Return to Transit Main Page
Return to Home Page
What we learned - A summation

TRANSIT SUMMIT REPORT

OPENING REMARKS

QUESTION 1: What do we need to do to make public transit successful? Presenter: Rosemarie Leclair, General Manager, Transportation Utilities and Public Works

QUESTION # 2 How do we make public transit work for the daycare connection and the business commute? Presenter: David Jeanes, Transport 2000

QUESTION #3 How do we connect Smart Growth ideas with the reality of financing transit needs? Presenter: Lloyd Russell, City Treasurer

QUESTION # 4 Should new residential development be permitted without transit services being included? Presenter: Ned Lathrop, General Manager, Development Services

A Note: All reporting of the summit was done by volunteers and their reporting style varies from question to question. Thank you for your help. If any discrepancies are note please contact the office about them. - Clive

QUICK SUMMARY (Points in Random Order).

• Our air quality is not good at present and Ottawa’s forecast growth will make it much worse if trends don’t change.

• Instead of a target of 20% transit ridership by 2020, we should have significantly more bold targets of something like 60%.

• Fare costs should be kept down if not lowered (free for children). Funding should come from other sources (e.g. provincial, parking, carbon tax, development charges,…).

• By 2020, seniors in Ottawa will make up 25% of the population.

• Transit service must address needs outside the rush hour commute. This means more frequency and reliability on off peak hours.

• Development near transit (e.g. Hurdman, Lebreton) has the potential to address key access issues (e.g. daycare for mothers and kids).

• Why do road projects for automobiles receive more funding and less scrutiny than transit projects?

• Parking should cost (if not the employee then the employer) and perhaps bonuses for no parking.

• Minimum density regulation can be used (e.g. minimum 2 storey requirements in some areas).

• Sidewalks should be wider.

• There should be no "out of service" buses traveling across town. Every empty bus traveling through the city is a lost opportunity.

• Development charges in suburbs need to cover all the costs. Existing neighborhoods shouldn’t be subsidizing infrastructure for new developments.

• Public education on smart growth and on the real cost of automobiles and of transit is needed.

• Get Treasury Board to support the Ecopass.

• Developers know light rail is permanent and build around it accordingly. It makes long range planning easy.

• We have existing rail lines that criss-cross the entire region with the potential of addressing the entire area’s needs (not just the core).

• Traffic Demand Management (TDM) could be pursued with large employers. The city can’t do it in isolation. TDM would reduce peak hour demands on our road system.

OPENING REMARKS (preamble)

1. to connect the dots between individual and community health and the funds spent on public transportation;

2. to explore how to get more money into public transit that into roads; and

3. to see if we can advance the idea of roads only being built if the outside lane is reserved for public transit.

1. The T & T Committee is responsible for all roads and public transit;

2. She hopes to make all streets transit-friendly;

3. Ottawa is growing, and so must public transit; and

4. Public transit must be good enough to compete (with other forms of transportation)

QUESTION 1: What do we need to do to make public transit successful?

Rosemary Leclair spoke to the first question: FULL TEXT of presentation

1. Her Branch is responsible for all transportation systems. Her staff will be studying other successful cities and will hold other PUBLIC TRANSIT meetings.

2. Ottawa is four times the area of Toronto, but the urban area is only about 25% of the total. In trips per capita, Ottawa ranks third out of nine Canadian cities, after Toronto and Montreal. Ottawa’s ridership has increased over the past six years.

3. In terms of the modal split, it was 15.2% for PUBLIC TRANSIT in 1995, it is 17% now, and it is aimed to be 20% by 2021.

4. In the bus transitway system, there are five park-and-ride lots. The O-Train now carries about 5,000 passengers per day. In 2003, Councillors will decide on the future of the light rail project.

5. As Ottawa grows in coming years, how can we ensure that transportation evolves so that Ottawa will continue to be a choice place to live?

1. Smart Growth and Transit Built Form

2. Smart Growth and Transit; Transit System

3. Smart Growth and Transit: a public policy issue

4. Smart Growth and Transit; financial considerations. Funding other than ridership is essential.

Questions and comments from the audience:

Q: Re. Clive’s remarks about health and public transit, was the City Health Department invited to attend this Summit? A: Yes, Dr. Cushman was invited, but he had another engagement.

C: She noticed that, in the Budget, three major roadways are announced.

C: We have heard good words from Rosemary Leclair, but the goals announced are not high enough. A modal split of 20% in 2021 is not good enough. It should be 40 or 50%. Public transit is a minority service; it should be a majority service.

C: 20% modal split for public transit is insufficient. In 2021, there will also be an additional 200,000 cars on the road. The light rail project took 4 years to get up and running; this slow progress is not good enough.

C: Public transit should be free, at least for the children. If they get used to it while growing up they are more likely to take it when they are adults.

C: Better marketing may be necessary. Public transit should be like the health care system i.e. it should serve all segments of the population. Public transit is now only for the poor and the elderly. The fares for OC Transpo are going up, but the Queensway has not raised its fare.

Q: What is the cost per passenger-kilometre, of both buses and cars?

C: Ottawa should consider hovercraft, to avoid having to build more bridges.

C: Older people can often not walk to the bus. She gave examples of poor, uncoordinated use of Para Transpo.

C: Jane Jacobs has asked the question: "Why is vertical transportation free, but horizontal transportation costs money?" He / she suggested that fares should be frozen or reduced.

C: Don’t concentrate on rush-hour only; keep frequencies up all day. Gatineau's public transit is only to get people in to centre of Gatineau and Ottawa; public transit must also be supplied to get people to the suburbs.

QUESTION # 2 How do we make public transit work for the daycare connection and the business commute?

Presenter: David Jeanes, Transport 2000

Sorry, the volunteer note-taker was absent.

QUESTION #3 How do we connect Smart Growth ideas with the reality of financing transit needs?

City Treasurer Lloyd Russell explained that the City has two budgets: Operating and Capital. The Operating Budget can set aside contributions to reserves for capital projects. The Capital Budget can be used to buy vehicles, to maintain infrastructure and to build new infrastructure. Sometimes, debt can be used to finance transit projects.

In 2002, O-C Transpo accounts for 16% of the City's operating budget, with $102 million coming from fares and $125 million from taxes. As well, the capital budget includes $90 million for transit, mostly for buying buses. The Province will contribute $12.8 million for replacement buses. The draft 2002 budget includes a number of growth road projects plus a portfolio of road maintenance.

New transit initiatives are partially funded by development charges. The City devotes $10 million/year to new transit initiatives. Before 1998, that would have been matched by $30 million/year from the Province, but that source has been discontinued. Without additional funding, the City cannot move forward with transit expansion. The Province funds the Toronto areas GO Trains. It should provide similar funding to Ottawa. The City hopes the Province and the federal government will both contribute. There should be an effort to have part of the gasoline tax devoted to public transit. Development charges will have to increase to pay for all, rather than two-thirds of the cost of transit, roads and other services to the developments. Development charges should be set after the Official Plan is established; the charges should be based on the principles of the Official Plan.

Members of the pubic made the following comments and recommendations:

Accessibility

The O-Train is great and OC-Transpo is working with Disabled and Proud, an advocacy group, to improve accessibility. Disabled and Proud wants Para Transpo van and car services operated under one umbrella within five years. Para Transpo users should not have to pay higher fares than regular users; only in Ottawa is this the case. The Paquet Report neglected to mention services to seniors and the disabled.

Improvements

Transit should be comfortable, should operate long hours and should be either free or inexpensive for users. The O-Train needs to serve more areas. Buses should serve the central areas and short trips better than they do; they should be kept operating more of the time. Hailable mini-buses should serve the outlying areas.

Development Charges and Funding Transit

The City should make the real cost of serving cars and of not having excellent transit clear to the public. As well, it should levy charges on employers who provide free parking. Parking stalls in general should be taxed. Taxes on suburban and rural homes should be based on the major use that their residents make of the transportation system. Development charges should be based on the number of spaces that garages have for cars, with three car garages being assessed three times as much as single car garages. Development charges should be reduced near the transit stations at Hurdman, Lebreton and Bayview to encourage development there. Road projects should be evaluated as thoroughly as the O-Train pilot project is scrutinized. There should be no more ring roads or road widening, with the money saved being invested in improving public transit.

There should be a carbon tax, which could fund public transit. This is an area of taxation as yet not claimed by either federal or provincial governments and could therefore be established as a reliable and sustaining revenue source.

The Province should contribute to transit and there should be an emphasis on transit and walking.

City Planning and Transit

The City should establish an outer boundary beyond which urban growth would not be permitted. Apartments, rather than parking lots should be built. Any new botanic garden project should be done in an empty field already serving as a transit node.

Transportation planning should protect both air quality and soundscape. Transportation noise from mainly trucks, but also from buses, cars and trains can be stressful.

QUESTION # 4: Should new residential development be permitted without transit services being included?

Overall Summary
Ned Lathrop, General Manager of Development Services at the City of Ottawa, led off with a presentation. Afterwards, eleven audience members provided comments and questions. This being the last question of the evening, many of things said touched on ideas that had come up earlier. The overall mood was upbeat and there was considerable interest and excitement in the audience. This was very encouraging when you consider that this was near the end of a three and half-hour public meeting.

Ned’s presentation dealt not only with the question of new residential developments but with most of the key issues and challenges facing Ottawa’s growth and transit needs. Audience members praised the presentation for its comprehensive and clear view. It was apparent that City staff understand the challenges, the options and many of the potential solutions. Priorities and decisions are set by elected representatives and by the people in the community who participate in the process. If there was one message for the audience it was that we have an opportunity and we share in the responsibility going forward. City staff will work with community groups, elected representatives, developers and the private sector to implement smart growth and improve transit.

Most of us in attendance understand that in order to achieve smart growth we need to reverse a number of trends and this challenge is not to be taken lightly. Council will need to show leadership and firm resolve. Many options exist and there is no shortage of ingenuity in the City or community to propose constructive solutions. Public education and participation is part of the solution.

Highlights from Ned Lathrop’s presentation and from public comments.
In the last 75 years or so, we have followed most North American trends that were totally car oriented. This has led to a vaster footprint (compared to European cities). Population growth in Ottawa will continue to be fueled by growth in the technology sector and in the federal government. This will result in an additional 400,000 people in the city in the next 20 years.

We could maintain the existing footprint by having a 15% increase in density. More compact development can be done in a positive way. There was concern that densification should not put any existing parks at risk. We need to get developers onside. The trend of lower density housing must be changed.

We have existing rail lines that criss-cross the entire region with the potential of addressing the entire area’s needs (not just the core).

Traffic Demand Management (TDM) could be pursued with large employers. The city can’t do it in isolation. TDM would reduce peak hour demands on our road system.

Transit must be in place before new homes are built in the suburbs.

The development of land next to transit stations is critical to improve access to services such as daycare, housing and employment.

The "Big Box Store" is another trend, which is a challenge to smart growth. How can we reverse this trend or accommodate it in a transit and/or pedestrian friendly manner?

Planning and decision making on roads and transit infrastructure must factor all the costs of the automobile (air quality, parking, asphalt…). The end result needs to walk the talk where priority is given to pedestrians, then bicycles, then transit and lastly cars.

Several speakers touched on the issue of political power and the need for leadership. Will the ward boundary review yield a better representation by population? Concern was raised about how some councillors receive considerable donations from developers and how this might influence their ability to represent their constituents. The new official plan needs to be different and fresh (e.g. the 60% transit target). That will require courage and leadership from municipal government to realize the vision of smart growth. The 2020 Summit was a good start.

Many in the elderly and disabled communities feel disenfranchised and isolated by current transit alternatives. Availability, frequency and reliability are the chief concerns.

Some suggestions made along the way:

• Parking should cost (if not the employee then the employer) and perhaps bonuses for no parking.

• Minimum density regulation can be used (e.g. minimum 2 storey requirements in some areas).

• Sidewalks should be wider.

• There should be no "out of service" buses traveling across town. Every empty bus traveling through the city is a lost opportunity.

• Development charges in suburbs need to cover all the costs. Existing neighborhoods shouldn’t be subsidizing infrastructure for new developments.

• Public education on smart growth and on the real cost of automobiles and of transit is needed.

• Get Treasury Board to support the Ecopass.

• Developers know light rail is permanent and build around it accordingly. It makes long range planning easy.

Business as usual will put hundreds of thousands of people in cars on acres and acres of new pavement in Ottawa making our bad air worse. The alternatives are clearer. Awareness needs to go beyond this Transit Summit.

What We Learned from the Experts