”
This will be done and it
is more appropriately addressed as part of the environmental assessment study
for this corridor.
·
“Whereas the Federal Budget allocated $3 billion in
infrastructure support over the next ten years which included $1 billion for
municipal infrastructure, and whereas the Federal Budget allocated $2 billion
over five years to help implement the Climate Change Plan for Canada through
such measures as sustainable transportation, and whereas the Provincial
Government is investigating new ways of financing infrastructure that better
reflect the life span of the asset involved, and whereas the Rapid Transit
Expansion Study is our plan for the future of the rapid transit network in
Ottawa, and whereas the plan recommends a priority plan for implementation of
the Rapid Transit Expansion Study plan, and whereas the top priorities for
implementation are extending the O-Train from South Keys to the Rideau Centre
and from South Keys to Riverside South, therefore be it resolved that
Transportation Committee recommend that Council approve the above-mentioned
priorities as City Council’s top priority for any Federal or Provincial
Infrastructure type funding. Further be
it resolved that staff consider the above-mentioned priorities as candidates for
any new financing arrangements proposed by the Province of Ontario, and that
Council’s number one transportation priority, the Rapid Transit Network (in
accordance with the Rapid Transit Priority Plan) be communicated by the Mayor
to the Prime Minister and the Minister of Finance, the Premier of Ontario and
to all area MPs and MPPs and that their support of our priorities be
solicited.”
Application has been
made for funding of the priority O-Train Expansion LRT Line and negotiations
with the appropriate officials at both the Federal and Provincial level is
ongoing and will continue.
·
“Whereas the southwest corridor to Centretown is under
tremendous stress, be it resolved that Riverside South to Centretown be
fast-tracked and if approvals, financing and equipment permit, to bring it into
service earlier than 2008.”
Schedules for the
priority project have been reviewed in detail and advancing the schedule to
earlier than 2008 would not be possible, even if full funding were in
place. Availability of funding is a
critical component of the implementation schedule.